Child Killers

sheryl_b · Post by **sheryl_b** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:23 am

Should child killers be given a trial in a court????? i don't agree with this i think they should be left out in the real world and their names and photos broadcast everywhere that way they'd save the tax payers money by letting the public kill them instead of placing them in jail under protection

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:40 am

Surely guilt has to be proved first.

What would happen to the vigilante that killed the killer, would they too be killed?

sheryl_b · Post by **sheryl_b** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:48 am

abbey wrote: Surely guilt has to be proved first.

What would happen to the vigilante that killed the killer, would they too be killed?
No Abbey the people who kill'd them shouldn't be punish'd cos they're only removing sicko's from our world.......... imagine them in moss side????? they'd be instantly killed

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:49 am

Your hypothesis is thoroughly unreasonable and preposterous.

Even rudimentary civilisations do not function in such an atavistic manner.

R.B.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:52 am

That would be interesting, stripping one of any protection given a human or animal. Any act against them would not be considered illegal.

Maybe we could brand their forehead so everybody would know.

pantsonfire321@aol.com · Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:56 am

sheryl_b wrote: Should child killers be given a trial in a court????? i don't agree with this i think they should be left out in the real world and their names and photos broadcast everywhere that way they'd save the tax payers money by letting the public kill them instead of placing them in jail under protection

Lets just top all unwanted scum - Imbecile- everyone ,what ever crime they have commited have the right to a trial .

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:02 pm

Sheryl b, on both sides of the pond people are entitled to due process of law. in a civilized country we can't execute arbitrarily, nor should we be able to. i , because i am law and order all the way through, want people, including child killers, to be tried, and guilt or innocence established. by evidence. i know if you think about this proposal, you'll realize it would make murderers out of the public, and vigilante 'justice' would reign. where would the line be drawn? who would be eligible for summary execution? who would decide who lives or dies?

sheryl_b · Post by **sheryl_b** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 12:17 pm

i know what your sayin about people should get a trial but look at them 2 sicko's who reaped a 3 month old baby..........they guilty before they even went into court due to the fact that they'd taken pictures of what they was doing.........

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:36 pm

posted by moverguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Bell

Your hypothesis is thoroughly unreasonable and preposterous.

Even rudimentary civilisations do non function in such an atavistic manner.

R.B.

WELL RICHIE, don't read much history then do you?

ROME, EGYPT, BUSHIDO what do you mean civilisations don't behave in such a manner?

GO BACK TO THE LIBRARY

Maybe you should read a bit more, even the most primitive of tribes have some kind of law. Where do you think the US got the idea of calling the senate a senate from, not to mention republic, democracy etc etc. course its best if you are of thge ruling class.

posted by cheryl_B

Should child killers be given a trial in a court????? i don't agree with this i think they should be left out in the real world and their names and photos broadcast everywhere that way they'd save the tax payers money by letting the public kill them instead of placing them in jail under protection

posted by moverguy

Kill Them All, Be Brutal, Be Vicious And The Need For The Human To Preserve Itself Will Bring About A Cessation Of These Abhorrent Behaviors

Due Process Can Kiss My Ass

Must Not Be A Parent To Think Otherwise

Everybody is innocent until proven guilty and is entitled to due process, anything else is just rule by thuggery.

In the UK there is at least one well publicised case where a paediatrican was attacked and had her home firebombed because the moronic idiots that make up vigilante mobs didn't know a paedophile was not the same as a paediatrician.

I hope for your sake none of your neighbours hear a rumour that you are molesting children and decide to take action against you-then of course you would deserve it wouldn't you cos you must be guilty, no smoke without fire as the saying goes.

Having said that, once caught I would never let them out of prison.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:53 pm

Richard Bell wrote: Your hypothesis is thoroughly unreasonable and preposterous.

Even rudimentary civilisations do non function in such an atavistic manner.

R.B.

lol. Nice vocabulary, richard!

I'd like to say that many times in the past, I've wanted to get personal revenge on someone for a misdeed. You know what I found out? Every time I tried, it backfired and I ended up in trouble.

Then, when I quit wishing for revenge, I found out that people like that eventually screw up their own lives far worse than I could ever have done.

so it's "Vengence is mine, sayeth the Lord" for me these days.

I am for brainwashing and reprogramming child molesters though. I'd even go for frontal lobotomies on them.

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 10:18 pm

moverguy wrote: WELL RICHIE, don't read much history then do you?

ROME, EGYPT, BUSHIDO what do you mean civilisations don't behave in such a manner?

GO BACK TO THE LIBRARY

I didn't join this forum to engage in silly hyperbole or puerile posturing, so I cannot be bothered debating with you on an AOL chatroom level of discourse.

R.B.

Bothwell · Post by **Bothwell** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:30 am

Err did the tinfoil hat brigade invade while I was away.

Execution by the public!!!!!

That will work, how about the stupid idiots down in Portsmouth (South UK) that spray painted the house of a local doctor because they saw an article in their local paper that named him as a Paediatrician which was close enough for them to Paedophile, that is actually true.

i can only hope that this thead is designed to gee everyone up is not for real

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 7:17 am

Richard Bell wrote: I didn't join this forum to engage in silly hyperbole or puerile posturing, so I cannot be bothered debating with you on an AOL chatroom level of discourse.

R.B.I like you, Richard. You've made me dust off my thesaurus.

Oh yeh, and I generally agree with ya, too.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 7:47 am

Bothwell wrote: Err did the tinfoil hat brigade invade while I was away.

Yes, Bothwell. They did.:-2

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:20 am

Accountable wrote: I like you, Richard. You've made me dust off my thesaurus.

Oh yeh, and I generally agree with ya, too.

Thanks for the nice words, Accountable !

I don't always spout off like Frasier Crane, but I do take the high road when the debate gets on the silly side. Having said that, I knew full well that the thread topic was intentionally inflammatory when I responded to it.

I'm enjoying the FG. I've been mostly lurking here for a couple months. Now that I'm getting a feel for the place, I'll be chiming in from time to time.

R.B.