man charged with beheading a person on bus

bmah · Aug 02, 2008 6:04 AM

WARNING: NOT FOR THE FAINT OF HEART

This incident is something I felt could not be ignored, however violent and gross it is.

As of very recently, a crazed man, on board with a load of other people on a bus travelling from Edmonton to Winnipeg (Canada), started stabbing a 20-year old guy in front of him in the neck until the victim's head was decapitated. And apparently for no reason, which is even scarier. The mentally disturbed man then went on to show off the head like a trophy to everyone else (children included and whoever was on board the bus). He also tried to get a stab at other people, but everyone got out the bus safely. He was later arrested after several hours of standoff by the police.

Pure insanity pretty much sums up this murderer. It's mind-boggling.

Story here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ … ional/home
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/ameri … storyemail

News via youtube:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=L5lGvjXXb … re=related
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=39j5yfU5E … re=related

Kamineko · Aug 02, 2008 8:02 AM

I've seen this story on like, every forum.

Pretty wild.

raven · Aug 02, 2008 8:08 AM

That was in the Australian media too. It's pretty disturbing, how someone can be so sadistic and sick minded to just do that to some random unknown person. He obviously has no conscience. Has there been widespread talk of the topic in Edmonton, Bmah?

A Guy · Aug 02, 2008 3:07 PM

I believe that anyone that kills another person should get the death sentence.

Spyro_fan55 · Aug 02, 2008 3:23 PM

That's sad. sad

Martial Arts Spyro · Aug 02, 2008 6:11 PM

Well i guess its safe to say that guy is a twisted little turd.

mimi · Aug 02, 2008 7:22 PM

evertieme i hear somthing nasty and involving murder my wild side grows from within with a feeling thats sends shivers down my spine

Kamineko · Aug 02, 2008 11:17 PM

A Guy wrote:

I believe that anyone that kills another person should get the death sentence.

hai guys let's teach people not to kill people by killing people lol?

A Guy · Aug 03, 2008 12:56 AM

Atresac wrote:

A Guy wrote:
I believe that anyone that kills another person should get the death sentence.
hai guys let's teach people not to kill people by killing people lol?

My point exactly. You learn that if you kill, you get killed.

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 1:09 AM

A Guy wrote:

Atresac wrote:
A Guy wrote:
I believe that anyone that kills another person should get the death sentence.
hai guys let's teach people not to kill people by killing people lol?
My point exactly. You learn that if you kill, you get killed.

You realize that that makes you no better than the person doing the killing, don't you?

A Guy · Aug 03, 2008 1:18 AM

Atresac wrote:

A Guy wrote:
Atresac wrote:
hai guys let's teach people not to kill people by killing people lol?
My point exactly. You learn that if you kill, you get killed.
You realize that that makes you no better than the person doing the killing, don't you?

Yes, I realize that. However, it does the job.

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 2:02 AM

A Guy wrote:

Atresac wrote:
A Guy wrote:
My point exactly. You learn that if you kill, you get killed.
You realize that that makes you no better than the person doing the killing, don't you?
Yes, I realize that. However, it does the job.

If it did the job, no one would be killing anybody right now.

A Guy · Aug 03, 2008 2:05 AM

Atresac wrote:

A Guy wrote:
Atresac wrote:
You realize that that makes you no better than the person doing the killing, don't you?
Yes, I realize that. However, it does the job.
If it did the job, no one would be killing anybody right now.

I never said that you could stop all murder. However, this would discourage most murderers.

Also, as the government would have a GOOD reason to deliver capital punishment, that would not make them just as bad as the murderers.

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 2:44 AM

A Guy wrote:

Atresac wrote:
A Guy wrote:
Yes, I realize that. However, it does the job.
If it did the job, no one would be killing anybody right now.
I never said that you could stop all murder. However, this would discourage most murderers.
Also, as the government would have a GOOD reason to deliver capital punishment, that would not make them just as bad as the murderers.

What? Because they killed somebody first?

If a civilian man were to kill someone because they let's say killed his wife, he's still a murderer.

You can't define what is and isn't a good reason for killing somebody since good is a subjective term. Either killing is allowed, or it's not. Leaving it to some trivial definition of who deserves it or not just puts our own human flaws of judgment into the matter of dictating whether a person lives or dies, and we don't have that authority.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 03, 2008 3:29 AM

Atresac wrote:

A Guy wrote:
Atresac wrote:
hai guys let's teach people not to kill people by killing people lol?
My point exactly. You learn that if you kill, you get killed.
You realize that that makes you no better than the person doing the killing, don't you?

ummm wrong...

you kill someone who kills others so they cant kill people anymore, just like rapists and paedophiles should be castrated, the only thing those genitals will ever be used for is violent sex or sex with children, so to make the world safe, they should be removed, teach people that the ability to take human life, and the ability to have sex with people who dont want it are not your rights, hell they arent even priveleges

now A Guy's original statement was too general, someone can kill someone else in self defence or because they were pushed too far, by accident etc.

people who murder others for no reason, like the guy in this topic, sould be put to death, they are obviously insane, and whilst that may excuse some crimes, if your insanity results in murder then you are never going to be part of society, we could place this person in a padded cell where they wont hurt anyone, but what's the point? what kind of a life is that? when someone is so far gone that they have lost any ability to interact with society they are pretty much as good as dead anyway

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 3:43 AM

Fletch_Talon wrote:

ummm wrong...
you kill someone who kills others so they cant kill people anymore, just like rapists and paedophiles should be castrated, the only thing those genitals will ever be used for is violent sex or sex with children, so to make the world safe, they should be removed, teach people that the ability to take human life, and the ability to have sex with people who dont want it are not your rights, hell they arent even priveleges

So if someone punches someone, chop off their hand?

That's a stupid argument. If you kill someone who kills people it's the same as raping someone who rapes people. Nothing is accomplished, all it results in is two misdeeds that haven't accomplished anything aside from killing.

And like I said, we as humans have no right to decide who is allowed to live or who is allowed to die. We have too many flaws in our own minds and ways of thinking to be able to decide that accurately. I'm sure if someone murders someone they probably have a reason for doing so. They may think that the person who got killed deserved it. But yet there's nothing wrong with killing them back, when the motives are the same?

As for rapists and pedophiles: that's absolutely ridiculous. First of all: castration doesn't stop anyone from having sex, it just stops them from being able to impregnate someone. The *bleep* one is especially flawed, because everyone who knows the first thing about *bleep* knows that *bleep* is rarely ever about the sex. Rather, people *bleep* for the feeling of power and dominance they get from it. As for pedophiles: like I said, castrating them doesn't do ANYTHING more than simply registering them would accomplish. They could still have sex with children.

No one motive for destruction is any better than the next. Either a deed is wrong, or it's fine. Like I've said before, if a man's wife is murdered, and he murders the murderer, the man who killed the murderer should be sent to jail all the same.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 03, 2008 4:04 AM

Atresac wrote:

So if someone punches someone, chop off their hand?

i would argue that a punch rarely does a great degree of lasting damage

That's a stupid argument. If you kill someone who kills people it's the same as raping someone who rapes people. Nothing is accomplished, all it results in is two misdeeds that haven't accomplished anything aside from killing.

no, that is a stupid argument, if someone is a serial killer, and then you rid the world of their existance, you have accomplished something rather substancial, youve stopped that person from ever killing ever again

if you *bleep*ed someone who rapes people, you dont achieve anything, i agree, theyd probably like it

And like I said, we as humans have no right to decide who is allowed to live or who is allowed to die. We have too many flaws in our own minds and ways of thinking to be able to decide that accurately.

thats your first good point so far, i agree to an extent, but even the most unintelligent individual can see when a serial killer deserves death

I'm sure if someone murders someone they probably have a reason for doing so. They may think that the person who got killed deserved it. But yet there's nothing wrong with killing them back, when the motives are the same?

this man killed a guy on a bus who he had never met, as far as i can tell they never said anything to each other

serial killers pick a type of person (to use a TV cliche, women that remind them of their abusive mother) to kill in large numbers, sure, they have a reason, but its universally accepted (by sane people) that its not a valid one

As for rapists and pedophiles: that's absolutely ridiculous. First of all: castration doesn't stop anyone from having sex, it just stops them from being able to impregnate someone. The *bleep* one is especially flawed, because everyone who knows the first thing about *bleep* knows that *bleep* is rarely ever about the sex. Rather, people *bleep* for the feeling of power and dominance they get from it. As for pedophiles: like I said, castrating them doesn't do ANYTHING more than simply registering them would accomplish. They could still have sex with children.

castration also removes sexual desire, sometimes completely, yes *bleep* is about power and control, but its power and control for sexual gratification, in other words they need to be in control to get off, if they dont need to get off then they dont need to be in control

now can you see the logic, and even if it wasnt successful, at least women and small children wouldnt need to worry about bearing a child through *bleep*

No one motive for destruction is any better than the next. Either a deed is wrong, or it's fine. Like I've said before, if a man's wife is murdered, and he murders the murderer, the man who killed the murderer should be sent to jail all the same.

again, i believe you are wrong, if someone punches you, you dont stand there and take it (well you might but youd have to be an idiot) you could run away and have them punch you in the back of the head or you can stand and try and defend yourself

if someone kills once, and logic says they are likely to do so again, you shouldnt let them live, same with rapists, thats like condemning an innocent person to death for what this person has done

life in prison isnt a solution, itd be fine if they were kept in isolation, but instead they form gangs on the inside and kill/*bleep*/hurt each other, and not everyone in that prison is necessarily a murderer

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 4:25 AM

Fletch_Talon wrote:

Atresac wrote:
So if someone punches someone, chop off their hand?
i would argue that a punch rarely does a great degree of lasting damage
That's a stupid argument. If you kill someone who kills people it's the same as raping someone who rapes people. Nothing is accomplished, all it results in is two misdeeds that haven't accomplished anything aside from killing.
no, that is a stupid argument, if someone is a serial killer, and then you rid the world of their existance, you have accomplished something rather substancial, youve stopped that person from ever killing ever again
if you *bleep*ed someone who rapes people, you dont achieve anything, i agree, theyd probably like it
And like I said, we as humans have no right to decide who is allowed to live or who is allowed to die. We have too many flaws in our own minds and ways of thinking to be able to decide that accurately.
thats your first good point so far, i agree to an extent, but even the most unintelligent individual can see when a serial killer deserves death
I'm sure if someone murders someone they probably have a reason for doing so. They may think that the person who got killed deserved it. But yet there's nothing wrong with killing them back, when the motives are the same?
this man killed a guy on a bus who he had never met, as far as i can tell they never said anything to each other
serial killers pick a type of person (to use a TV cliche, women that remind them of their abusive mother) to kill in large numbers, sure, they have a reason, but its universally accepted (by sane people) that its not a valid one
As for rapists and pedophiles: that's absolutely ridiculous. First of all: castration doesn't stop anyone from having sex, it just stops them from being able to impregnate someone. The *bleep* one is especially flawed, because everyone who knows the first thing about *bleep* knows that *bleep* is rarely ever about the sex. Rather, people *bleep* for the feeling of power and dominance they get from it. As for pedophiles: like I said, castrating them doesn't do ANYTHING more than simply registering them would accomplish. They could still have sex with children.
castration also removes sexual desire, sometimes completely, yes *bleep* is about power and control, but its power and control for sexual gratification, in other words they need to be in control to get off, if they dont need to get off then they dont need to be in control
now can you see the logic, and even if it wasnt successful, at least women and small children wouldnt need to worry about bearing a child through *bleep*
No one motive for destruction is any better than the next. Either a deed is wrong, or it's fine. Like I've said before, if a man's wife is murdered, and he murders the murderer, the man who killed the murderer should be sent to jail all the same.
again, i believe you are wrong, if someone punches you, you dont stand there and take it (well you might but youd have to be an idiot) you could run away and have them punch you in the back of the head or you can stand and try and defend yourself
if someone kills once, and logic says they are likely to do so again, you shouldnt let them live, same with rapists, thats like condemning an innocent person to death for what this person has done
life in prison isnt a solution, itd be fine if they were kept in isolation, but instead they form gangs on the inside and kill/*bleep*/hurt each other, and not everyone in that prison is necessarily a murderer

This is going to be really *bleep*ing annoying to cover because of all those breaks in the argument but I'll give this a shot as best as I can:

1) Doesn't matter, your reasoning is that if someone does something wrong, you should ensure that it doesn't happen again by just destroying whatever is causing the problem, a very destructive way of thinking.

2) You stop them from killing, but there's blood on your hands all the same. Someone who kills one person is no better than someone who kills 10 if the death was avoidable. In any case, as far as murder to "teach a lesson" goes, every death is avoidable.

3) No one "deserves" death. That's not for us to decide. Like I said, just about anyone who kills, insane or otherwise, has a reason in their own mind for who deserves to die. But we as humans are in no place whatsoever to say whose reason is better than other's when it comes to a living human being.

4) Even still, you can't say that all it will do is cause other people harm and that all it will be used for is raping/pedophilia or whatever. That's another flaw we as humans come across every day: we don't see strangers as actual people, but as a label. We hear "rapist" and imagine an evil sinister mustache-twirling villain, as opposed to an actual person with likes, dislikes, a personality, and maybe an actual desire to have kids. Fact is: there have been pleanty of cases of rapists, to put it simply, not raping anymore. They can move on, change, and become a productive member of society and raise their own family. However, forcing a castration upon them would ruin that, and I find that too grand a punishment for today's day and age. People were castrated as punishment in the middle ages, we've grown beyond that as a society.

5) I don't see what that part has to do with what I said. You're talking about standing up for yourself but the fact is there is no way to say one murder is more deserved than another, at least not as an absolute.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 03, 2008 4:49 AM

Atresac wrote:

This is going to be really *bleep* annoying to cover because of all those breaks in the argument but I'll give this a shot as best as I can:

this is gonna be really *bleep* easy to cover because ive given my point of view for all these points, the argument is now based on personal opinion, and thats where our opinions differ, you believe that killing is wrong no matter what, i believe killings right if it prevents more killing, nonetheless ill restate my view on the key points

1) Doesn't matter, your reasoning is that if someone does something wrong, you should ensure that it doesn't happen again by just destroying whatever is causing the problem, a very destructive way of thinking.

its the only way of thinking, we cannot control people, id be all for life in prison for murderers and rapists if it werent for the fact that, being human, criminals will adapt, and they can spend theyre life in prison much as they would in the outside world, somewhat violent, but with regular meals and leisure actiities

for prison to be a suitable punishment, they need to be separated from everything, so that theyre actually missing out on something, make it an actual punishment, and make it so they cant hurt anyone ever again, whether that means death or that means complete isolation, its not my decision to make

2) You stop them from killing, but there's blood on your hands all the same. Someone who kills one person is no better than someone who kills 10 if the death was avoidable. In any case, as far as murder to "teach a lesson" goes, every death is avoidable.

you keep trying to say its to "teach a lesson" someone cant learn a lesson if theyre dead, theres only one reason for capital punishment, and that is to prevent more violent murders

you can kill a man who killed ten and have the blood of one man on your hands, or you can let him live and have the blood of ten men on your hands

3) No one "deserves" death. That's not for us to decide. Like I said, just about anyone who kills, insane or otherwise, has a reason in their own mind for who deserves to die. But we as humans are in no place whatsoever to say whose reason is better than other's when it comes to a living human being.

why thats one nice bag of *bleep* you got there, if someone kills a random person on a bus, there is absoposalutely no reason that could justify it, yes im working on a majority rules form of judgement but considering the majority of the world seem to have pretty good judgement (ie. not killing people because they looked at you funny) i think thats a good way to judge

4) Even still, you can't say that all it will do is cause other people harm and that all it will be used for is raping/pedophilia or whatever. That's another flaw we as humans come across every day: we don't see strangers as actual people, but as a label. We hear "rapist" and imagine an evil sinister mustache-twirling villain, as opposed to an actual person with likes, dislikes, a personality, and maybe an actual desire to have kids. Fact is: there have been pleanty of cases of rapists, to put it simply, not raping anymore. They can move on, change, and become a productive member of society and raise their own family. However, forcing a castration upon them would ruin that, and I find that too grand a punishment for today's day and age. People were castrated as punishment in the middle ages, we've grown beyond that as a society.

rapists and paedophiles have given up any rights to have families in y opinion, im sure that girl who was violently *bleep*ed and has been suffering from post traumatic stress disorder ever since would agree with me in not wanting to see the man who violated have a happy life with 2.5 kids and a white picket fence

5) I don't see what that part has to do with what I said. You're talking about standing up for yourself but the fact is there is no way to say one murder is more deserved than another, at least not as an absolute.

this man killed a man by bludgeoning them with an iron bar
the reason he gives is that, "he looked at me"

do you:
a) slap him in solitary confinement with little to no contact with human beings for the rest of his life
b) put him in prison where he can kill/maim other people who could be in there for fraud/theft/falsely accused etc. and where he can possibly be released on good behaviour despite the fact that someone might "look at him" again
c) kill him

a) would work, but frankly its crueler than c) life without human contact would drive a man insane, its more or less torture, and torture is frowned upon more than capital punishment

raven · Aug 03, 2008 5:57 AM

Wow, this is a controversial subject. Atresac and Fletch_Talon, you's would be good lawyers, or good debaters in parliment.

Regardless of which view you take, there is no death penalty/capital punishment in Canada (as far as I know), so this guy won't be dying, unless he suicides or something. I hope he doesn't get an easier sentence because his lawyers argue that he was "not of sound mind and therefore not responsible for his actions" or something like that.

Fletch_Talon · Aug 03, 2008 6:09 AM

raven wrote:

Wow, this is a controversial subject. Atresac and Fletch_Talon, you's would be good lawyers, or good debaters in parliment.
Regardless of which view you take, there is no death penalty/capital punishment in Canada (as far as I know), so this guy won't be dying, unless he suicides or something. I hope he doesn't get an easier sentence because his lawyers argue that he was "not of sound mind and therefore not responsible for his actions" or something like that.

i still say the lawyer/politician thing is as much an insult as a compliment lol...

as for him being insane, well theres no doubt he isnt sane, but as ive said thats no reason to lesson the sentence, he clearly has no moral sense of right and wrong and so any decision he makes in life is going to be horrendously flawed

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 6:10 AM

Fletch_Talon wrote:

Atresac wrote:
This is going to be really *bleep* annoying to cover because of all those breaks in the argument but I'll give this a shot as best as I can:
this is gonna be really *bleep* easy to cover because ive given my point of view for all these points, the argument is now based on personal opinion, and thats where our opinions differ, you believe that killing is wrong no matter what, i believe killings right if it prevents more killing, nonetheless ill restate my view on the key points
1) Doesn't matter, your reasoning is that if someone does something wrong, you should ensure that it doesn't happen again by just destroying whatever is causing the problem, a very destructive way of thinking.
its the only way of thinking, we cannot control people, id be all for life in prison for murderers and rapists if it werent for the fact that, being human, criminals will adapt, and they can spend theyre life in prison much as they would in the outside world, somewhat violent, but with regular meals and leisure actiities
for prison to be a suitable punishment, they need to be separated from everything, so that theyre actually missing out on something, make it an actual punishment, and make it so they cant hurt anyone ever again, whether that means death or that means complete isolation, its not my decision to make
2) You stop them from killing, but there's blood on your hands all the same. Someone who kills one person is no better than someone who kills 10 if the death was avoidable. In any case, as far as murder to "teach a lesson" goes, every death is avoidable.
you keep trying to say its to "teach a lesson" someone cant learn a lesson if theyre dead, theres only one reason for capital punishment, and that is to prevent more violent murders
you can kill a man who killed ten and have the blood of one man on your hands, or you can let him live and have the blood of ten men on your hands
3) No one "deserves" death. That's not for us to decide. Like I said, just about anyone who kills, insane or otherwise, has a reason in their own mind for who deserves to die. But we as humans are in no place whatsoever to say whose reason is better than other's when it comes to a living human being.
why thats one nice bag of *bleep* you got there, if someone kills a random person on a bus, there is absoposalutely no reason that could justify it, yes im working on a majority rules form of judgement but considering the majority of the world seem to have pretty good judgement (ie. not killing people because they looked at you funny) i think thats a good way to judge
4) Even still, you can't say that all it will do is cause other people harm and that all it will be used for is raping/pedophilia or whatever. That's another flaw we as humans come across every day: we don't see strangers as actual people, but as a label. We hear "rapist" and imagine an evil sinister mustache-twirling villain, as opposed to an actual person with likes, dislikes, a personality, and maybe an actual desire to have kids. Fact is: there have been pleanty of cases of rapists, to put it simply, not raping anymore. They can move on, change, and become a productive member of society and raise their own family. However, forcing a castration upon them would ruin that, and I find that too grand a punishment for today's day and age. People were castrated as punishment in the middle ages, we've grown beyond that as a society.
rapists and paedophiles have given up any rights to have families in y opinion, im sure that girl who was violently *bleep*ed and has been suffering from post traumatic stress disorder ever since would agree with me in not wanting to see the man who violated have a happy life with 2.5 kids and a white picket fence
5) I don't see what that part has to do with what I said. You're talking about standing up for yourself but the fact is there is no way to say one murder is more deserved than another, at least not as an absolute.
this man killed a man by bludgeoning them with an iron bar
the reason he gives is that, "he looked at me"
do you:
a) slap him in solitary confinement with little to no contact with human beings for the rest of his life
b) put him in prison where he can kill/maim other people who could be in there for fraud/theft/falsely accused etc. and where he can possibly be released on good behaviour despite the fact that someone might "look at him" again
c) kill him
a) would work, but frankly its crueler than c) life without human contact would drive a man insane, its more or less torture, and torture is frowned upon more than capital punishment

I don't see what's wrong with just addressing the post as a whole instead of turning it into bullet point arguments.

1) It's not even close to the only way of thinking. It's the worst possible way of thinking. During 9/11, if we decided "hey you know this country attacked us, to make sure it doesn't happen again: let's blow the country sky-high". It doesn't work like that.

2) Blood on your hands is blood no matter what. And letting him live is not the same as letting him kill more people. Many people who are serving life sentences for murders are doing just fine in prison. Also: how you like all the people who are on death row, only to have a new piece of evidence revealed many years on proving their innocence? While this is not the case for all people, as some people have without a doubt committed the crime, allowing capital punishment to exist also allows errors like this to happen.

3) Most people agree "hey yeah that's kind of a *bleep* thing to do you know?" But as we can see here, the majority is also split as to whether or not killing them back with an "eye for an eye" way of thinking is a good way to go about it. If you want to go by what the majority thinks, you're going to have a hard time saying the majority wants to kill people back.

4) Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the three inalienable rights that all people are born with. You're already arguing against life for them, but with that you're also arguing against liberty. Everyone deserves a chance to better themselves and change. Yeah, I'm sure the girl who got *bleep*ed by a man wants to rip out his throat and feed it to him should we listen to her and do that? No, because that's just as sick and wrong as *bleep* in the first place, and we don't need to stoop to that level.

5) You do realize that people who murder are NOT put in the same kind of prison as people who commit petty crimes? They're not going to put a guy who killed 50 people in the same cell as a dude convicted of mail fraud or something like that. Not to mention, if capital punishment was illegal, they'd save a lot of money from all the paperwork and dozens of court things that they'd be able to have a better system to make sure "hey let's try and make sure these people don't kill each other y'know?"

Like I said, life is an inalienable right that all people are born with. You can't take that away from them just because "they started it!"

Fletch_Talon · Aug 03, 2008 7:09 AM

Atresac wrote:

I don't see what's wrong with just addressing the post as a whole instead of turning it into bullet point arguments.

adressing an argument point by point is easier and quicker than writing an essay

it also gets a point across easier nowadays since many people will not take the time to read through a "wall of text" as the call it

1) It's not even close to the only way of thinking. It's the worst possible way of thinking. During 9/11, if we decided "hey you know this country attacked us, to make sure it doesn't happen again: let's blow the country sky-high". It doesn't work like that.

oh thats right, i forgot that it was an entire country not simply a radical group of religious extremists that attacked america that day

2) Blood on your hands is blood no matter what. And letting him live is not the same as letting him kill more people. Many people who are serving life sentences for murders are doing just fine in prison. Also: how you like all the people who are on death row, only to have a new piece of evidence revealed many years on proving their innocence? While this is not the case for all people, as some people have without a doubt committed the crime, allowing capital punishment to exist also allows errors like this to happen.

in many cases letting him live/letting him kill others will be the same thing, especially since the people i am suggesting should be put to death are the serial killers who will kill again given the chance. im not saying we should kill bob down the street for killing the guy that broke into his house, or even macdiddy from the ghetto who shot a store clerk in an armed robbery. im talking about premeditated cold blooded murder, murder for the sake of murder.

i was also waiting for someone to bring up the "what if theyre innocent" argument. again im not saying every case of murder should end with the death sentence, only the most extreme cases, and only when there is absolutely no doubt (for example this guy was seen by literally a busload of witnesses)

3) Most people agree "hey yeah that's kind of a *bleep* thing to do you know?" But as we can see here, the majority is also split as to whether or not killing them back with an "eye for an eye" way of thinking is a good way to go about it. If you want to go by what the majority thinks, you're going to have a hard time saying the majority wants to kill people back.

thats true enough, my comment was in relation to whether humans are able to decide what is wrong and right, and death penalty definitely comes under that. however a lot of people argue against it because of the belief that an innocent person could be punished, which in my opinion wouldnt happen if the system was correctly established, the law system is supposed to work on the concept of "reasonable doubt" when the punishment is so severe this concept would need to become "beyond any doubt"

4) Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are the three inalienable rights that all people are born with. You're already arguing against life for them, but with that you're also arguing against liberty. Everyone deserves a chance to better themselves and change.

this seems to imply that you dont even believe in life imprisonment which takes away a lot of a persons freedom/liberty, i really hope thats not what you mean because if that were the case my opinion of you would greatly decrease.

not everyone deserves a second chance, there is a point of no return, granted thats just my opinion, but as ive said, thats what we're discussing here, opinions, like you said, some people are for death penalties others are against.

Yeah, I'm sure the girl who got *bleep*ed by a man wants to rip out his throat and feed it to him should we listen to her and do that? No, because that's just as sick and wrong as *bleep* in the first place, and we don't need to stoop to that level.

from what ive heard, most women who get *bleep*ed just want to forget it, those who dont, dont want it to happen to anyone else.

i dont feel that that is an unreasonable wish, and there are only 2 sure fire ways to solve the problem, keep the person locked up forever (which doesnt happen consistantly at the moment as far as i can tell) or make it so they can not, or do not do it again

im not suggesting death for rapists, because theres a better and more appropriate solution, castration removes their urge to have sex and therefore they can exist in society without the need to cause harm to others. and if you dont agree with that punishment for rapists, please at least see the sense in doing it for paedophiles.

if they did want to have a family rapists would still feel the need to overpower and control their sexual partner, and paedophiles would still feel sexually attracted to young children.

5) You do realize that people who murder are NOT put in the same kind of prison as people who commit petty crimes? They're not going to put a guy who killed 50 people in the same cell as a dude convicted of mail fraud or something like that. Not to mention, if capital punishment was illegal, they'd save a lot of money from all the paperwork and dozens of court things that they'd be able to have a better system to make sure "hey let's try and make sure these people don't kill each other y'know?"

i could have sworn i read somewhere that people convicted of fraud and theft were in some places placed in the same facilities as those who commited more violent crimes, but now that ive thought about it, that was more to do with assault rather than murder, sorry about my mistake

as for saving money, i think theyd save just as much money by not having to feed/clothe/care for murderers and rapists

Like I said, life is an inalienable right that all people are born with. You can't take that away from them just because "they started it!"

once again, thats your opinion

my opinion is that murderers need harsher consequences for their actions than prison, im not saying id enjoy life in prison, but im not a murderer, and a lot of murders are committed by people whose lives are far from perfect, in many cases regular meals and a bed (however uncomfortable) is a distinct improvement

and no i havnt changed my belief that the death sentence is to prevent reoccurring murders, the above point is in addition to previous points.

corky · Aug 03, 2008 9:23 AM

What a sick mind he has...I mean seriously, even if you have a mental disorder, who the hell goes around stabbing random people they don't know on a bus in front of everyone?

Kamineko · Aug 03, 2008 10:56 AM

I haven't gotten any sleep today yet, so I'm in no mental condition to continue with this debate. I'll type a response when I wake up.

#1 Aug 02, 2008 6:04 AM

man charged with beheading a person on bus

#2 Aug 02, 2008 8:02 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#3 Aug 02, 2008 8:08 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#4 Aug 02, 2008 3:07 PM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#5 Aug 02, 2008 3:23 PM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#6 Aug 02, 2008 6:11 PM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#7 Aug 02, 2008 7:22 PM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#8 Aug 02, 2008 11:17 PM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#9 Aug 03, 2008 12:56 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#10 Aug 03, 2008 1:09 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#11 Aug 03, 2008 1:18 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#12 Aug 03, 2008 2:02 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#13 Aug 03, 2008 2:05 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#14 Aug 03, 2008 2:44 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#15 Aug 03, 2008 3:29 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#16 Aug 03, 2008 3:43 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#17 Aug 03, 2008 4:04 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#18 Aug 03, 2008 4:25 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#19 Aug 03, 2008 4:49 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#20 Aug 03, 2008 5:57 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#21 Aug 03, 2008 6:09 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#22 Aug 03, 2008 6:10 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#23 Aug 03, 2008 7:09 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#24 Aug 03, 2008 9:23 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

#25 Aug 03, 2008 10:56 AM

Re: man charged with beheading a person on bus

Board footer