[quote](CNN) -- A gunman opened fire on a Jewish school in southern France Monday, killing four people -- the third shooting in the area in 10 days.
The shooting in the city of Toulouse left a teacher and three children dead, including a 3-year-old, said local prosecutor Michel Valet. A fourth child was injured.
The gunman arrived shortly after 8 a.m. and fled on a motor scooter after the shootings. He is believed to have used two different guns, interior ministry spokesman Pierre-Henry Brandet said.
"It's a horrible tragedy," Brandet said on CNN affiliate BFM.
It's the third shooting by a man on a motorcycle in southwest France since March 11, and authorities suspect the cases may be linked, Brandet said.
"Even if it's too early to say whether or not they are the same weapons, there are similarities," Brandet said, citing the use of a motorcycle and the location of the killings.
The interior ministry has ordered police across the country to contact Jewish organizations to arrange increased vigilance, Brandet said.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy was on his way to Toulouse, his office announced, accompanied by the head of the French Jewish organization CRIF.
The shooting took place at a private school, Ozar Hatorah.
France, which has one of the largest Jewish populations in Europe, had 389 reported acts of anti-Semitism in 2011, according to CRIF.
The news of Monday's shooting brought immediate reaction from Israel and France's grand rabbi.
"We follow with shock the news coming from France, and we trust the French authorities to shed full light on this crime and to bring those responsible to justice," said Yigal Palmor, the spokesman for the Israeli foreign ministry.
Gilles Bernheim, the grand rabbi of France, said he was "horrified" and "upset" and that he was on his way to the school.
On March 11, a soldier was on his motorbike when a helmeted man on another motorcycle pulled up and shot and killed him, Toulouse police Capt. David Delattre said.
The soldier was not in uniform, and his motorbike did not have any military identification, Delattre said.
On Thursday, two other soldiers were shot dead and another injured by a black-clad man wearing a motorcycle helmet in the southwestern French city of Montauban, about 50 kilometers (31 miles) from Toulouse.[/quote]
[url]http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/19/world/europe/france-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1[/url]
Sick people. I wish people like these would get executed.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202316]Sick people. I wish people like these would get executed.[/QUOTE]
why the dumbs?
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;35202371]why the dumbs?[/QUOTE]
because he wished for more people to die
fall into that and you never stop killing the killer of the killer of the killer...etc
Third shooting in 10 days. What the fuck.
Well for some to live others must die
*In response to Onirik
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;35202371]why the dumbs?[/QUOTE]
First off, he wants someone executed, which adds only more bloodshed to the situation.
Secondly, he's encouraging retribution as "justice" as opposed to the proper rehabilitation and protection system, which works for the wellfare of all parties.
Thirdly, the death penalty is flawed on so many levels, which I won't go further on as it tends to shit up a thread, turning it into a death penalty argument.
I mean wtf? If you take someone else's life you don't deserve your own, execute those mother fuckers
[QUOTE=Terminutter;35202422]First off, he wants someone executed, which adds only more bloodshed to the situation.
Secondly, he's encouraging retribution as "justice" as opposed to the proper rehabilitation and protection system, which works for the wellfare of all parties.
Thirdly, the death penalty is flawed on so many levels, which I won't go further on as it tends to shit up a thread, turning it into a death penalty argument.[/QUOTE]
To start with, people who willingly take other peoples' lives do not deserve to live in the first place. If you disagree, you're no better than the killer like in the OP
Then, how many times have you seen terrorists like this to get properly rehabilitated and integrated within the society?
Lastly, I never said that death penalty should be applied to all the murderers, because of the fact it can be proven wrong, but when you publicly shoot this amount of people with a fuckload of witnesses, execution is fully justified.
[editline]19th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Onirik;35202400]because he wished for more people to die
fall into that and you never stop killing the killer of the killer of the killer...etc[/QUOTE]
why do i have a feeling you're watching naruto.
[QUOTE=Jocke;35202441]I mean wtf? If you take someone else's life you don't deserve your own, execute those mother fuckers[/QUOTE]
Humans have a fundamental right to life. This right is irrevocable and inviolable as stated in the UDHR, which is not legally binding in it's own right, but most rights in the UDHR are secured by treaties between countries.
In addition to this, you can never have 100% certainity that someone is guilty, and as the death of a single innocent is murder, you have then participated in state sanctioned murder, and what proportion of guilty : innocent is deemed acceptable? It's impossible to have it at 0, as there will always be human error, biased evidence and false witnesses and if you put a number higher than 0 then you have sentenced innocents to death.
It's also uneconomical, as it's proven to be more expensive than a lifelong jail sentance without parole (which I am also against due to reform being impossible without parole) due to the costs of the tribunals and appeals, the lack of which leads to more accidental executions of innocents. In addition to this, what does executing him do? It makes him a martyr if he did it for a cause, and solves nothing but the bloodlust of the general public.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202465]To start with, people who willingly take other peoples' lives do not deserve to live in the first place. If you disagree, you're no better than the killer like in the OP
Then, how many times have you seen terrorists like this to get properly rehabilitated and integrated within the society?
Lastly, I never said that death penalty should be applied to all the murderers, because of the fact it can be proven wrong, but when you publicly shoot this amount of people with a fuckload of witnesses, execution is fully justified.
[/QUOTE]
It's not a case of deserving to live, you have a [b]right[/b] to life, and depriving anyone of an inviolable, irrevocable, fundamental human right it is a horrific crime, state sanctioned or not. Nice strawman assuming that I support the killer, I'll do the same and use the fact that you are supporting the death of a human being as the same as the gunman, good job.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202465]To start with, people who willingly take other peoples' lives do not deserve to live in the first place. If you disagree, you're no better than the killer like in the OP
Then, how many times have you seen terrorists like this to get properly rehabilitated and integrated within the society?
Lastly, I never said that death penalty should be applied to all the murderers, because of the fact it can be proven wrong, but when you publicly shoot this amount of people with a fuckload of witnesses, execution is fully justified.[/QUOTE]
No offense, but what gives you the right to decide that someone "does not deserve to live"?
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;35202371]why the dumbs?[/QUOTE]
You don't see the hypocrisy killing someone for killing someone?
Literally nobody deserves to die regardless of how heinous their actions.
disgonbgud.gif
[QUOTE=Terminutter;35202492]Humans have a fundamental right to life. This right is irrevocable and inviolable as stated in the UDHR, which is not legally binding in it's own right, but most rights in the UDHR are secured by treaties between countries.
In addition to this, you can never have 100% certainity that someone is guilty, and as the death of a single innocent is murder, you have then participated in state sanctioned murder, and what proportion of guilty : innocent is deemed acceptable? It's impossible to have it at 0, as there will always be human error, biased evidence and false witnesses and if you put a number higher than 0 then you have sentenced innocents to death.
It's also uneconomical, as it's proven to be more expensive than a lifelong jail sentance without parole (which I am also against due to reform being impossible without parole) due to the costs of the tribunals and appeals, the lack of which leads to more accidental executions of innocents. In addition to this, what does executing him do? It makes him a martyr if he did it for a cause, and solves nothing but the bloodlust of the general public.
It's not a case of deserving to live, you have a [b]right[/b] to life, and depriving anyone of an inviolable, irrevocable, fundamental human right it is a horrific crime, state sanctioned or not. Nice strawman assuming that I support the killer, I'll do the same and use the fact that you are supporting the death of a human being as the same as the gunman, good job.[/QUOTE]
A murderer is a murderer man, and always will be. If he shot a fucking 3 year old kid to death, what good is he doing to society as a whole? Should we just encourage this then? "Oh, you killed a kid? Cool, stay quiet in this jail for your whole life!!".
[QUOTE=Noble;35202514]No offense, but what gives you the right to decide that someone "does not deserve to live"?[/QUOTE]
What gives others the right to kill someone in the first place? Even if they do get "punished" by the law, they still do it.
[editline]19th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Terminutter;35202492]Nice strawman assuming that I support the killer, I'll do the same and use the fact that you are supporting the death of a human being as the same as the gunman, good job.[/QUOTE]
Great job pulling words out of the context.
Thread derailed by first post.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;35202549]Thread derailed by first post.[/QUOTE]
Hah, now that you mention it...
[QUOTE=Fingers!!!;35202538]A murderer is a murderer man, and always will be. If he shot a fucking 3 year old kid to death, what good is he doing to society as a whole? Should we just encourage this then? "Oh, you killed a kid? Cool, stay quiet in this jail for your whole life!!".[/QUOTE]
I just stated that I am against lifelong jail sentances, did you even read what I wrote?
The developed world has mostly abolished the death penalty, and I notice that the Scandinavian countries somehow manage to have consistantly lower and lower numbers of offenders, let alone reoffenders rates whilst most have capped jail sentances at 40 years or so, only extending it when there is a severe mental condition.
You're not encouraging them in any way by not executing them, contrary to what you said.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202543]
Great job pulling words out of the context.[/QUOTE]
It's what he did, and that was my point by making it.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202543]What gives others the right to kill someone in the first place? Even if they do get "punished" by the law, they still do it.[/QUOTE]
Nothing gives them that right. I am arguing that the criminal is entirely in the wrong for what they did. I'm asking why revenge killing is justified.
[QUOTE=Terminutter;35202568]I just stated that I am against lifelong jail sentances, did you even read what I wrote?
The developed world has mostly abolished the death penalty, and I notice that the Scandinavian countries somehow manage to have consistantly lower and lower numbers of offenders, let alone reoffenders rates whilst most have capped jail sentances at 40 years or so, only extending it when there is a severe mental condition.
You're not encouraging them in any way by not executing them, contrary to what you said.
It's what he did, and that was my point by making it.[/QUOTE]
But there are so many SO MANY variables in those cases that it's not even worth commenting, after all a scandinavian jail HELPS people out, while USA jails just encourage them to do even more crimes (with rare exceptions). You aren't supposed to be afraid of them, but to think that it helps you out instead. Man, this discussion won't go anywhere.
[QUOTE=Noble;35202571]Nothing gives them that right. I am arguing that the criminal is entirely in the wrong for what they did. I'm asking why revenge killing is justified.[/QUOTE]
It's justified because he took the lives of others. Simple as that.
It's funny how many people try to find high moral grounds for things such as death penalties and executions, but look at the big picture. If you can't understand, then I can see why you do not support killing others and rehabilitating them instead.
[QUOTE=Fingers!!!;35202595]But there are so many SO MANY variables in those cases that it's not even worth commenting, after all a scandinavian jail HELPS people out, while USA jails just encourage them to do even more crimes. Man, this discussion won't go anywhere.[/QUOTE]
Which is a good thing that the murderer will be going to a [b]French[/b] jail, then, and France actually takes on reformative theory, as opposed to the US's retribution ideals.
[QUOTE=ggbaddies1;35202536]disgonbgud.gif[/QUOTE]
How offensive, some very brave jewish people lost there lifes and YET you reply with the dumbest meme ever made.
Shame on you.
[QUOTE=SaintHitler;35202821]How offensive, some very brave jewish people lost there lifes and YET you reply with the dumbest meme ever made.
Shame on you.[/QUOTE]
he's talking about the death penalty smackdown going on in this thread.
Seriously, let's stay on topic shall we?
I don't think it's the same person but I believe that it could be part of some right-wing terrorist group. Targeting jews and the military would be logical, though I don't necessarily get the military part.
Also, the gunman (or men) appear to be somewhat targeted in their killings, supposedly they shoved regular people out of the way in order to get to the soldiers at the ATM.
[QUOTE=Fingers!!!;35202538]A murderer is a murderer man, and always will be. If he shot a fucking 3 year old kid to death, what good is he doing to society as a whole? Should we just encourage this then? "Oh, you killed a kid? Cool, stay quiet in this jail for your whole life!!".[/QUOTE]
how the fuck do you encourage someone by making him rot in a prison for the rest of his life?
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202598]It's justified because he took the lives of others. Simple as that.
It's funny how many people try to find high moral grounds for things such as death penalties and executions, but look at the big picture. If you can't understand, then I can see why you do not support killing others and rehabilitating them instead.[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's time to put that ancient tradition of "eye for an eye" behind us and grow up as a species?
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202598]It's funny how many people try to find high moral grounds for things such as death penalties and executions, but look at the big picture.[/QUOTE]
[I]What[/I] "big picture"? [URL="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates#stateswithvwithout"]Deterrence doesn't work[/URL], it costs a ridiculously uneconomical amount of money just for a lethal injection, it's against the UDHR, places that support rehabilitation over simply killing them have infinitely lower crime-rates and, even disregarding all that, it's still an incredibly morally detestable thing to do.
It doesn't matter whether someone deserves to live or not, because at the end of the day it's an uneconomical decision that requires money go towards it that could instead go towards both stopping the problem at the source and indirectly saving people's lives. I'm sure you know that governments live having more money, so even [I]if[/I] you still don't think it's an amoral act they'd still be wasting money on simple bloodlust and [I][B]literally nothing else[/B][/I].
Now, I'm sorry the thread's been derailed so ridiculously soon, but I just want to get it straight that there's objective facts supporting one side of this silly, silly argument.
[QUOTE=Cone;35202921][I]What[/I] "big picture"? [URL="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates#stateswithvwithout"]Deterrence doesn't work[/URL], it costs a ridiculously uneconomical amount of money just for a lethal injection, it's against the UDHR, places that support rehabilitation over simply killing them have infinitely lower crime-rates and, even disregarding all that, it's still an incredibly morally detestable thing to do.
It doesn't matter whether someone deserves to live or not, because at the end of the day it's an uneconomical decision that requires money go towards it that could instead go towards both stopping the problem at the source and indirectly saving people's lives. I'm sure you know that governments live having more money, so even [I]if[/I] you still don't think it's an amoral act they'd still be wasting money on simple bloodlust and [I][B]literally nothing else[/B][/I].
Now, I'm sorry the thread's been derailed so ridiculously soon, but I just want to get it straight that there's objective facts supporting one side of this silly, silly argument.[/QUOTE]
Hm.... I guess you are right. I still think it's wrong to keep serial killers alive, but if it really works (rehabilitation i mean), maybe it's not that bad after all.
You make a valid point and I agree with it.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;35202985]You make a valid point and I agree with it.[/QUOTE]
whoah wait wait what
that's like the first time someone actually listened, cool
WOW GUYS SOME KIDS WERE SHOT AND KILLED.
THAT IS HORRIBLE, I THINK MAYBE WE SHOULD DISCUSS IT.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.