Give this MAN a Medal - Page 2

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Give this MAN a Medal (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:11:35 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

IN THE UNITED STATES OF FUCKING AMERICA!

Do you have the slightest understanding of what that means? Apparantly not......

Are you sure you are from Texas?

Again, your argument is that we should all be allowed to kill whoever we feel like needs a good killing?
Yeah, in Texas we call that murder.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:12:41 AM EDT

[#2]

Look, let me make this clear. Obviously this guy has to be arrested and charged. There is no way around that. Of course, the people doing that should do all they can to make sure that is considered mentally incompetent and gets of as light as possible.

I am not disputing the fact that what he did was illegal. I am saying that what he did was NOT immoral. Sometimes 'legal' and 'moral' are not interchangeable.

I am arguiing these points:

1. That the guy should not "fry", that what he did was not morally wrong, that I am glad he did it, and that he should be charged and punished in the absolute most lenient manner possible under the law.

2. That Child molesters and rapists should be fucking executing by firing squad, legally, immediately following the verdict. Oh, yeah, chop their fucking pathetic dicks off first too.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:13:40 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I am not advocating breaking the law. I am just saying that this man is a hero.

He is a hero to you because this time he chose as his victim someone that you don't like.

I'm sorry, but a convicted child molester goes beyond "someone that you don't like." They are more on the order of rabid dogs. They should be killed out of hand.

A big +1

The chances are very high that they would have victimized another child.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:14:09 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Some of you sure are sticking up pretty hard for these perverts...kind of makes me wonder why to tell you the truth. Are you sex offenders or what?

Bullshit. Show me one example where anyone here has even come close to excusing the acts of the convicted sex offenders. So far, you are in the minority of those cheering on a murderer.

Obviously the law has to be enforced. I just don't get how you think that what this guy did is actually morally wrong. Its pretty sad that people like you stick up for these fucks and because of that we can't protect our kids.

Again, noone is coming to the defense or "sticking up for" the murdered sex offenders. And I do just fine defending my own children, thank you very much.

1/3 women will be raped in their lifetime,

Source? Didn't think so.

IN THE UNITED STATES OF FUCKING AMERICA!

Nice.

Something is clearly not being done that needs to be. I am sorry but this is the real world, its harsh and brutal, and I am not going to fucking advocate endangering women and children and letting 1/3 of them be raped to protect some faggot ass peice of shit pervert who needs a fucking dirt nap.

Thank you, Oh Great Arbiter of All That Is Good In the World. Again, just so you know, I'm not about to "let" anyone rape my children, mmm-kay?

I am going to send this horrible "vigilante" a fucking certificate or a plaque or something. Thanks for making me think of it.

Yay! I'm sure your scrapbooking club can help you with that.

I will follow up with pics in a few days once I get around to it.

Don't bother. Nobody is interested.

It just makes me sad that we are powerless against these fucking perverts because nobody will do what needs to be done. What kind of nation of men are we when we can't fucking protect our women and children?

Be sad all you want if you feel powerless, but that's not going to change anything. If you want to effect change, get busy! Start a grass-roots campaign to get rape changed to a capital offense. And for the third time, I am not unable to protect my family. Speak for yourself, sweetheart.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:15:37 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Police notified convicted Level 3 sex offenders in the area as a precaution, but said the letter was vague and could be a hoax.

So, do they also send individual letters to all children when perverts move into town or are released from jail?

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:15:52 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Look, let me make this clear. Obviously this guy has to be arrested and charged. There is no way around that. Of course, the people doing that should do all they can to make sure that is considered mentally incompetent and gets of as light as possible.

I am not disputing the fact that what he did was illegal. I am saying that what he did was NOT immoral. Sometimes 'legal' and 'moral' are not interchangeable.

I am arguiing these points:

1. That the guy should not "fry", that what he did was not morally wrong, that I am glad he did it, and that he should be charged and punished in the absolute most lenient manner possible under the law.

2. That Child molesters and rapists should be fucking executing by firing squad, legally, immediately following the verdict. Oh, yeah, chop their fucking pathetic dicks off first too.

Well, for your #2, you are 100% right, and I'd love to see that happen.

But what he did WAS morally wrong, as DK_Prof so nicely put it: This man spat in the face
of what our legal system stands for. It might not always work 100%, but it will not work at
all if it is meaningless.

This guy made himself the judge, jury, and executioner and gave himself power that the People
of the country did not give him. THAT is his crime. The victim, who gives a shit, he's better
off dead, but this guy did NOT have the MORAL OR LEGAL right to make that decision.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:18:14 AM EDT

[#7]

So what people are saying amounts to: if OBL were captured and brought to trial, convicted on murder, conspiracy, and terrorism charges, and then (for whatever reason) released from prison, anyone who went out and killed him extrajudiciously should fry.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:20:05 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Look, let me make this clear. Obviously this guy has to be arrested and charged. There is no way around that. Of course, the people doing that should do all they can to make sure that is considered mentally incompetent and gets of as light as possible.

I am not disputing the fact that what he did was illegal. I am saying that what he did was NOT immoral. Sometimes 'legal' and 'moral' are not interchangeable.

I am arguiing these points:

1. That the guy should not "fry", that what he did was not morally wrong, that I am glad he did it, and that he should be charged and punished in the absolute most lenient manner possible under the law.

2. That Child molesters and rapists should be fucking executing by firing squad, legally, immediately following the verdict. Oh, yeah, chop their fucking pathetic dicks off first too.

Now HERE's a rational post.

Indeed, "legal" and "moral" are rarely interchangeable. We do not want to live in a state where flexible morality is legislated. If you're into that sort of thing, go live in Singapore for a year, and report back. Or perhaps Tehran.

I do not suggest that the killer "fry," only that he be tried in the same manner as his victims. I am sure that his attorney will do the utmost to secure a lenient sentence, and possibly even a "not guilty" verdict. This will be a most difficult case to prosecute, I should think.

Regarding your point #2 above, I am in complete and total agreement with you. However, no such law exists in our Beloved Country, and until such time passes, we must abide by the laws that are in place to the best of our CIVILIZED ability.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:20:34 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
So what people are saying amounts to: if OBL were captured and brought to trial, convicted on murder, conspiracy, and terrorism charges, and then (for whatever reason) released from prison, anyone who went out and killed him extrajudiciously should fry.

OBL is not a citizen of the US, and therefore not subject to the protections that offers.
You are talking about 2 different things. Remember, this discussion is about
the American legal system, not morality in general.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:20:46 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

IN THE UNITED STATES OF FUCKING AMERICA!

Do you have the slightest understanding of what that means? Apparantly not......

Are you sure you are from Texas?

Again, your argument is that we should all be allowed to kill whoever we feel like needs a good killing?Yeah, in Texas we call that murder.

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:22:55 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
So what people are saying amounts to: if OBL were captured and brought to trial, convicted on murder, conspiracy, and terrorism charges, and then (for whatever reason) released from prison, anyone who went out and killed him extrajudiciously should fry.

In your far-fetched scheme, yes. However, I for one do not say that the killer in either the real or ficticious case should necessarily "fry." I only ask that they be tried under the same set of laws as the original offender, and judged accordingly. If convicted, their sentence should match the State guidelines for the crime.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:24:56 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

This isn't a morality only issue, that's the problem. As an American, and as a proud one, I cannot
justify spitting in the face of our legal system, flawed as it may be. The Founding Fathers
didn't like their system, and they changed it. One guy that decided to kill a child molester
or 2 isn't really making the same kind of social change that Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson made.

If all of us tomorrow decided we should kill all child molesters, then that is indeed the "will of the people"
and I'm right with ya. That is not what happened here however.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:30:38 AM EDT

[#13]

Better leave Jefferson out of your argument. He once executed a traitor in his front yard without a trial.

Yep, this guy is a killer and will be prosecuted to the max, deservably so.

Shame his crime spree ended with only two.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:30:47 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

This isn't a morality only issue, that's the problem. As an American, and as a proud one, I cannot
justify spitting in the face of our legal system, flawed as it may be. The Founding Fathers
didn't like their system, and they changed it. One guy that decided to kill a child molester
or 2 isn't really making the same kind of social change that Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson made.

If all of us tomorrow decided we should kill all child molesters, then that is indeed the "will of the people"
and I'm right with ya. That is not what happened here however.

I'd like to add that the founding fathers felt so strongly, that they were willing to die for their beliefs. The advocates of vigilante justice posting thus far, are not likey willing to face certain death for the killing of convicted sex offenders.

Championing the efforts of a lone individual is a far cry from a group of people who were willing to die for the institution of an imporved legal system.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:31:19 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:
So what people are saying amounts to: if OBL were captured and brought to trial, convicted on murder, conspiracy, and terrorism charges, and then (for whatever reason) released from prison, anyone who went out and killed him extrajudiciously should fry.
In your far-fetched scheme, yes. However, I for one do not say that the killer in either the real or ficticious case should necessarily "fry." I only ask that they be tried under the same set of laws as the original offender, and judged accordingly. If convicted, their sentence should match the State guidelines for the crime.

I admitt my scheme is far-fetched and thank you for answering it honestly. I'm beginning to think a more appropriot question is not "should this guy fry" or "should this guy be charged" but rather "If you were on the jury, would you convict him." I can respect the fact that any official representing a state with laws cannot afford to arbitrarily decide when and when not to enforce them, however when it comes down to the people in the jury box beyond deciding the facts, a simple question of right and wrong needs to be answered.

I can understand your respect for our system of laws and "the law" in general, however in my view thoughout history and even today, "the law" has too often been wrong to hold it above all else.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:31:37 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

This isn't a morality only issue, that's the problem. As an American, and as a proud one, I cannot
justify spitting in the face of our legal system, flawed as it may be. The Founding Fathers
didn't like their system, and they changed it. One guy that decided to kill a child molester
or 2 isn't really making the same kind of social change that Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson made.

If all of us tomorrow decided we should kill all child molesters, then that is indeed the "will of the people"
and I'm right with ya. That is not what happened here however.

so what you are saying is that if the revolution failed, and franklin and jefferson were hanged, then you would have been right there in the crowd throwing tomatoes at them screaming "fry vigilante scum!!!"

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:31:42 AM EDT

[#17]

The guy murdered two people he got off of a website. So, people defending this murderer are willing to trust their lives on the ability of a minimum wage government employee working in data entry?

Someone's finger slips and a level 3 show up instead of 2 or 1, and someone dies? Are you OK with that? They mispell or mix up a name and/or address, and a random guy is killed, OK with that?

The man didn't track and hunt these people. Didn't study their cases, histories and court transcripts like the jury did. He just took two names and an address off a website and murdered them.

Sounds to me like he wanted to be a serial killer, and picked victims that he tought he could get away with killing.

A lot of these perverts do deserve death, but that choice is made through the legal system in an attempt to make sure they have the right person.

This murderer deserves the death penalty, just as much as his victims probably did.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:31:48 AM EDT

[#18]

What is a Level III offender? Is that a scale of 1-10? Did they lick but not poke? Poke but not lick? For all I know, a Level III could have been found guilty of date rape.

What is it exactly we are talking about?

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:32:56 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Better leave Jefferson out of your argument. He once executed a traitor in his front yard without a trial.

Yep, this guy is a killer and will be prosecuted to the max, deservably so.

Shame his crime spree ended with only two.

Well, traitors get special privileges

And yeah, I'd agree too that if this idiot was going to go on a crime spree
like this, it's a shame he turned himself in after 2. Why not 40 or 50.

But, now he has to be treated as a criminal.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:36:01 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

This isn't a morality only issue, that's the problem. As an American, and as a proud one, I cannot
justify spitting in the face of our legal system, flawed as it may be. The Founding Fathers
didn't like their system, and they changed it. One guy that decided to kill a child molester
or 2 isn't really making the same kind of social change that Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson made.

If all of us tomorrow decided we should kill all child molesters, then that is indeed the "will of the people"
and I'm right with ya. That is not what happened here however.

I'd like to add that the founding fathers felt so strongly, that they were willing to die for their beliefs. The advocates of vigilante justice posting thus far, are not likey willing to face certain death for the killing of convicted sex offenders.

Championing the efforts of a lone individual is a far cry from a group of people who were willing to die for the institution of an imporved legal system.

No offense but I fail to see "willingness to die for ones beliefs" as any type of vindication of ones beliefs. No does a belief being supported by a group rather than an individual. Millions of people, with more courage than I, have died for beliefs I find repugnant.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:36:28 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Some of you sure are sticking up pretty hard for these perverts...kind of makes me wonder why to tell you the truth. Are you sex offenders or what?

People like YOU are the ones that actually hurt conservatives, if this is the pathetic level of argument you resort to when people have the audacity to disagree with you.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:36:43 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

so what you are saying is that if the revolution failed, and franklin and jefferson were hanged, then you would have been right there in the crowd throwing tomatoes at them screaming "fry vigilante scum!!!"

Didn't you take a civics class somewhere along the way?

If the "revolution" fails, then it was not the will of the people, wouldn't you say?

But in 1776 it was most certainly the will of the people. This one guy however,
was not authorized to speak for the people.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:38:40 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Better leave Jefferson out of your argument. He once executed a traitor in his front yard without a trial.

Really? Source (because I think it is awesome, not because I am skeptical)

Although that really seems more of a back-yard kind of activity.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:40:00 AM EDT

[#24]

First of all, I apologize for being rude at anyone who disagreed with me here. You respect the law and I respect that. I respect the law too. All I am saying is that in the cases where the law does not bring about justice, it is in no way immoral to supercede the law. Yes it is illegal. Yes this guy has to be brought up on charges. No I am not going to sit here and say that he is an immoral person, because his actions were not immoral.

If someone killed your entire family and got off scott free you wouldn't execute their ass? I sure as hell would.

All I have to say is this:

If somebody ever rapes one of my loved ones, I am going to personally see to the following:

1. Procure duct tape, rope, 3 foot 5 inch diameter cast-iron pipe, sledge-hammer, double barrel coach gun, knife.

2. <COC violation>

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:40:21 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
What is a Level III offender? Is that a scale of 1-10? Did they lick but not poke? Poke but not lick? For all I know, a Level III could have been found guilty of date rape.

What is it exactly we are talking about?

In most states a Level III offender is the worst of the worst, most likely to re-offend. Someone posted the crimes these guys were convicted of and it sounded pretty bad. While I dont see "date rape" as any minor thing, I can see your point. I think the list of offenses for which people can be listed as a sex offender should be clarified and perhaps shortened. I also think more scrutiniy needs to be given to testimony by the "victim" in rape/molestation cases. I dont think anyone should be listed as a sex offender for public urination, and I don't think anyone should be convicted of rape for having sex with a willing woman who had two beers.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:43:14 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

This isn't a morality only issue, that's the problem. As an American, and as a proud one, I cannot
justify spitting in the face of our legal system, flawed as it may be. The Founding Fathers
didn't like their system, and they changed it. One guy that decided to kill a child molester
or 2 isn't really making the same kind of social change that Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson made.

If all of us tomorrow decided we should kill all child molesters, then that is indeed the "will of the people"
and I'm right with ya. That is not what happened here however.

I'd like to add that the founding fathers felt so strongly, that they were willing to die for their beliefs. The advocates of vigilante justice posting thus far, are not likey willing to face certain death for the killing of convicted sex offenders.

Championing the efforts of a lone individual is a far cry from a group of people who were willing to die for the institution of an imporved legal system.

Unfortunately you are right. I have my own family to take care of. You can't save the whole world, but if anyone ever tries to hurt any member of my family then I hope somebody around here has a good supply of body bags.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:44:38 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So what people are saying amounts to: if OBL were captured and brought to trial, convicted on murder, conspiracy, and terrorism charges, and then (for whatever reason) released from prison, anyone who went out and killed him extrajudiciously should fry.
In your far-fetched scheme, yes. However, I for one do not say that the killer in either the real or ficticious case should necessarily "fry." I only ask that they be tried under the same set of laws as the original offender, and judged accordingly. If convicted, their sentence should match the State guidelines for the crime.

I admitt my scheme is far-fetched and thank you for answering it honestly. I'm beginning to think a more appropriot question is not "should this guy fry" or "should this guy be charged" but rather "If you were on the jury, would you convict him." I can respect the fact that any official representing a state with laws cannot afford to arbitrarily decide when and when not to enforce them, however when it comes down to the people in the jury box beyond deciding the facts, a simple question of right and wrong needs to be answered.

I can understand your respect for our system of laws and "the law" in general, however in my view thoughout history and even today, "the law" has too often been wrong to hold it above all else.

+1

this is a correct and intelligent post. I agree with you 100%.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:45:54 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
What is a Level III offender? Is that a scale of 1-10? Did they lick but not poke? Poke but not lick? For all I know, a Level III could have been found guilty of date rape.

What is it exactly we are talking about?

Oh and date-rape is ok then?

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:46:28 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
First of all, I apologize for being rude at anyone who disagreed with me here. You respect the law and I respect that. I respect the law too. All I am saying is that in the cases where the law does not bring about justice, it is in no way immoral to supercede the law. Yes it is illegal. Yes this guy has to be brought up on charges. No I am not going to sit here and say that he is an immoral person, because his actions were not immoral.

If someone killed your entire family and got off scott free you wouldn't execute their ass? I sure as hell would.

All I have to say is this:

If somebody ever rapes one of my loved ones, I am going to personally see to the following:

1. Procure duct tape, rope, 3 foot 5 inch diameter cast-iron pipe, sledge-hammer, double barrel coach gun, knife.

2. <COC violation>

I'm with you 100% there. Thats the problem with this one case though, this guy had
no connection at all. He just out of the blue decided to start killing people. That is the
problem, not who he did it to.

In the case you describe here, you would probably be found not guilty, there have been lots
of cases like that.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:46:41 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Better leave Jefferson out of your argument. He once executed a traitor in his front yard without a trial.

Yep, this guy is a killer and will be prosecuted to the max, deservably so.

Shame his crime spree ended with only two.

Well, traitors get special privileges

And yeah, I'd agree too that if this idiot was going to go on a crime spree
like this, it's a shame he turned himself in after 2. Why not 40 or 50.

But, now he has to be treated as a criminal.

+1

I agree with you here, he does have to be and I wish he didn't turn himself in.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:47:34 AM EDT

[#31]

The LAW cannot always address every injustice.

The law is not the final, and sole arbiter of right or wrong in a society.

Morality, religious faith, and ethics are also factors to govern behavior.

I am conflicted about this case, but I know that if MY child were preyed upon, I will kill the MF'er.

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:47:48 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Some of you sure are sticking up pretty hard for these perverts...kind of makes me wonder why to tell you the truth. Are you sex offenders or what?

People like YOU are the ones that actually hurt conservatives, if this is the pathetic level of argument you resort to when people have the audacity to disagree with you.

try reading the whole thread and you will see that I aplogized already. Thanks for the input though I really appreciate your all your help and everything.

ETA:

you are right it was stupid of me to say that, I just have a lot of anger about anything to do with rapists because I have known too many women who have been hurt by scum and I spend way more of my life then I should have to making sure that my wife and family is safe from these assholes. There are way too many of them.

also, i didn't realize that you had posted this before I retracted.

please continue with the discussion...

Posted: 9/6/2005 10:52:51 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Some of you sure are sticking up pretty hard for these perverts...kind of makes me wonder why to tell you the truth. Are you sex offenders or what?

People like YOU are the ones that actually hurt conservatives, if this is the pathetic level of argument you resort to when people have the audacity to disagree with you.

try reading the whole thread and you will see that I aplogized already. Thanks for the input though I really appreciate your all your help and everything.

In that case, I am an idiot

I DID read the whole thread, but I guess I missed it. Sorry.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:08:03 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Better leave Jefferson out of your argument. He once executed a traitor in his front yard without a trial.

Really? Source (because I think it is awesome, not because I am skeptical)

Although that really seems more of a back-yard kind of activity.

Caught me, have no idea if it was front or back yard. The quote though from the movie "Swordfish" that it happened on the White House Lawn of course is total bull. Though I'm sure at one point he would have loved to shoot Burr on the white house steps.

The actual incident reported to be on Jefferson's own property carries about as much factual support as his affair with Sally Hemmings. Both stories are based in presidential folklore with some basis in fact but not published credible works of the day. It was a time of yellow journalism at its peak, however I for one give it as much credence to this rumor as the Sally Hemmings rumor which the 1998 DNA study failed to prove, however in my opinion did not disprove either.

Tj

BTW, No way in hell, the DA would not reject me for that jury.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:09:47 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Caught me, have no idea if it was front or back yard. The quote though from the movie "Swordfish" that it happened on the White House Lawn of course is total bull. Though I'm sure at one point he would have loved to shoot Burr on the white house steps.

The actual incident reported to be on Jefferson's own property carries about as much factual support as his affair with Sally Hemmings. Both stories are based in presidential folklore with some basis in fact but not published credible works of the day. It was a time of yellow journalism at its peak, however I for one give it as much credence to this rumor as the Sally Hemmings rumor which the 1998 DNA study failed to prove, however in my opinion did not disprove either.

Tj

Well, it's an excellent story, so let's all agree to repeat that it was in the backyard at his home.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:12:03 AM EDT

[#36]

I can assure you no prosecutor would want me on the jury. I'd acquit. Period.

Taking out two child molesters? Seems to me he did what the law SHOULD have done.

Just because something is the law doesn't mean it's right. Sure, I pick this because I agree with it, and that makes me slightly hypocritical in this regard.

So be it. Two fewer kind-fondlers walking the streets. The world is a better place, on balance.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:14:11 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Caught me, have no idea if it was front or back yard. The quote though from the movie "Swordfish" that it happened on the White House Lawn of course is total bull. Though I'm sure at one point he would have loved to shoot Burr on the white house steps.

The actual incident reported to be on Jefferson's own property carries about as much factual support as his affair with Sally Hemmings. Both stories are based in presidential folklore with some basis in fact but not published credible works of the day. It was a time of yellow journalism at its peak, however I for one give it as much credence to this rumor as the Sally Hemmings rumor which the 1998 DNA study failed to prove, however in my opinion did not disprove either.

Tj

Well, it's an excellent story, so let's all agree to repeat that it was in the backyard at his home.

No, front yard is better. You'd have to invite the traitor to you backyard, but people show up in front yards unannounced. Lets keep this rumor as plausible as possible.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:19:20 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
I bet some of you would feel different if it was your kid they molested.

Just a father speaking here....

There is no room in justice for emotion.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:40:31 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Quoted:
What is a Level III offender? Is that a scale of 1-10? Did they lick but not poke? Poke but not lick? For all I know, a Level III could have been found guilty of date rape.

What is it exactly we are talking about?

Oh and date-rape is ok then?

I think he's referring to the concept date rape is usually a he said -- she said type of situation. Very hard to tell who is telling the truth if both people consensually entered the same house/apartment/room/bedroom, no signs of violence, and two different stories. No means No, as long as it isn't after the fact.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:45:08 AM EDT

[#40]

.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:59:45 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Quoted:

No, I don't advocate that. I am just trying to gauge your moral compass, so to speak.

for example, I would wonder what you might think of an all-out gun ban. As long as it were legal under the present system, would you adhere to it?

Do you view the founding fathers as lawless rebels because they violated the laws of their times though those same laws served to the detriment of the public?

As an aside, I would like to see "Jessica's Law" of Florida passed enforced on the Federal level. A mandatory minimum of 25 years would put an end to molesters walking the streets.

This isn't a morality only issue, that's the problem. As an American, and as a proud one, I cannot
justify spitting in the face of our legal system, flawed as it may be. The Founding Fathers
didn't like their system, and they changed it. One guy that decided to kill a child molester
or 2 isn't really making the same kind of social change that Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson made.

If all of us tomorrow decided we should kill all child molesters, then that is indeed the "will of the people"
and I'm right with ya. That is not what happened here however.

Fair enough. I personally think there is still room to work within the system. Alerting neighbors of a pedophile's presence is a step in the right direction.

I just think it is necessary to caution others about blind adherence to unjust laws.

Posted: 9/6/2005 11:57:48 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Fair enough. I personally think there is still room to work within the system. Alerting neighbors of a pedophile's presence is a step in the right direction.

I just think it is necessary to caution others about blind adherence to unjust laws.

Yeah, this guy in particular is a wacko because he was writing letters, etc, basically begging
to get caught. If he wanted to really kill a child molester to "help out" in some fashion
in his own mind at least, he should have at the very least followed one of them around
until they committed another crime. Then it would be somewhat justified.

I think the fact that he turned himself in tells a lot about his motivations. He wanted
to kill someone for fun and notoriety, and he picked a victim that would piss the least
number of people off.

Posted: 9/6/2005 12:07:48 PM EDT

[#43]

So he "took one for the team".... He turned himself in, the beloved justice system will do it`s thing. On behalf of the children they molested and the ones they would have molested... Thanks man!

Posted: 9/6/2005 12:20:33 PM EDT

[#44]

In the absence of any personal conection to the crimes these two people commited. I would convict.

That is not something I am willing to allow in a lawful society. Now ask me as a father if I would be able to end the life of a man I know raped my child.... the answer is quite possibly. I have a tough time rationalizing that but I have a strong suspision that the slap on the wrist some states hand out as punishment for these crimes is not sufficient to supress that very primal desire. I'd never vote to convict a man who did likewise. Logic tells me to go on and care for my child and let the system deal with the offense. The other part of me says that the strong possiblity of being killed by an angry father who will walk may make it a little harder to get over that hump and actually attack a child.

What this fruitcake did (based on what we know) is quite different. Picking a couple names off a list and executing them because you want to is not justified, right, or even understandable. It's murder plain as day. I shed no tears for those who died, nor for the man that will be convicted of killing them.

It's a hard issue to argue, and I honestly don't suggest my answer is without contridiction. It's based on my understanding that some things are so damaging to a person and those who care for them that I can forgive entirely an act that I would otherwise condem. I can only hope beyond words that I never in my life face that situation with my little girl.

Posted: 9/6/2005 12:21:25 PM EDT

[#45]

While we're all throwing out "what ifs" at this story-

What if this guy is a total nutjob, not a "righteous" vigilante? Even better, what if he's a closet pedo and in his delusional paranoia and neuroses he lashes out against those like him because of his own self-loathing? He murders others for his inablity to commit suicide. Are you going to pity/praise him then?

Posted: 9/6/2005 12:25:44 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
I can assure you no prosecutor would want me on the jury. I'd acquit. Period.

Taking out two child molesters? Seems to me he did what the law SHOULD have done.

Just because something is the law doesn't mean it's right. Sure, I pick this because I agree with it, and that makes me slightly hypocritical in this regard.

So be it. Two fewer kind-fondlers walking the streets. The world is a better place, on balance.

Think for a moment about the motivations here though. Do you really want to turn loose a man who kills not make the world a better place or to end a threat to his family, but who simply can't wait to tell someone about what he did? To pick a person that nobody will like and become god to them by deciding tonight to end thier life. It's not WHO he killed, its the mind and motivation behind it. I'd be happy with all three off the streets myself.

Posted: 9/6/2005 12:28:34 PM EDT

[#47]

If he had done this to one that had wronged him or his, I would see this differently.

But at some point the rule of law must take over from peoples desire for justice at any price.

He did it, now he'll pay for it.

Posted: 9/6/2005 12:58:12 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
While we're all throwing out "what ifs" at this story-

What if this guy is a total nutjob, not a "righteous" vigilante? Even better, what if he's a closet pedo and in his delusional paranoia and neuroses he lashes out against those like him because of his own self-loathing? He murders others for his inablity to commit suicide. Are you going to pity/praise him then?

Triple goodness. He takes out two bad guys and is now in jail.

Posted: 9/6/2005 1:48:00 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

Think for a moment about the motivations here though. Do you really want to turn loose a man who kills not make the world a better place or to end a threat to his family, but who simply can't wait to tell someone about what he did? To pick a person that nobody will like and become god to them by deciding tonight to end thier life. It's not WHO he killed, its the mind and motivation behind it. I'd be happy with all three off the streets myself.

Oh, you're probably right. I'm simply talking about the "crime" of having offed these two. Not Guilty.

Now, if you wish too delve into the inner workings of his mind (or lack thereof), then by all means do so. Certainly can't hurt. In a very real sense the man should at least be checked to see if he really does have any screws loose.

He might not, you know.

Again. If he were put on trial for their murder, I would acquit. I still think the balance of danger to society is tilted toward the good guys. Instead of two confirmed and one possible whackjob on the street, we only have one. That's good math in my book.

Posted: 9/6/2005 2:09:09 PM EDT

[#50]

I'm glad he killed them. Two less assholes in the world I have to worry about being around my kids.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Give this MAN a Medal (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us