Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 4/23/2016 8:48:29 AM EDT
Yep, I said it.

Violent felons or anyone that committed crimes against minors should be forbidden to have children.

We aren't in the post-era of an apocalypse, we aren't endanger of becoming extinct due to low birth rates. (Japanese people are debatable)

My wife and I have friends that foster children that are so fucked up I have no idea how they do it. They had to hide everyones toothbrush from a 7yr old girl because... well, I'm sure you can figure that shit out.

Anyway, just a Saturday morning rant, probably a 2/10 one because not enough fucks or fuck you's.

And yes I do know this will never happen, right now people are defending grown men that want to show their penis in a girls locker room/rest room. If someone proposes the bold statement above it would turn all the SJWs into rabid werewolves.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 8:53:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 8:54:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/23/2016 8:54:41 AM EDT by MarkNH]
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 8:56:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/23/2016 8:59:51 AM EDT by waterglass]
Because they don't kill them anymore.

But it aint them breeding you need to worry about, it is them turning their kids into copies of them with abuse, or going out and raping or hurting one of your own because we don't do with them what we need too.

but we have to keep them alive so some lawyers can have jobs, and so some corrections officers can have jobs, and so some governors cousins construction companies don't go under, and so service conglomerates can service conglomerate.

So what if they get out and kill and rape?

Think of all those jobs they justify.

All those good kids who go to college and make the world safer one space at a time.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:01:14 AM EDT
Many terrible laws had good intentions. Once you legislate who can and can't perform the most basic natural act of creating life, it can never be undone, and will be turned against you in a second.

I will never support the state deciding who can and can't procreate. No matter what the noble disguise.

I do however support erasing these monsters as they have forfeited their right to life when they make the decision to destroy someone else's
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:02:05 AM EDT
If we are going to play eugenics I'd rather we focus on barring people with serious hereditary conditions from breeding.

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:03:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/23/2016 9:06:42 AM EDT by I_am_Dan]
Holy Totalitarian ideologies Batman!



This isn't a caliphate, our options of criminal penalties are deprive someone of their life, or their freedom on a temporary basis.

Shit our system already creates second class citizens out of criminals, making them subhuman is a slippery slope, and to trust the government with that power is ludicrous.

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:05:53 AM EDT
...no



Once someone has paid for a crime and is a free citizen again you have no right to impose a lifelong punishment on them
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:06:55 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Yep, I said it.

Violent felons or anyone that committed crimes against minors should be forbidden to have children.

We aren't in the post-era of an apocalypse, we aren't endanger of becoming extinct due to low birth rates. (Japanese people are debatable)

My wife and I have friends that foster children that are so fucked up I have no idea how they do it. They had to hide everyones toothbrush from a 7yr old girl because... well, I'm sure you can figure that shit out.

Anyway, just a Saturday morning rant, probably a 2/10 one because not enough fucks or fuck you's.

And yes I do know this will never happen, right now people are defending grown men that want to show their penis in a girls locker room/rest room. If someone proposes the bold statement above it would turn all the SJWs into rabid werewolves.
View Quote


Also, show me where this has happens?...no one is defending this, it is illegal and if someone was doing it they would go to jail
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:07:33 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MarkNH:
If they were properly punished for their crimes you wouldn't have to worry about them breeding, they would either be in jail or dead.
View Quote


Except our justice system is not set up to punish anymore.

Our justice system is set up to "rehabilitate" offenders instead.

What our justice system really does is something else all together.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:09:33 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By I_am_Dan:
Holy Totalitarian ideologies Batman!



This isn't a caliphate, our options of criminal penalties are deprive someone of their life, or their freedom on a temporary basis.

Shit our system already creates second class citizens out of criminals, making them subhuman is a slippery slope, and to trust the government with that power is ludicrous.

View Quote

They are made subhuman when they lose the rights of a freeman.

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:10:43 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By USMC0928:


Except our justice system is not set up to punish anymore.

Our justice system is set up to "rehabilitate" offenders instead.

What our justice system really does is something else all together.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By USMC0928:
Originally Posted By MarkNH:
If they were properly punished for their crimes you wouldn't have to worry about them breeding, they would either be in jail or dead.


Except our justice system is not set up to punish anymore.

Our justice system is set up to "rehabilitate" offenders instead.

What our justice system really does is something else all together.



So your answer is to give more power to an ineffective government agency?
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:11:04 AM EDT
The voting majority has no appetite for state imposed sterilization, provisioned by the courts.


Next question.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:14:57 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By I_am_Dan:



So your answer is to give more power to an ineffective government agency?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By I_am_Dan:
Originally Posted By USMC0928:
Originally Posted By MarkNH:
If they were properly punished for their crimes you wouldn't have to worry about them breeding, they would either be in jail or dead.


Except our justice system is not set up to punish anymore.

Our justice system is set up to "rehabilitate" offenders instead.

What our justice system really does is something else all together.



So your answer is to give more power to an ineffective government agency?


My answer is the same answer that is was in college. Go back to a punishment instead of rehabilitation. None of the extra shit they get now.

Think how Sheriff Arpaio runs his jail is how I would run every prison.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:22:34 AM EDT
I support the death penalty, but there is a problem with extreme penalties.

Simply because trusting the state with extreme power is rarely a good idea. District Attorney's, Judges, and Cops are human and often make mistakes, and in some cases they conspire to mislead juries. With the rise of DNA Testing we have seen the overturning of thousands of cases and sentences. Every few months I read stories of police or court corruption scandals.

Our criminal justice system was originally designed to "fail safe" and find guilty men innocent if there was any shred of doubt, but over the years we have had politicians who were so "tough on crime" that they attempted to short circuit our societal safety switches, and when they couldn't do that they found ways to legally and illegally rail road motherfuckers into prison cell and electric chairs.

While it is morally right to execute a murderer, it is much more morally wrong to deprive an innocent man of his rights.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:22:39 AM EDT
Cause they vote Democrat
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:27:42 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By I_am_Dan:
I support the death penalty, but there is a problem with extreme penalties.

Simply because trusting the state with extreme power is rarely a good idea. District Attorney's, Judges, and Cops are human and often make mistakes, and in some cases they conspire to mislead juries. With the rise of DNA Testing we have seen the overturning of thousands of cases and sentences. Every few months I read stories of police or court corruption scandals.

Our criminal justice system was originally designed to "fail safe" and find guilty men innocent if there was any shred of doubt, but over the years we have had politicians who were so "tough on crime" that they attempted to short circuit our societal safety switches, and when they couldn't do that they found ways to legally and illegally rail road motherfuckers into prison cell and electric chairs.

While it is morally right to execute a murderer, it is much more morally wrong to deprive an innocent man of his rights.
View Quote


I agree.

I wish I was able to articulate it as nicely as you did.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:34:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/23/2016 9:36:06 AM EDT by waterglass]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By I_am_Dan:
I support the death penalty, but there is a problem with extreme penalties.

Simply because trusting the state with extreme power is rarely a good idea. District Attorney's, Judges, and Cops are human and often make mistakes, and in some cases they conspire to mislead juries. With the rise of DNA Testing we have seen the overturning of thousands of cases and sentences. Every few months I read stories of police or court corruption scandals.

Our criminal justice system was originally designed to "fail safe" and find guilty men innocent if there was any shred of doubt, but over the years we have had politicians who were so "tough on crime" that they attempted to short circuit our societal safety switches, and when they couldn't do that they found ways to legally and illegally rail road motherfuckers into prison cell and electric chairs.

While it is morally right to execute a murderer, it is much more morally wrong to deprive an innocent man of his rights.
View Quote



fix the system, and the issue is minimized.

Lots of good people die because we turn bad people loose.

Either way we are sentencing people to death.

Either way we are all culpable, though supporters of this modern chaos are quick to deny all responsibility for their actions in the current state of things.



Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:36:02 AM EDT
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:44:06 AM EDT
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:46:02 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DangerJ:
If we are going to play eugenics I'd rather we focus on barring people with serious hereditary conditions from breeding.

View Quote


No thank you

Throughout history there have been scores of disabled and genetically hindered people that have contributed to the world.

I'll pass
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:46:30 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.
View Quote

who are you to say what someone may do once they pay their debt to society
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:47:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:

Violent felons or anyone that committed crimes against minors should be forbidden to have children.
View Quote

Let me guess, you probably consider yourself a libertarian too

The stupidity I read on this site never ceases to amaze me
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:48:43 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?
View Quote


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?


Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:52:03 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jmo371:

who are you to say what someone may do once they pay their debt to society
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jmo371:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.

who are you to say what someone may do once they pay their debt to society


Pay their debt to society?

So we are defending those who destroy and hurt innocent people?

If we really had any justice in this country we would use this more often and this wouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:52:10 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.
View Quote

Do you even listen to yourself?

So these same people who ignored the laws regarding murder, assault or rape are suddenly going to follow the law regarding reproduction? And if they choose to not comply, then what? Put them back in jail? What exactly is that supposed to accomplish?
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:53:13 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Krashdog:


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?




It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:54:48 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Krashdog:


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?



I wasn't saying she shouldn't be able to breed. She is free to do as she pleases but she shouldn't get money from me. I guess given the subject of this thread I should have been more specific.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:55:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/23/2016 9:56:45 AM EDT by Krashdog]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?




It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".


L O fucking L




Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:56:29 AM EDT
Forbidden you say comrade?
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:56:48 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?




It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".

You do know that posession of a 30rd magazine in NY is considered a "violent felony" don't you? Should violators of that law lose their right to breed under your guidelines?
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:57:31 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By airgunner:

Do you even listen to yourself?

So these same people who ignored the laws regarding murder, assault or rape are suddenly going to follow the law regarding reproduction? And if they choose to not comply, then what? Put them back in jail? What exactly is that supposed to accomplish?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By airgunner:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.

Do you even listen to yourself?

So these same people who ignored the laws regarding murder, assault or rape are suddenly going to follow the law regarding reproduction? And if they choose to not comply, then what? Put them back in jail? What exactly is that supposed to accomplish?


Just throwing out ideas. If you were to see the kids I've seen you would probably lean more toward my side of things.

I do see your point though, people wouldn't follow it, kind of like criminals and gun free zone signs.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:58:07 AM EDT
The same reason we shouldn't let gun owners breed...
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:58:52 AM EDT
I shudder to think of the world some here would create, given the chance.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:59:01 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By flynhghr2001:

You do know that posession of a 30rd magazine in NY is considered a "violent felony" don't you? Should violators of that law lose their right to breed under your guidelines?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By flynhghr2001:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?




It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".

You do know that posession of a 30rd magazine in NY is considered a "violent felony" don't you? Should violators of that law lose their right to breed under your guidelines?


Now you are just being obtuse.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 9:59:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/23/2016 9:59:58 AM EDT by Cucumbermonkey]
Owning a hicap mag in NY is classified as a violent felony. eta beat.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:04:26 AM EDT
If they can't be trusted completely in society with the same rights and privileges as everyone else, they belong in jail.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:04:35 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.
View Quote


Pass a law? To prevent habitual offenders from doing something? Regardless of the morality or constitutionality of this law, what on earth makes you think any badguy would abide by it?

Let's pass a law forbidding crime, while we're at it.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:08:02 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


Now you are just being obtuse.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By flynhghr2001:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?




It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".

You do know that posession of a 30rd magazine in NY is considered a "violent felony" don't you? Should violators of that law lose their right to breed under your guidelines?


Now you are just being obtuse.

How is he being obtuse? You propose another law than would only addresses feels. We already have enough idiotic laws. No need for more.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:08:16 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


Pay their debt to society?

So we are defending those who destroy and hurt innocent people?

If we really had any justice in this country we would use this more often and this wouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/pirates/images/6/6a/AWEHangmansNoose.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20121003130159
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Jmo371:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
LOL i was not advocating for court ordered "tube tying".

Just a law prohibiting violent criminals (felonies) and sexual offenders against minors from having children.

who are you to say what someone may do once they pay their debt to society


Pay their debt to society?

So we are defending those who destroy and hurt innocent people?

If we really had any justice in this country we would use this more often and this wouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/pirates/images/6/6a/AWEHangmansNoose.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20121003130159



I am defending them once they are out of prison/off parole all rights should be restored.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:09:19 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Just throwing out ideas.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Just throwing out ideas.

You are going to have to wake up and realize that more laws isn't the solution. What we have is a problem with society and it can't be fixed or even mitigated with law

Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
If you were to see the kids I've seen you would probably lean more toward my side of things.

I've seen plenty of fucked up, dangerous kids and most of them weren't the off spring of violent felons.

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:13:34 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By airgunner:

You are going to have to wake up and realize that more laws isn't the solution. What we have is a problem with society and it can't be fixed or even mitigated with law


I've seen plenty of fucked up, dangerous kids and most of them weren't the off spring of violent felons.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By airgunner:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Just throwing out ideas.

You are going to have to wake up and realize that more laws isn't the solution. What we have is a problem with society and it can't be fixed or even mitigated with law

Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
If you were to see the kids I've seen you would probably lean more toward my side of things.

I've seen plenty of fucked up, dangerous kids and most of them weren't the off spring of violent felons.



Wholeheartedly agree. My mistake was bringing up a "law" in the first place. Just wanted to start a discussion if the rights to bear children should apply to our most fucked up of people.

I fucked my own thread up, oh wells.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:16:06 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


Wholeheartedly agree. My mistake was bringing up a "law" in the first place. Just wanted to start a discussion if the rights to bear children should apply to our most fucked up of people.

I fucked my own thread up, oh wells.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By airgunner:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Just throwing out ideas.

You are going to have to wake up and realize that more laws isn't the solution. What we have is a problem with society and it can't be fixed or even mitigated with law

Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
If you were to see the kids I've seen you would probably lean more toward my side of things.

I've seen plenty of fucked up, dangerous kids and most of them weren't the off spring of violent felons.



Wholeheartedly agree. My mistake was bringing up a "law" in the first place. Just wanted to start a discussion if the rights to bear children should apply to our most fucked up of people.

I fucked my own thread up, oh wells.


Our most fucked up people are gun nuts. They should be banned from breeding. And speaking, because that's how their bloodthirsty ethos is spread. Only when this is done can we stop the cycle of violence and hate and have a just and peaceful world.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:19:12 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


Now you are just being obtuse.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By flynhghr2001:
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
Originally Posted By Htown156:
Why is Shaqueesha, who hasn't worked a day in her life, rewarded with more welfare for bringing a child into this world she cannot care for?


Perfect example of why emotion should be left out of the argument .

I agree 100% I get very mad at shaqueesha. But what about when it's your turn? Or your child's turn? When the bodies in power decide that shaqueesha can breed, but John smith can't?




It would be a cut and dry law based on prior/current convictions. No judge could abuse it, nor any government panels of "people playing God".

You do know that posession of a 30rd magazine in NY is considered a "violent felony" don't you? Should violators of that law lose their right to breed under your guidelines?


Now you are just being obtuse.

LOL

YOU are the one that suggested that "violent felons" should by law not be allowed to breed.
YOU are the one that said make it cut and dry based on prior/CURRENT covictions
YOU are the one that wants to make it so judges have no leeway in the matter

So just because I found a huge flaw with your asinine suggestion does not mean I'm being obtuse
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:24:03 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By waterglass:



fix the system, and the issue is minimized.

Lots of good people die because we turn bad people loose.

Either way we are sentencing people to death.


Either way we are all culpable, though supporters of this modern chaos are quick to deny all responsibility for their actions in the current state of things.



View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By waterglass:
Originally Posted By I_am_Dan:
I support the death penalty, but there is a problem with extreme penalties.

Simply because trusting the state with extreme power is rarely a good idea. District Attorney's, Judges, and Cops are human and often make mistakes, and in some cases they conspire to mislead juries. With the rise of DNA Testing we have seen the overturning of thousands of cases and sentences. Every few months I read stories of police or court corruption scandals.

Our criminal justice system was originally designed to "fail safe" and find guilty men innocent if there was any shred of doubt, but over the years we have had politicians who were so "tough on crime" that they attempted to short circuit our societal safety switches, and when they couldn't do that they found ways to legally and illegally rail road motherfuckers into prison cell and electric chairs.

While it is morally right to execute a murderer, it is much more morally wrong to deprive an innocent man of his rights.



fix the system, and the issue is minimized.

Lots of good people die because we turn bad people loose.

Either way we are sentencing people to death.


Either way we are all culpable, though supporters of this modern chaos are quick to deny all responsibility for their actions in the current state of things.






And what do you mean by "fix the system"?

William Blackstone, and John Adams would disagree

All presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously; for the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:26:15 AM EDT
a thousand thoughts running through my head. what would she do with the truth brushes?

stick it into the toilet, wipe her ass with it, sharpen it into a shiv and stab them in their sleep? put draino on it? what?
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:31:29 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Beachhead0:
a thousand thoughts running through my head. what would she do with the truth brushes?

stick it into the toilet, wipe her ass with it, sharpen it into a shiv and stab them in their sleep? put draino on it? what?
View Quote


Toothbrushes are "phallic"

Her and her twin sister were taken away when the mother beat the fuck out of the father with a baseball bat when she caught him molesting them.

But.... not for the reason you think. They would both molest them together, but when he did it by himself she went apeshit. The girls would not confess that they had been molested and the exam they were given proved inconclusive. The mother would not testify against her husband, and neither confessed.

Never knew CPS could take children away if one spouse beats the shit out of another.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:31:33 AM EDT
This thread will implode soon

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:33:12 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Krashdog:
This thread will implode soon

https://d.gr-assets.com/hostedimages/1393075568ra/8658308.gif
View Quote


It already did.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:33:40 AM EDT
We are swinging the other way OP, half of your subject matter is now allowed to vote in VA.

Give them room
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 10:43:16 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:


Toothbrushes are "phallic"

Her and her twin sister were taken away when the mother beat the fuck out of the father with a baseball bat when she caught him molesting them.

But.... not for the reason you think. They would both molest them together, but when he did it by himself she went apeshit. The girls would not confess that they had been molested and the exam they were given proved inconclusive. The mother would not testify against her husband, and neither confessed.

Never knew CPS could take children away if one spouse beats the shit out of another.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Originally Posted By Beachhead0:
a thousand thoughts running through my head. what would she do with the truth brushes?

stick it into the toilet, wipe her ass with it, sharpen it into a shiv and stab them in their sleep? put draino on it? what?


Toothbrushes are "phallic"

Her and her twin sister were taken away when the mother beat the fuck out of the father with a baseball bat when she caught him molesting them.

But.... not for the reason you think. They would both molest them together, but when he did it by himself she went apeshit. The girls would not confess that they had been molested and the exam they were given proved inconclusive. The mother would not testify against her husband, and neither confessed.

Never knew CPS could take children away if one spouse beats the shit out of another.


in a million guesses I wouldn't guess someone would suggest toothbrushes are phallic. what happened to the children is horrible but that rationality is really fucking stupid. it s going to be a really miserable life for those children if they are afraid of anything with a length greater than it s width.


Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top