Guns!

ok doser

Well-known member
It occurred to me that in all the discussion that I'm seeing both from gun control advocates and 2nd amendment rights advocates about how to prevent incidents like the latest one at the Atlanta spa and the Boulder grocery store, I'm not seeing anybody suggesting that an effective deterrent might be a couple of swift trials and swift, public, painful executions.

In the current discourse the left has succeeded in taking that off the table as even a topic of discussion.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
It occurred to me that in all the discussion that I'm seeing both from gun control advocates and 2nd amendment rights advocates about how to prevent incidents like the latest one at the Atlanta spa and the Boulder grocery store, I'm not seeing anybody suggesting that an effective deterrent might be a couple of swift trials and swift, public, painful executions.

In the current discourse the left has succeeded in taking that off the table as even a topic of discussion.
Except when the government wants someone dead before they reveal too much. Remember the speedy trial Timothy McVeigh got? Reporters got to interview Charles Manson. But McVeigh? Not on your life. Can't let that guy talk.
 

Carolina

Active member
Except when the government wants someone dead before they reveal too much. Remember the speedy trial Timothy McVeigh got? Reporters got to interview Charles Manson. But McVeigh? Not on your life. Can't let that guy talk.
So what deep, dark info do you think McVeigh was carrying?
 

Hilltrot

Well-known member
It occurred to me that in all the discussion that I'm seeing both from gun control advocates and 2nd amendment rights advocates about how to prevent incidents like the latest one at the Atlanta spa and the Boulder grocery store, I'm not seeing anybody suggesting that an effective deterrent might be a couple of swift trials and swift, public, painful executions.

In the current discourse the left has succeeded in taking that off the table as even a topic of discussion.
Actually, the Colorado legislature and Governor made that decision when they stopped the death penalty.
 

Idolater

Well-known member
It occurred to me that in all the discussion that I'm seeing both from gun control advocates and 2nd amendment rights advocates about how to prevent incidents like the latest one at the Atlanta spa and the Boulder grocery store, I'm not seeing anybody suggesting that an effective deterrent might be a couple of swift trials and swift, public, painful executions.

In the current discourse the left has succeeded in taking that off the table as even a topic of discussion.
I once advocated a return to this, but not that we actually do it, but that we make it abundantly clear that some crimes by rights deserve this punishment, and that when we don't punish our capital criminals in this way, it is a mercy to them, and perhaps if we all understood the gravity of the mercy that we are showing, just as a policy, to our worst criminals, I think that might help peoples' brains who are contemplating such mass murdering treachery in the future. We should talk more about the things we are justified doing to them in retribution, so that our mercy is properly regarded, right now our mercy to them isn't taken seriously at all.
 

marke

Well-known member
Joe the Rapist, blowing his nose on the second amendment in the name of compassion

Atheistic world communists, including members of the leftist democrat party in America, must find a way to remove weapons of defense against forced communism from the hands of American patriots.
 

marke

Well-known member
I once advocated a return to this, but not that we actually do it, but that we make it abundantly clear that some crimes by rights deserve this punishment, and that when we don't punish our capital criminals in this way, it is a mercy to them, and perhaps if we all understood the gravity of the mercy that we are showing, just as a policy, to our worst criminals, I think that might help peoples' brains who are contemplating such mass murdering treachery in the future. We should talk more about the things we are justified doing to them in retribution, so that our mercy is properly regarded, right now our mercy to them isn't taken seriously at all.
Arrest the terrorists. Try them the next day and execute them the following day in the public square. We would see acts of terrorism diminish dramatically and immediately. Thugs and gangsters do not want to die.
 

Idolater

Well-known member
Arrest the terrorists. Try them the next day and execute them the following day in the public square. We would see acts of terrorism diminish dramatically and immediately. Thugs and gangsters do not want to die.
Right, not typically, but mass murderers frequently do, in fact it's typical that a mass murder /massacre ends in the death of the mass murderer, whether by his (they're only males) hand or someone else's. Boulder is an exception that proves the rule, rather than typical of these infernal things.

It's so typical of mass murder /massacre to end in the death of the perpetrator /murderer, that we have to conclude that their basic plan is to kill themselves, and to take as many innocent people with them as they can. It's horrible, and cowardly. One of the only things I can think of to even have a chance to defend yourself against such a thing, is to have on yourself already a rifle or rifle-like firearm or ranged weapon.

When they do survive, it would be nice if our mercy shown to them is valued more than it is now. Breaking all the major bones in their body, making sure that they don't expire too soon, to maximize their pain and torment, is what they deserve for such treachery. We don't do that, but we are showing them mercy. It's not because they don't deserve it, or because we wouldn't be justified in doing it, because we would be justified, and they do deserve it.
 

marke

Well-known member
Right, not typically, but mass murderers frequently do, in fact it's typical that a mass murder /massacre ends in the death of the mass murderer, whether by his (they're only males) hand or someone else's. Boulder is an exception that proves the rule, rather than typical of these infernal things.

It's so typical of mass murder /massacre to end in the death of the perpetrator /murderer, that we have to conclude that their basic plan is to kill themselves, and to take as many innocent people with them as they can. It's horrible, and cowardly. One of the only things I can think of to even have a chance to defend yourself against such a thing, is to have on yourself already a rifle or rifle-like firearm or ranged weapon.

When they do survive, it would be nice if our mercy shown to them is valued more than it is now. Breaking all the major bones in their body, making sure that they don't expire too soon, to maximize their pain and torment, is what they deserve for such treachery. We don't do that, but we are showing them mercy. It's not because they don't deserve it, or because we wouldn't be justified in doing it, because we would be justified, and they do deserve it.
God ordained the death penalty for many good reasons, one of which is that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to crime.

Ecclesiastes 8:11
Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.
 

ok doser

Well-known member
4:09

Last year eider, posturing as a weapons expert, questioned why anybody would want a semi-automatic rifle. I replied that I was happy with my semi-auto rifle in that it gave me a quick second or third or fourth shot when shooting at extreme range, often in conditions where I didn't have a real good view of my target, without having to take my eyes off the target or my rifle out of shooting position. Eider revealed his ignorance of shooting by criticizing what I was describing as being careless and irresponsible.

4:09 shows why any real gun shooter understands immediately what I was talking about. And that eider is a retard.

 
Top