The real answer to control gun violence...

[mlyonsd]

is execute anyone that commits a violent crime with one. That means holding up a convenience store, etc.

A society that embraces killing an innocent human conceived but not yet born should be able to do this, right? This of course won't stop a nut from killing kindergartners but nothing will do that.

And don't preach to me about being a civilized society because you're fighting a losing argument. If you're not intelligent enough to understand what the consequences of your actions are you're not civilized.

The answer is so simple it's scary.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

Catch Les Mis yet?

No why? I heard it sucked but others loved it.

[CoMoChief]

Well same w/ sex offenders and rapists etc.

I think you should just take them out back and shoot them. Saves tons of people's time and tax dollars that way, and the deterrent is more effective. You have a choice....play w/ little Susie's bootyhole, or get executed.

I'm all for it.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

No why? I heard it sucked but others loved it.

It's very good, except for Russell Crowe. When he starts singing a solo, it's a good time for a bathroom break.

Although I don't really get KChiefer's comparison. Granted, I haven't read the book, but I don't remember anyone discussing Valjean using an assault rifle to steal his loaf of bread.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

is execute anyone that commits a violent crime with one. That means holding up a convenience store, etc.

I'm a fan of yours, mlyonsd. I think you're a good poster on this forum, but I don't think you've thought this through.

[gblowfish]

Interesting blog entry by musician James McMurtry. Too long to post, but a good read. He's certainly not a bithering leftist hippie socialist, but he ain't Ted Nugent, either:

http://blurt-online.com/features/view/1309/

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Justice should be equal to intent. Meaning if you're willing to use a weapon to achieve something illegal you should pay the same price as if you used that same weapon.

It's an intriguing idea. In its purest form, I understand the logic and the sense of justice. I think the problems that you run into with something like this are multiple:

1) I was taught certain rules about operating a firearm. Treat every gun as if it were loaded. Don't draw it unless you intend to use it. Don't aim it at someone unless you are prepared to shoot that person with it. Those rules involve discipline and control. I don't believe that most would be robbers/muggers/etc. have actually made the decision to use that weapon. Sure, it's disgusting to me that someone would use a firearm to coerce someone in one of those situations. But you are treading in "thought crime" territory with this.

2) I have no faith in the justice of our legal system. I believe that the death penalty has been improperly used in the past. The very notion of allowing "the State" to legally end the life of a citizen is fraught with danger, and substituting vengeance for justice (which this sounds like to me) is a personally terrifying concept.

3) We already place a lot of power at the fingertips of the police. I don't trust (as a group) their objectivity enough to take every policeman's word enough to introduce more capital offenses. I think we do have a system in place that may or may not sentence someone to death based on the facts in a case by case scenario. Let the juries decide, and let the voters consider death penalties.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by listopencil

2) I have no faith in the justice of our legal system. I believe that the death penalty has been improperly used in the past. The very notion of allowing "the State" to legally end the life of a citizen is fraught with danger, and substituting vengeance for justice (which this sounds like to me) is a personally terrifying concept.

This, more or less, is my primary concern.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'm a fan of yours, mlyonsd. I think you're a good poster on this forum, but I don't think you've thought this through.

Oh sure, I know it's not as easy as I make it sound but it will save more innocent lives in the long run than anything we have in place.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by listopencil

It's an intriguing idea. In its purest form, I understand the logic and the sense of justice. I think the problems that you run into with something like this are multiple:

1) I was taught certain rules about operating a firearm. Treat every gun as if it were loaded. Don't draw it unless you intend to use it. Don't aim it at someone unless you are prepared to shoot that person with it. Those rules involve discipline and control. I don't believe that most would be robbers/muggers/etc. have actually made the decision to use that weapon. Sure, it's disgusting to me that someone would use a firearm to coerce someone in one of those situations. But you are treading in "thought crime" territory with this.

2) I have no faith in the justice of our legal system. I believe that the death penalty has been improperly used in the past. The very notion of allowing "the State" to legally end the life of a citizen is fraught with danger, and substituting vengeance for justice (which this sounds like to me) is a personally terrifying concept.

3) We already place a lot of power at the fingertips of the police. I don't trust (as a group) their objectivity enough to take every policeman's word enough to introduce more capital offenses. I think we do have a system in place that may or may not sentence someone to death based on the facts in a case by case scenario. Let the juries decide, and let the voters consider death penalties.

1) Committing a murder with a handgun is punishable by death right now in lots of states. I don't have a problem expanding that to include purposely risking the lives of others when committing a crime.

2) Well on this we'll probably never agree so I won't try and change your mind.

3) Like I said in my previous post certain criteria would have to be considered. And I'm just expanding on what could be considered as a capital offense.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by frazod

It's very good, except for Russell Crowe. When he starts singing a solo, it's a good time for a bathroom break.

Although I don't really get KChiefer's comparison. Granted, I haven't read the book, but I don't remember anyone discussing Valjean using an assault rifle to steal his loaf of bread.

You got the gist of it. Les Mis could easily be modernized where Valjean robs a store. Upon release from prison he goes on to redeem himself despite his past.

As far as the newest remake, it's a tough watch. The cast is great, the costumes and sets are great. Having them sing every damn line, not great.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

1) Committing a murder with a handgun is punishable by death right now in lots of states. I don't have a problem expanding that to include purposely risking the lives of others when committing a crime.

2) Well on this we'll probably never agree so I won't try and change your mind.

3) Like I said in my previous post certain criteria would have to be considered. And I'm just expanding on what could be considered as a capital offense.

Fair enough. We'll have to agree to disagree.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Fair enough. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I think the best way to reduce gun violence is to make committing a crime with a gun a scarier proposition than the gain of doing so.

The media and Biden have it all backwards.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

I think the best way to reduce gun violence is to make committing a crime with a gun a scarier proposition than the gain of doing so.

The media and Biden have it all backwards.

They need the gun crimes to keep their fear campaign going. The crime statistics are clear. We know where the gun crimes are happening yet laws are passed that have zero chance to reduce them. In fact those paying attention are well aware of the fact these crimes happen where the tightest gun laws are in place~

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

I think the best way to reduce gun violence is to make committing a crime with a gun a scarier proposition than the gain of doing so.

Sure, but I don't think expanding the death penalty is necessarily going to do that.

The media and Biden have it all backwards.

I completely agree.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

They need the gun crimes to keep their fear campaign going. The crime statistics are clear. We know where the gun crimes are happening yet laws are passed that have zero chance to reduce them. In fact those paying attention are well aware of the fact these crimes happen where the tightest gun laws are in place~

I fully believe the liberal POV is most criminals can be converted and their rights are equal to the innocent law abiding citizen.