Stupidest person ever

PHoNyMiKe · Post by **PHoNyMiKe** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:33 am

down here in florida we still got the death penalty. it's used only in extreme cases, where there is no other options. we've killed 64 inmates in the past 30 years, there's 388 more waiting, it's really not common. they should just go back to chopping the hands off of thieves!

Gonzo · Post by **Gonzo** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:36 am

alexz721 wrote:
Franky wrote:The thief threatened to hurt the guy. That means he was willing to hurt him. The fact that he didn't is meaningless. Intention over action, that's my law.
This is literally one of the dumbest motherfucking things I've ever read on this board.

Quoted for truth.

Just because someone threatens someone, it doesn't automatically mean they are going to do it, and as I type this I can't believe I had to say something so fucking obvious to another person.

And as for intention being more important than action, that is the exact reasoning that has completely screwed up the legal system here in Australia.
An example;

A couple of years a go a man got in his car drunk and invariably ran over
a child who I think was about 4. His sentence? 18 months. Why? He didn't intentionally kill the kid.

So Franky, you can get the fuck out with that "Intention over action, that's my law" shit.

PHoNyMiKe · Post by **PHoNyMiKe** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:09 am

p.s. I love google

eye for an eye is a great system, but it only works on paper, like communism.

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:21 am

Deathlike2 wrote:
Gil_Hamilton wrote:
Franky wrote:I swear you people are insane...

Bye
Yes, it's the people that DON'T think you should be killed for stealing necklaces who are crazy.
If there was a gun or a knife to threaten the guy, then maybe there's a legit reason for saying it. However, it doesn't even sound like that's the case, so I don't see it as an true threat.

Threatening someone is a lot different than actually doing something, even if you're threatening with a deadly weapon.

Hence why armed robbery isn't usually considered a capital offense.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 4:28 am

Gil_Hamilton wrote:
Deathlike2 wrote:
Gil_Hamilton wrote:
Franky wrote:I swear you people are insane...

Bye
Yes, it's the people that DON'T think you should be killed for stealing necklaces who are crazy.
If there was a gun or a knife to threaten the guy, then maybe there's a legit reason for saying it. However, it doesn't even sound like that's the case, so I don't see it as an true threat.
Threatening someone is a lot different than actually doing something, even if you're threatening with a deadly weapon.

Hence why armed robbery isn't usually considered a capital offense.

Well, in the end, all bets are off when someone dies.

Tallgeese · Post by **Tallgeese** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:13 am

I DO however think it's rather screwy that prison life in certain UK institutions are so... well stocked.

Freedom is overrated.

Francis64 · Post by **Francis64** » Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:06 am

DancemasterGlenn wrote:Either way, Franky is completely out of line. He didn't even hurt the guy, all he did was steal the kid's jewelry and make a retarded threat. Why the hell would you give someone the death penalty for that?

This is an interwebs forum, you don't have to take everything literally.
Personally, if I was in power to change things, I'd go for this.

Franky wrote:They keep being criminals because they never learn from their ways. And there is nothing to scare them into not doing the things they do. That's why the risk of dying for their crimes might help, because it would scare many away.

Wrong. The death penalty might by scary for some, but those who commit the most serious of crimes are too stupid to think forward about the consequences of their actions.

adventure_of_link wrote:No, they keep being criminals because once they get out of jail they know they usually won't get a decent job and have to either settle for holding down two minimum wage jobs (if they're THAT lucky) or just recommit a crime so they can go back to prison where they know they can at least get food, water, clothes, and shelter all at taxpayer's expense.

or so this is my theory anyway.

There is nothing to refute your theory at the moment, therefore it's still a valid theory.
The prospect of going to prison should be a deterrent to anyone, stupid or not.
Instead, what are potential criminals going to think when they see this?

whicker · Post by **whicker** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:14 am

blah.
again the "wonderful" over-exaggerated news pieces. I'm sure it's one of those minimum security prisons for non-violent offenders. However, I still doubt they have conjugal visits.

Joe Camacho · Post by **Joe Camacho** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:05 am

Francis64 wrote:
DancemasterGlenn wrote:Either way, Franky is completely out of line. He didn't even hurt the guy, all he did was steal the kid's jewelry and make a retarded threat. Why the hell would you give someone the death penalty for that?
This is an interwebs forum, you don't have to take everything literally.
Personally, if I was in power to change things, I'd go for this.

In the god damn contrary, because this IS an internet forum, things like sarcasm, jokes and innuendo can't be detected unless you state them as sarcasm, jokes and innuendo, if not, you can't blame other people for "taking everything literally".

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:09 am

*Insert headbanging here*

Francis64 · Post by **Francis64** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:03 am

Joe Camacho wrote: In the god damn contrary, because this IS an internet forum, things like sarcasm, jokes and innuendo can't be detected unless you state them as sarcasm, jokes and innuendo, if not, you can't blame other people for "taking everything literally".

It wasn't sarcasm, it was an overreaction.

Seriously, people who misinterpret sarcasm and overreactions should be killed.

declan · Post by **declan** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:04 am

I think people, who think others should be killed for making empty threats and misinterpreting sarcasm or overeaction, should be killed!

I'm looking at Franky and Francis64.

that's my law

Ofcourse i'm being sarcastic and i'm not gonna have you killed either, if you didn't realise it was sarcasm

Gil_Hamilton · Post by **Gil_Hamilton** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 11:21 am

I think anyone I deem in need of killin' should be killed.

This probably includes most of the board. So it's a good thing I'm not the law.

Post by **grinvader** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 12:05 pm

I kill this thread nao.