Here's an Idea - Mass Shootings

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Moon68

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: chr0naut

Is trans-gender-ism on the same scale with population numbers as...Christianity???

I think not.

Is BLM on same scale (i.e. reparations and burn your S# down) as with population numbers as Christiantity??? Not even!
(NOTE: NOT to be confused with colored skin persons being Christians, so don't go there!)

Frankly, is ANY of today's activism on parallel with the numbers, or percentages, of the population with respect to...Christianity??? NO! No, they're not!

I'm not a big religious guy; don't go to church, but I have extreme distaste of deflective arguments like this.

Sorry.

ETA - Old Rome is a far different world than we live in today. If you'd like to go back to that world, my suspicion is...you'd have a very difficult life indeed. Let's start with the...lions!

You seem to have entirely missed my point.

Western culture is filled with violence and guns pushed by a media where the bad guy usually gets their comeuppance. It just desensitizes people from aversion to violence.

There is ample historical proof that public executions do not work to reduce crime.

You might feel all vengeful, but violence breeds violence. End of story.

Bullsnip. If Johnny sees his buddy go down for popping a store clerk during a robbery, taking a long drop and the end of a short rope, bowels and bladder draining down his legs, he's going to think twice about the consequences of his actions.

People already know that some criminals are executed.

Also many of these mass shooters fully intend 'suicide by cop' after their carnage.

Maybe Judge dredd had a point we can use in real society. When a arrest happens,round up a jury of people in that area on the spot and have a trial. pay each person 50 bucks for their short time. a trial should take no more than 4 hours on scene.have PD's on hand for legal defense. If someone died,and the shooter is the killer,the jury should vote guilty and publically execute the person. there,trial by jury of their peers,and speedy trial.
Note this will NOT work in all cases btw.

Perhaps the perpetrator should be prevented from ever being able to kill again in such a way (surgical amputation of their fingers, for example), and then they enter into a life of absolute servitude (slavery) to the families and community of the victims. In that way, no-one else dies, and they remain an obvious and perpetual reminder that crime has consequence?

Of course, that then criminalizes those who enslave them, so perhaps not.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: tanstaafl
I wasn't equating child murders with Christianity.

Uh... yes... yes, you were...

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: yuppa
Perhaps the perpetrator should be prevented from ever being able to kill again

When they are publicly executed, they will never be able to kill again.

That is precisely the point. Yes, it might give someone else pause if they were considering doing the same thing, but that is not the point of their execution, the point is preventing that murderer from ever doing it again.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: tanstaafl
I wasn't equating child murders with Christianity.

Uh... yes... yes, you were...

In my post, I chose a historical instance where public executions clearly had no preventative effect.

Nowhere did I say, or even hint, that they were the same or similar. I did not 'equate' them. I did not say they were equal.

A mention of different topics or situations does not mean that they are being equated. Equating them would need to be explicit.

Extremists often use false equivalences as justification for their hatred, which further radicalizes them, as they come to believe things they know they actually just made up.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: yuppa
Perhaps the perpetrator should be prevented from ever being able to kill again

When they are publicly executed, they will never be able to kill again.

That is precisely the point. Yes, it might give someone else pause if they were considering doing the same thing, but that is not the point of their execution, the point is preventing that murderer from ever doing it again.

Then one might prevent all murders, forever, by eliminating the entire population?

The issue is one of degree of severity of the response, and of the effectiveness.

It makes no sense to compound one murder with another.

And execution gives no allowance for any possible compensation, or repentance, either.

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" and "The wages of sin is death". This means we all should be under a death sentence.

“...neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Now go and sin no more.”

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: tanstaafl
Then one might prevent all murders, forever, by eliminating the entire population?

Gaslighting again, are we?

Ok, I'll respond with...

Did everyone in the entire population commit murder?

The issue is one of degree of severity of the response, and of the effectiveness.

Executing a mass murderer very effectively ensures that they will never murder anyone again.

It makes no sense to compound one murder with another.

Gaslighting again, are we?

Murder is lying in wait and killing someone with malic and aforethought. Executing someone is not murder, unless it is ordered to be done by someone with knowledge that the one being executed is or is possibly innocent.

And execution gives no allowance for any possible compensation, or repentance, either.

For my own personal beliefs, I don't automatically believe that every murderer deserves the death penalty, but I would have to say that many/most do - but all mass-murderers do, as do all murderers and rapists/sexual abusers of children

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Exactly, you are spot-on