alpine_saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Ian Huntley - great example. Why is society f**king protecting his lying b*tch of a girlfriend ?? She should be doing the time as an accomplice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I feel the same about your bleeding-heart liberal opinion. I've bet you've already forgotten what happened to this baby in carrying out this crusade.. Thanks for supporting my point. Just because I don't think that the death penalty works as a deterrent you've classed me as a "bleeding heart liberal" and inferred that I don't care about the victim. Simply pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Stick him in a Travellodge? Stayed there one night recently. Seriously dont think I could handle even a year there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Ian Huntley - great example. Why is society f**king protecting his lying b*tch of a girlfriend ?? She should be doing the time as an accomplice. You are displaying lack of understanding of the case here. Carr didn't help out in the murder so she isn't an accomplice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Stayed there one night recently. Seriously dont think I could handle even a year there. I didn't think it was too bad actually! Had everything I wanted out of a hotel, bed and shower and the bed wasn't uncomfortable at all. And it was well priced for central London Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 and you said Alps is an attention seeker. If this isn't an "ohh look at me" post what is?!! I'm just proving him wrong using evidence from the thread. I didn't start the thread then froth at the mouth with wild accusatory posts fired off at posters who happened to disagree. I also don't constantly doom-monger on match reaction threads when I didn't even see the match. "Strolling around unchallenged" lol at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 seriously saintandy...you are 18...enjoy yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 6 January, 2012 You are displaying lack of understanding of the case here. Carr didn't help out in the murder so she isn't an accomplice. She helped in covering it up. She lied to the police. She tried to help Huntley get away with it. Not surprised you remembered her name. She's probably a poster girl for The Bleeding Heart Lefty Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 seriously saintandy...you are 18...enjoy yourself I'm 19. And I do enjoy myself! It's possible to come on here and debate while also doing a tonne of other stuff. You can't judge me from my posts here. In life, I am no where near as opinionated as I come across on here(as does everyone else) because it's a debate forum so what else am I meant to do?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 seriously saintandy...you are 18...enjoy yourself What DD said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 She helped in covering it up. She lied to the police. She tried to help Huntley get away with it. Not surprised you remembered her name. She's probably a poster girl for The Bleeding Heart Lefty Party. There you go again - "because you disagree with me I will infer that you admire Maxine Carr". Utterly pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Give it a rest, for christs sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 She helped in covering it up. She lied to the police. She tried to help Huntley get away with it. Not surprised you remembered her name. She's probably a poster girl for The Bleeding Heart Lefty Party. Again, just because I think perverting the course of justice and child murder should have different sentencing times, it doesn't mean I have sympathy or forget what her stupidity led to. For what it is worth, I believe it was said that she naively believed Huntley's words. Huntley is the real evil bastard here and he should never leave jail ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 What DD said. by 18 I had properly lived.. by 21 I had been around the world and took part in a war by 25 had notched up my 2nd war and had experiences that I will never forget at 18, I could not have cared less about paddy ashdown, myra hindley and the local health authority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Ooops. A mod has turned up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 6 January, 2012 by 18 I had properly lived.. by 21 I had been around the world and took part in a war by 25 had notched up my 2nd war and had experiences that I will never forget at 18, I could not have cared less about paddy ashdown, myra hindley and the local health authority hehehehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I'm just proving him wrong using evidence from the thread. I didn't start the thread then froth at the mouth with wild accusatory posts fired off at posters who happened to disagree. I also don't constantly doom-monger on match reaction threads when I didn't even see the match. "Strolling around unchallenged" lol at you. Usualy story on here when someone has an alternative view to the accepte one on here. That's the great thing about you liberal forum superstars, everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as it's what yours is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 by 18 I had properly lived.. by 21 I had been around the world and took part in a war by 25 had notched up my 2nd war and had experiences that I will never forget at 18, I could not have cared less about paddy ashdown, myra hindley and the local health authority That's good for you, and I'm glad you led a life that you enjoyed at that age. Personally, I think it is good I take an interest. And are you saying I haven't properly lived because I post on here? Please define what you count as having lived? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 hehehehehe Are you a 10 year old girl? I don't know any grown male who would ever utter those words. Isn't there an age old phrase about never discuss religion and politics at a dinner party? Wise words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Usualy story on here when someone has an alternative view to the accepte one on here. That's the great thing about you liberal forum superstars, everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as it's what yours is. I think Alpine is more than entitled to his own opinion. In fact, I celebrate the fact that we all have different opinions and welcome it. What it does not mean though is that his opinion is sacred and shouldn't be challenged, and mine isn't sacred either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I'm 19. And I do enjoy myself! It's possible to come on here and debate while also doing a tonne of other stuff. You can't judge me from my posts here. In life, I am no where near as opinionated as I come across on here(as does everyone else) because it's a debate forum so what else am I meant to do?! Andy, you've got an opion and an intellect to back it with. You're already leading them 2-1. Playing the age card is weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Someone made the point earlier that the state should never have control over it's citizens right to life - completely agreed, but what if the decisions were only ever made by jury? Fwiw, there have only ever seen 1 or 2 cases where i've felt the death penalty would be justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Are you a 10 year old girl? I don't know any grown male who would ever utter those words. Isn't there an age old phrase about never discuss religion and politics at a dinner party? Wise words. Pass the port. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Andy, you've got an opion and an intellect to back it with. You're already leading them 2-1. Playing the age card is weak. The second anyone resorts to ad hominem, it always weakens their argument! It's why I always try to stay away from personal abuse on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Usualy story on here when someone has an alternative view to the accepte one on here. That's the great thing about you liberal forum superstars, everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as it's what yours is. Brilliant depsite my mere(!) 1,474 post I am a liberal forum superstar - is that a promotion from "liberal elite" or just a re-badging? Conversely for you reactionary mouth-frothers - everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if it's different from mine I'll say that you don't care about babies being murdered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 The second anyone resorts to ad hominem, it always weakens their argument! It's why I always try to stay away from personal abuse on here. If we were all like you the world would be a wonderful little bubble wouldn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I remember Alan Partridge interviewing some Old Duffer on the radio one time and when Alan noted that the O.D. was in favour of hanging, the O.D. interjected "Only for criminals". Made me laaaaugh :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Someone made the point earlier that the state should never have control over it's citizens right to life - completely agreed, but what if the decisions were only ever made by jury? Fwiw, there have only ever seen 1 or 2 cases where i've felt the death penalty would be justified. There's still a chance of the old slippery slope though in my opinion! And once the jury makes the decision(and also the death penalty being such an emotive decisive issue, would people vote with the law or their conscience?), the action is passed on to the state and obviously in the 'slippery slope' argument, there's always the point of abuse... what if the jury were bribed and so on... in some countries, people are just sentenced to death immediately for simply having different opinions, that's why the state should never be given the power over life as the right to life is the most important right of all. I understand that many will come back with the argument of 'What about the victims right to life?', but you still have the issue of the state having control over a citizens life and two wrongs(kind of revenge argument) don't make a right. I would rather just not take the risk and let them rot in jail for the rest of their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I would probably sentence the Norwegian to death too, though by lethal injection. But generally I would say first offences you get the benefit of doubt that it was a momentary loss of control, or a freak unintended consequence. The three strikes rule deals with that by showing persistence of behaviour, the failure of incaceration to alter behaviour and guilt beyond all reasonable doubt (the odds of three unjust guilty verdicts are astronomical). I'm confused???? Are you saying you would sentence the Norwegian fella to death because he killed 70 odd people, but if someone murdered just one person you'd give them the benefit of doubt and thus allow them to potentially murder another two people before you would sentence them to death? Justice is a concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, or equity, along with the punishment of the breach of said ethics; justice is the act of being just and/or fair.[2] - does this not make justice pretty similar to revenge? As for me, I'd go for hanging every time - a good old fashioned public hanging, make a day of it I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I remember Alan Partridge interviewing some Old Duffer on the radio one time and when Alan noted that the O.D. was in favour of hanging, the O.D. interjected "Only for criminals". Made me laaaaugh :lol: Do you believe in absolute morality though? Crime in itself is a social construct(that I 100% support if it reasoned correctly and the right wrongs are punished correctly), and people that are criminals 1000 years ago are no longer criminals now, for example homosexuality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 If we were all like you the world would be a wonderful little bubble wouldn't it. People would be able to have a debate about politics without insulting the other person. Don't see the issue with that. Destroy the other persons argument with reason is the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Child killers such as Huntley should be hung, I'd I'll happily volunteer to do it. Sometimes a crime is so heinous that the death penalty is the only fitting punishment. Not a very liberal attitude perhaps but I can live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I would rather just not take the risk and let them rot in jail for the rest of their lives. But this very rarely happens and that's the problem. Nutters like Huntly will never be let out, but most murderers are out after incredibly short sentances compared to the crime they've committed.If I beat Mrs Duck to death because she burnt my dinner, I bet I'd be out and about in between 10-15 years, how can that be right? Hanging was abolished on the understanding that murder would carry a life sentance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latter day saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Child killers such as Huntley should be hung, I'd I'll happily volunteer to do it. Sometimes a crime is so heinous that the death penalty is the only fitting punishment. Not a very liberal attitude perhaps but I can live with it. this although hung,drawn & quartered would be more fitting & more of a show for the crowds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 But this very rarely happens and that's the problem. Nutters like Huntly will never be let out, but most murderers are out after incredibly short sentances compared to the crime they've committed.If I beat Mrs Duck to death because she burnt my dinner, I bet I'd be out and about in between 10-15 years, how can that be right? Hanging was abolished on the understanding that murder would carry a life sentance. Then argue to fix the sentencing system. Don't resort to the death penalty which helps nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 I'm confused???? Are you saying you would sentence the Norwegian fella to death because he killed 70 odd people, but if someone murdered just one person you'd give them the benefit of doubt and thus allow them to potentially murder another two people before you would sentence them to death? Justice is a concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, or equity, along with the punishment of the breach of said ethics; justice is the act of being just and/or fair.[2] - does this not make justice pretty similar to revenge? As for me, I'd go for hanging every time - a good old fashioned public hanging, make a day of it I say. Its not inconsistent. There is a clear difference between somebody deliberately taking aim and shooting 70 people over a several hour time frame and somebody who kills during a drunken street fight or kills their baby when you cant prove beyond reasonable doubt that she meant to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 But this very rarely happens and that's the problem. Nutters like Huntly will never be let out, but most murderers are out after incredibly short sentances compared to the crime they've committed.If I beat Mrs Duck to death because she burnt my dinner, I bet I'd be out and about in between 10-15 years, how can that be right? Hanging was abolished on the understanding that murder would carry a life sentance. How about if she burnt the dinner, you called her a dozy cow, she whacked you, you whacked her, she pulled out a knife, you tried to grab it, she slashed at you, you punched her hard in the face, she fell back and smashed her head on the granite worktop. Death penalty for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Do you believe in absolute morality though? Crime in itself is a social construct(that I 100% support if it reasoned correctly and the right wrongs are punished correctly), and people that are criminals 1000 years ago are no longer criminals now, for example homosexuality. That's a heavy question to ask someone who only joined the thread to share an Alan Partridge joke. But no, I don't. I'd like to wind forward 1000 years and see if baby-murder is legal though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 How about if she burnt the dinner, you called her a dozy cow, she whacked you, you whacked her, she pulled out a knife, you tried to grab it, she slashed at you, you punched her hard in the face, she fell back and smashed her head on the granite worktop. Death penalty for you? That would be manslaughter, not murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 That's a heavy question to ask someone who only joined the thread to share an Alan Partridge joke. But no, I don't. I'd like to wind forward 1000 years and see if baby-murder is legal though! Infanticide by the mother is treated differently (more leniently) in the UK than in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 That would be manslaughter, not murder. Not if the prosecution decided to prove prior intent - maybe her sister and friends said she would never have pulled a knife, or claiming Mrs Duck was planning to leave her husband, or there were some iffy google searches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Not if the prosecution decided to prove prior intent - maybe her sister and friends said she would never have pulled a knife, or claiming Mrs Duck was planning to leave her husband, or there were some iffy google searches. Regardless, what you actually described was manslaughter. If the law was amended to allow for capital punishment then it would be cases like Sobham, Milly Dowler, Sarah Paine that the rope would be used for, or at least in VFTT land it would be and not every case, same as the USofA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Its not inconsistent. There is a clear difference between somebody deliberately taking aim and shooting 70 people over a several hour time frame and somebody who kills during a drunken street fight or kills their baby when you cant prove beyond reasonable doubt that she meant to do it. You seem to be blurring the boundaries between manslaughter and murder. If you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone committed pre-meditated murder, then surely it should not make the slightest bit of difference as to how many people were murdered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 (edited) You seem to be blurring the boundaries between manslaughter and murder. If you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone committed pre-meditated murder, then surely it should not make the slightest bit of difference as to how many people were murdered? That might be true if there was a cast iron way of proving intent. Was someone murdered or did they die accidentally during a fight? Was someone accidentally hit by a car during an attempt to get away after a fight or deliberately murdered? were they poisoned to make them ill and get back at them, or to kill? As I said earlier, imo you are entitled to benefit of the doubt over intent if you get into a bad situation once. Being in that situation several times proves you are a danger to society. Edited 6 January, 2012 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 How about a "is it really time time to bring back the death penalty thread" FFS. Subject's been done to death on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Regardless, what you actually described was manslaughter. If the law was amended to allow for capital punishment then it would be cases like Sobham, Milly Dowler, Sarah Paine that the rope would be used for, or at least in VFTT land it would be and not every case, same as the USofA. What I described was manslaughter - but without the benefit of cameras and independent witnesses to the actual killing interpretation of what happened and the motives for it are at the mercy of the police, judge and jury- they may decide the evidence points toward murder. It may or may not be accurate in any one case. If however you have a pattern of behaviour that is more damning. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 How about a "is it really time time to bring back the death penalty thread" FFS. Subject's been done to death on here. So has HCDAJFU and 'Nigel says' and MLT threads. Shall we all pack up and go home cause you're bored or shall we leave those who want to participate to do just that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsash saint Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 If I shot Alpine Saint - Death Penalty or hailed a hero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 What I described was manslaughter - but without the benefit of cameras and independent witnesses to the actual killing interpretation of what happened and the motives for it are at the mercy of the police, judge and jury- they may decide the evidence points toward murder. It may or may not be accurate in any one case. If however you have a pattern of behaviour that is more damning. . I'd imagine you'd actually get far more manslaughter convictions instead of murder, as people would be less inclined to convict for murder if they knew the defendant would die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 6 January, 2012 Share Posted 6 January, 2012 Not if the prosecution decided to prove prior intent - maybe her sister and friends said she would never have pulled a knife, or claiming Mrs Duck was planning to leave her husband, or there were some iffy google searches. I'm sure my legal team would advise me to plead guilty to Manslaughter or second degree murder. If there is a death penalty I believe there should be degree's of murder as in the US. I would then go to court for a sentancing hearing only, saving the state money and Mrs Duck's family the pain of a protracted court case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now