Explosions at Boston Marathon

[Condunum]

I wanted both of these brothers to look those who they affected right in the eyes. Unfortunately, that can't happen, but in an ideal world...

Were I to ever accidentally kill someone, this punishment would probably be too much for me, personally.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

What are we talking about now?

Bonobos.

Are you possibly implying the Chechens are being aided by the Bonobian?

[The New Sea Territory]

It's a theory. You stop.

I will continue to say what I want. It's in the Constitution, if you forgot. Racism is legal. Theories are legal. And me saying anything I want is legal.

This is just my thoughts from what I personally know. And I was right when I called that they were Muslim, and white. I've been right so far.

He's not arguing that it's illegal. He's arguing that you can't honestly know and that speculation is disingenuous.

It's my guess at it. That's all.

[Lolzieristan]

The reversible part is true, yes.

But it's not cheaper, you're housing, feeding, and caring for a man for the rest of his life. It's oppressive, because you are putting a man in a 12ft by 12ft room until he dies. And for that reason, I don't really think it's all that different than the death penalty. The objective of both is to take the individual off the streets for eternity, The only real difference is that one actually kills people. The other merely deprives people of their freedom, and their lives of any notable value, until they die from some other reason.

The difference is that it's not oppressive because the prisoner can be freed if he did not do the crime.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Oh, and the death penalty does cost more. I even put some sauce on it.

Did not know about the cost issue. But what about appeals? We seem to have so many opportunities for that at present.

[The New Sea Territory]

Bonobos.

Are you possibly implying the Chechens are being aided by the Bonobian?

Well shit. I bet the Koreans are in on it.

[Individuality-ness]

I'd like to see this admitted into a court of law. If it's admitted, then sure.

the trial will not be for months if not years, even the first phase of the investigation is not over, There is already enough evidence that there may be some sort of connection, if not a direct action by a terror group, and that it was done for "islamic" reasons. Doesnt mean its so, but there is evidence pointing that way.

I know the trial won't be for ages. But I don't know what would be accepted in a court of law. None of us do.

[Frisivisia]

He's not arguing that it's illegal. He's arguing that you can't honestly know and that speculation is disingenuous.

It's my guess at it. That's all.

My guess is that Obama told them to do it.

I can be disingenuous too. And that's okay because it's just my guess.

[Frisivisia]

The difference is that it's not oppressive because the prisoner can be freed if he did not do the crime.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Oh, and the death penalty does cost more. I even put some sauce on it.

Did not know about the cost issue. But what about appeals? We seem to have so many opportunities for that at present.

That's necessary to the death penalty system. Otherwise you get mob trials and quick executions.

[Ethel mermania]

The reversible part is true, yes.

But it's not cheaper, you're housing, feeding, and caring for a man for the rest of his life. It's oppressive, because you are putting a man in a 12ft by 12ft room until he dies. And for that reason, I don't really think it's all that different than the death penalty. The objective of both is to take the individual off the streets for eternity, The only real difference is that one actually kills people. The other merely deprives people of their freedom, and their lives of any notable value, until they die from some other reason.

The difference is that it's not oppressive because the prisoner can be freed if he did not do the crime.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Oh, and the death penalty does cost more. I even put some sauce on it.

that is because we make it that way (and that is not a bad thing) death penalty cases the state generally will pay for good private lawyer instead of legal aid, there are a myrad of appeals that are automatic in capital cases. It should be more expensive to kill someone legally. It is the crime that justifies the punishment not the cost.

[Lolzieristan]

It's my guess at it. That's all.

My guess is that Obama told them to do it.

I can be disingenuous too. And that's okay because it's just my guess.

Ever see The Manchurian Candidate?

That's my guess.

Does it really even have to make sense? Nope.

[The New Sea Territory]

Did not know about the cost issue. But what about appeals? We seem to have so many opportunities for that at present.

That's necessary to the death penalty system. Otherwise you get mob trials and quick executions.

The state itself is a tool of oppression, but if it is truly the necessary evil I'd rather have it not kill people.

[Miss Defied]

What are we talking about now?

Bonobos.

Holy crap, as i was hitting the quote button to give this very response, i saw yours!
Most random ninja ever.

[Lolzieristan]

The difference is that it's not oppressive because the prisoner can be freed if he did not do the crime.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Oh, and the death penalty does cost more. I even put some sauce on it.

that is because we make it that way (and that is not a bad thing) death penalty cases the state generally will pay for good private lawyer instead of legal aid, there are a myrad of appeals that are automatic in capital cases. It should be more expensive to kill someone legally. It is the crime that justifies the punishment not the cost.

Shh, we're disinterested policymakers. It's all run on money here. ALL OF IT.

We'd let the toilets overflow in the assisted living homes if it was economically justifiable. The Republicans would love it, it's a great way to cut healthcare costs, shrink government, and reduce the deficit.

[The New Sea Territory]

The difference is that it's not oppressive because the prisoner can be freed if he did not do the crime.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Oh, and the death penalty does cost more. I even put some sauce on it.

that is because we make it that way (and that is not a bad thing) death penalty cases the state generally will pay for good private lawyer instead of legal aid, there are a myrad of appeals that are automatic in capital cases. It should be more expensive to kill someone legally. It is the crime that justifies the punishment not the cost.

No. No one should take away your life legally. That is not liberty. But you forfeit your liberty and pursuit of happiness when you infringe on the rights of others. Life is absolute, though. The state better stop killing people.

[Ethel mermania]

the trial will not be for months if not years, even the first phase of the investigation is not over, There is already enough evidence that there may be some sort of connection, if not a direct action by a terror group, and that it was done for "islamic" reasons. Doesnt mean its so, but there is evidence pointing that way.

I know the trial won't be for ages. But I don't know what would be accepted in a court of law. None of us do.

thats not true at all.

everything gathered before he was caught is admissible, all the video, all the bomb making evidence, the guns on him, the explosive packs, the testimony of hte guy whos care was hijacked. anything he says after he is miranderized, anything he just blurts out before he is miranderized, very little will be thrown out.

[Frisivisia]

The difference is that it's not oppressive because the prisoner can be freed if he did not do the crime.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Oh, and the death penalty does cost more. I even put some sauce on it.

that is because we make it that way (and that is not a bad thing) death penalty cases the state generally will pay for good private lawyer instead of legal aid, there are a myrad of appeals that are automatic in capital cases. It should be more expensive to kill someone legally. It is the crime that justifies the punishment not the cost.

Oh, that's good because that's an auxiliary argument. My main argument is that in addition to being more expensive, the death penalty is irreversible, which makes it worse in cases where the legal system fucks up, as well as the fact that it's cruel, if not unusual.

[Frisivisia]

That's necessary to the death penalty system. Otherwise you get mob trials and quick executions.

The state itself is a tool of oppression, but if it is truly the necessary evil I'd rather have it not kill people.

The state, when acting properly is all that stands between society and oppression.

[Individuality-ness]

I know the trial won't be for ages. But I don't know what would be accepted in a court of law. None of us do.

thats not true at all.

everything gathered before he was caught is admissible, all the video, all the bomb making evidence, the guns on him, the explosive packs, the testimony of hte guy whos care was hijacked. anything he says after he is miranderized, anything he just blurts out before he is miranderized, very little will be thrown out.

I'm not 100% sure. Some of the evidence, yes for sure, but I don't know.

[Ethel mermania]

that is because we make it that way (and that is not a bad thing) death penalty cases the state generally will pay for good private lawyer instead of legal aid, there are a myrad of appeals that are automatic in capital cases. It should be more expensive to kill someone legally. It is the crime that justifies the punishment not the cost.

No. No one should take away your life legally. That is not liberty. But you forfeit your liberty and pursuit of happiness when you infringe on the rights of others. Life is absolute, though. The state better stop killing people.

Life is not absolute, Death is absolute. we disagree i am fine with the death penalty, it should be used more. Bernie madoff should be dead, charles manson should be dead, david berkowitz should be dead.

[Ethel mermania]

that is because we make it that way (and that is not a bad thing) death penalty cases the state generally will pay for good private lawyer instead of legal aid, there are a myrad of appeals that are automatic in capital cases. It should be more expensive to kill someone legally. It is the crime that justifies the punishment not the cost.

Oh, that's good because that's an auxiliary argument. My main argument is that in addition to being more expensive, the death penalty is irreversible, which makes it worse in cases where the legal system fucks up, as well as the fact that it's cruel, if not unusual.

as i said before, the us constitution disagree's with you.

[Death Metal]

The state itself is a tool of oppression, but if it is truly the necessary evil I'd rather have it not kill people.

The state, when acting properly is all that stands between society and oppression.

Fucking this.

[Lolzieristan]

That's necessary to the death penalty system. Otherwise you get mob trials and quick executions.

The state itself is a tool of oppression, but if it is truly the necessary evil I'd rather have it not kill people.

I'm not saying they're a bad thing. I'm just saying they're prime opportunities to exhibit reversibility in the system.

[Ethel mermania]

The state itself is a tool of oppression, but if it is truly the necessary evil I'd rather have it not kill people.

The state, when acting properly is all that stands between society and oppression.

of course you would say that, if there was no state you would not be VP

[Frisivisia]

No. No one should take away your life legally. That is not liberty. But you forfeit your liberty and pursuit of happiness when you infringe on the rights of others. Life is absolute, though. The state better stop killing people.

Life is not absolute, Death is absolute. we disagree i am fine with the death penalty, it should be used more. Bernie madoff should be dead, charles manson should be dead, david berkowitz should be dead.

No. Where does the blood stop? When do we stop killing because we're angry? People do horrible things. People kill. And state-sponsored killing of killers is simply collective killing. It's morally reprehensible as well as fiscally unsound and legally shaky at best.

[Frisivisia]

The state, when acting properly is all that stands between society and oppression.

of course you would say that, if there was no state you would not be VP

There's that.