Batman Killer, EG That massive cunt, appears in Court. - Polidicks

Oh god seriously another death penalty debate. Stab me

[QUOTE=Paramud;36906263]Hopefully this won't count as leaking content, but he essentially admitted to working with the person spamming, and taunted Craptastic by posting Goatse in the RC. At any rate, he did it 15 times, which should be evidence enough that it was fully intended.[/QUOTE] Well there wasn't any Goatse when I quoted it, it appeared shortly after. I even noticed the url in [img] tags when I was quoting, but I pasted the URL in my browser and was met with a blank page. I quickly edited out the image, but in the process of me editing it, got banned, and in the process of me posting an RC camp thread, got unbanned.

[QUOTE=G3rman;36906972]I'll leave it up to you with those sources because we are arguing the American system. I still have doubts though. Why take chances of letting bad people live to do more bad things? You aren't saving them for anything, rarely are they rehabilitated. They are just wasting away, using resources and space.[/QUOTE] And as my sources show it would cost even more resources to kill bad people. And so you really believe the sacrifice of innocent life is worth the incredibly low chance of such high profile criminals escaping maximum security prisons in America of all places. [editline]24th July 2012[/editline] In fact G3rman let me turn your logic against you. Why take chances of killing bad people if you have a chance of killing the wrong person. If you kill the wrong person that means there's no chance of exoneration. If there's no chance of exoneration that means the real criminal is still free to do whatever horrible acts got the innocent sent to death row.

[QUOTE=Boxbot219;36905767]It's not that think an innocent going to prison is ok. It's that I think it's an acceptable risk given what our system is capable of. Killing people when it serves absolutely no purpose is not ok, especially when there is a risk of an innocent being killed. Whether some people deserve to die or not is no reason to have a death penalty. The death penalty serves no purpose for deterrence of crime. Just look at homicide rates in states that have the death penalty compared to those that don't and you can easily tell that there is no connection. First of all justice should be blind. This is why a judge and a jury sentence a criminal and not the victim. It wouldn't matter how much I hate a criminal in a proper justice system. And the reason I called your post stupid was you said that the concept of the risk of innocent life applied to being wrongfully imprisoned as well. The death penalty is far more severe than wrongful imprisonment and the two really can't be compared in such a way.[/QUOTE] -So killing innocent people is not ok, but locking innocent people up for life is an acceptable risk? Clearly we have a different opinion of how bad beind locked up for life really is. -"Whether some people deserve to die or not is no reason to have a death penalty." Why not? Some criminals deserve to die, and justice should give punishments criminals deserve. -I was making the clear signal argument in response to the torture thing. Death penalty does not lower crime because it is not a tangible punishment. Nobody knows what death really is, however everybody knows what pain is, so it is a much stronger stimulus. -So if there would be a vote regarding the use of the bliss machines to punish criminals you would vote yes? Because if not, someone supporting the use of the bliss machines could use the exact same arguments you are using against you (prison sentences are inhumane! what if an innocent man has to suffer all his life in prison? Prisons are expensive!) [QUOTE=Camundongo;36906538]And as I mentioned in another thread, how can you condemn someone for making the decision to end another person's life by doing the same yourself, without being a massive hypocrite.[/QUOTE] I did not say that all murder should be punishable by death, only murder without serious motive.

[QUOTE=Bobie;36901757]the idea is that people do not choose to make actions like this. he didn't have a wonderful, happy lifestyle like you did, and his mind is not in the condition to make decisions like you do[/QUOTE] Actually he did. He grew up in a well-off middle-class family, was extremely intelligent, got mad grants in uni above and beyond what he needed for tuition and living expenses... Obviously there could be some hidden aspect of his childhood and teenage years that caused him to become mentally unstable, but I'm not seeing that play out. I think it's just a case of modern society putting too much stress on individuals, and that in turn causing temporary psychosis.

To the people who say that he doesn't deserve the death penalty, imagine the families of the victims that lost their lives, what do you think they want? I don't care what you nubcakes say, but he does "DESERVE" death.

[QUOTE=Sr.;36907436]To the people who say that he doesn't deserve the death penalty, imagine the families of the victims that lost their lives, what do you think they want? I don't care what you nubcakes say, but he does "DESERVE" death.[/QUOTE] Disagree? NUBCAKES Your argumentative skills are a wonder to behold. No, no one innately deserves death. You aren't even aware of the circumstances that lead up to this. Granted, the circumstances don't change the outcome of the massacre, nor does it excuse his actions in any way, but there's a huge difference in how a cold-blooded murderer is treated, and that of a person experiencing mental instability.

[QUOTE=Sr.;36907436]To the people who say that he doesn't deserve the death penalty, imagine the families of the victims that lost their lives, what do you think they want? I don't care what you nubcakes say, but he does "DESERVE" death.[/QUOTE] "nubcakes"? are you 11?

[QUOTE=D33f;36907308]-So killing innocent people is not ok, but locking innocent people up for life is an acceptable risk? Clearly we have a different opinion of how bad beind locked up for life really is. -"Whether some people deserve to die or not is no reason to have a death penalty." Why not? Some criminals deserve to die, and justice should give punishments criminals deserve. -I was making the clear signal argument in response to the torture thing. Death penalty does not lower crime because it is not a tangible punishment. Nobody knows what death really is, however everybody knows what pain is, so it is a much stronger stimulus. -So if there would be a vote regarding the use of the bliss machines to punish criminals you would vote yes? Because if not, someone supporting the use of the bliss machines could use the exact same arguments you are using against you (prison sentences are inhumane! what if an innocent man has to suffer all his life in prison? Prisons are expensive!) [/QUOTE] First of all you explained pretty well why serious effort should be taken so that prison isn't something that someone like you would consider bad enough that it could be compared to the death penalty. Making the death penalty because prisons are considered shitty is just such an incredibly backwards thing to do. Secondly justice should not be about punishment in a country that calls itself part of the civilized world. It should be about rehabilitation, prevention, and containment of those who can't be rehabilitated. Honestly though I don't know why I'm bothering arguing with someone who seriously condones using torture to punish criminals, especially when even in this day and age with the amount of money we throw at the appeals process for the death penalty we still manage to screw up and kill innocent people, and that's just considering the documented cases of innocent executions. [editline]24th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sr.;36907436]To the people who say that he doesn't deserve the death penalty, imagine the families of the victims that lost their lives, what do you think they want? I don't care what you nubcakes say, but he does "DESERVE" death.[/QUOTE] Whether he deserves death or not doesn't matter. What matters is that you trust a system that has proven to make mistakes to be allowed to carry out death. Imagine the families of the innocents that lost their lives to the death penalty.

What would Batman do?

so did they find out why he did it? I heard he was rejected by 3 women or something.

[QUOTE=Boxbot219;36907064]And as my sources show it would cost even more resources to kill bad people. And so you really believe the sacrifice of innocent life is worth the incredibly low chance of such high profile criminals escaping maximum security prisons in America of all places. [editline]24th July 2012[/editline] In fact G3rman let me turn your logic against you. Why take chances of killing bad people if you have a chance of killing the wrong person. If you kill the wrong person that means there's no chance of exoneration. If there's no chance of exoneration that means the real criminal is still free to do whatever horrible acts got the innocent sent to death row.[/QUOTE] You further technology to both make court systems more streamlined, less chance of wrongful conviction via proper evidence gathering, and to fixing other associated drawbacks. Same apply to the death penalty, the real cost comes from holding such lengthy trials and not the real action of killing them. My opinion is, you make sure you have the right man or woman and then you send them straight to death after jury says yay to capital punishment. And yes, I know its 'not that easy' to rationalize such a complex argument, however, it is better we strive for maximizing our use of a legitimate tool like capital punishment rather than throwing it away because its considered 'uncivilized'.

[QUOTE=G3rman;36907567]You further technology to both make court systems more streamlined, less chance of wrongful conviction via proper evidence gathering, and to fixing other associated drawbacks. Same apply to the death penalty, the real cost comes from holding such lengthy trials and not the real action of killing them. My opinion is, you make sure you have the right man or woman and then you send them straight to death after jury says yay to capital punishment.[/QUOTE] And when someone makes a mistake ensuring they have the right person somebody innocent gets killed. No amount of technological advancement is going to fix human error until the day we replace people with machines. [editline]24th July 2012[/editline] And the reason the court system isn't streamlined is because they took human error into account. A streamlined death penalty would be the worst thing imaginable.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;36907432]Actually he did. He grew up in a well-off middle-class family, was extremely intelligent, got mad grants in uni above and beyond what he needed for tuition and living expenses... Obviously there could be some hidden aspect of his childhood and teenage years that caused him to become mentally unstable, but I'm not seeing that play out. I think it's just a case of modern society putting too much stress on individuals, and that in turn causing temporary psychosis.[/QUOTE] Hidden? When you take into account the fact that despite all his friends doing the "he was a nice, quiet guy" routine, his mother immediately said "you got the right guy", it's obvious this guy was troubled. There is no doubt.

[QUOTE=Xenomoose;36907789]Hidden? When you take into account the fact that despite all his friends doing the "he was a nice, quiet guy" routine, his mother immediately said "you got the right guy", it's obvious this guy was troubled. There is no doubt.[/QUOTE] LOL "he was a nice, quiet guy" I'm a nice, quiet girl (in person anyway, I think everyone is a little more free with their statements online), and I'm sure most nice, quiet people I know wouldn't do something like this. As for that quote from his mother? It's, "you've got the right person," not "guy," and she was referring to herself when a reporter was asking for her, not her son. That quote has been magnificently taken out of context and repeated everywhere. It's simply not true. She wasn't referring to her son. [quote]"This statement is to clarify a statement made by ABC media. I was awakened by a call from a reporter by ABC on July 20 about 5:45 in the morning. I did not know anything about a shooting in Aurora at that time," Holmes said in a statement this afternoon, read to the national press by attorney Lisa Damiani. "He asked if I was Arlene Holmes and if my son was James Holmes who lives in Aurora, Colorado. I answered yes, you have the right person. I was referring to myself."[/quote] Oh, and before anyone wants to accuse this woman of lying to protect her son (as if someone who would accuse their son initially would have that change of heart anyway), consider the other mistake ABC put in that same report that introduced the quote in question. You know, where they said he had ties to the Colorado Tea Party Patriots based off a profile online of someone with the same name. (Because James Holmes can't be that popular in fucking COLORADO could it?) [editline]23rd July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=HazeFyer23;36907542]What would Batman do?[/QUOTE] Vigilante justice gogogo

[QUOTE=HazeFyer23;36907542]What would Batman do?[/QUOTE] Teach him a lesson in tennis.

whoa excuse my conspiracy-theory level concept and sources, and if this has been brought up already and I skimmed past it, but when I watched the video posted on the first page I noticed he was studying some particular theories (years ago now): Temporal illusions, and subjective experience. Basically, reconfiguring your memory of the past, and altering your perception of the present retarded villain plot sounding mechanic aside, I thought "wow, what if he was trying to work on that kind of conditioning and accidentally triggered it in himself, or did it on purpose?" So, feeling like a dumb nut, I decided to do a little digging, and came across multiple sources talking about him and the concept of the "MK-ULTRA" project, [I]"which focused on controlling the minds of ordinary citizens so as to induce them into performing assassinations. An account of one such experiment, from all the way back in 1954, showed that it was possible to get individuals to fire a gun and then forget about it."[/I] found a lot of sites talking about the connection between this and the shooter already, I think [url=http://www.examiner.com/article/the-aurora-colorado-shooting-echoes-of-mk-ultra]the examiner[/url]'s article summed up a few things nicely (but still sounds like a try-hard conspiracy theory when you're reading it). Not sure about examiner's trustworthiness as a source but talk is talk right now.

Advocating torture or murder as an emotional response to pain is a show of pure immaturity and pure zealotry. Yes, anyone and everyone would be angry in that situation. Some would want violence. I seriously hope most would do their best to control the stupid, animalistic sides of themselves to say he shouldn't be violence against them. If they don't, then that's THE reason the system is designed in a method that cuts stupid emotion out of the issue. Shedding blood for blood [b]is a psychotic and stupid answer.[/b] I have a friend who was raped, I wanted to ruin that motherfucker that did it. But luckily for everyone, reason won out, she didn't even want him killed or raped for it. It should win out for others when people really figure it out that shedding blood for blood is proof of our simplistic stupidity and inability to grow. [editline]23rd July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=HazeFyer23;36907542]What would Batman do?[/QUOTE] Nothing. He's in jail and not going to escape. Batman's done with him now. [editline]23rd July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=G3rman;36907567]You further technology to both make court systems more streamlined, less chance of wrongful conviction via proper evidence gathering, and to fixing other associated drawbacks. Same apply to the death penalty, the real cost comes from holding such lengthy trials and not the real action of killing them. My opinion is, you make sure you have the right man or woman and then you send them straight to death after jury says yay to capital punishment. And yes, I know its 'not that easy' to rationalize such a complex argument, however, it is better we strive for maximizing our use of a legitimate tool like capital punishment rather than throwing it away because its considered 'uncivilized'.[/QUOTE] "Complex". Yes, that's a "complex" idea you've got there. Yes, let's simply streamline the court system so that we have nothing but guilty people through some magic and wonderful technology to just pick who's guilty. Either it'll backfire and innocents will die, or it'll backfire and innocents will die, they'll just be called guilty. It's complex in the way that it's kind of what everyone wants as it is, just the humane part of us that rationalizes cost as less of an issue than life. Well, in some of us anyways.

[QUOTE=D33f;36905048]No, once again I am not american and liberal seems to have an entirely different meaning there than it does in my country. I know the word has a negative tone for some people but I'm not trying to make it sound like an insult. I'm simply saying that if for example your mother (or perhaps in your case: the author of your favourite freaky hentai series :v: ) was killed and the killer showed, you PROBABLY wouldn't be advocating such a humane justice system.[/QUOTE] That's because I would then be emotionally devastated and vengeful. Have you had anyone near you gunned down? Irrational and vengeful is the opposite of what we want our justice system based on, isn't it? I suppose for lesser crimes like rape we should only rape them, right? I mean, if you'd been raped you would probably want them to be raped as punishment, so it's only right.

[QUOTE=Irespawnoften;36902126]If he's got a mental disorder, then no, he's not entirely in control of his actions. If He had some how managed to kill 12 people and wound another 58 on accident, then also no. But this guy went there willingly, with the intent to kill. If he has no remorse the his actions, no sorrow over the loss of life he caused, then throwing him in prison so he can live with the consequences of his actions isn't going to do anything. When he killed those people, and that was his intent from the start, he voided what ever 'right to life' he had. Hes got the blood of 12 people on his hands, possibly more, does it look like he cares? Run him through the justice system, at the end of the day, if hes not mental, I'll bet you he will get the death penalty.[/QUOTE] And of course you get too decide when he loses his right to live.

[QUOTE=G3rman;36907567]My opinion is, you make sure you have the right man or woman and then you send them straight to death after jury says yay to capital punishment.[/QUOTE] how much do you think it'd cost to examine all those people to the point where every event of their life is taken into account and their position in life is 100% understood? we're talking about getting people to look at the same evidence every day of the week for about a year and a half, and if they ever discover that there was an influence they weren't aware of before, they have to scrap everything and start again. now, keep in mind, they'd have to do this for a really long time to totally understand everything about the case - and I mean EVERYTHING - and they're going to want pay. oh, and if anyone fucks up in even the most miniscule of fashions, an innocent person could die. good luck with making that work, because I have absolutely no idea how to do so.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;36908005]"he was a nice, quiet guy" I'm a nice, quiet girl (in person anyway, I think everyone is a little more free with their statements online), and I'm sure most nice, quiet people I know wouldn't do something like this.[/QUOTE] Being nice and quiet doesn't mean anything. You can be nice and quiet, because you've been raised to act like that in public, but at the same time you might desire to slaughter everyone in your vicinity. How you're on the outside is completely irrelevant on how you're on the inside.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;36908546]Advocating torture or murder as an emotional response to pain is a show of pure immaturity and pure zealotry. [/QUOTE] I agree with your point, but looking at your avatar whilst reading this is hilarious.

[QUOTE=MajorMattem;36901885]They're considering the death penalty? I dont mean to sound too bloodthirsty, but unless this man has some kind of mental disorder that went unchecked, I think that's the right thing to do.[/QUOTE] Nah, spending his whole life in a 4x4 cage is a bigger punishment, imo.

Well, he can be happy that they haven't captured his brother, the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_rapist"]Batman rapist[/URL], yet. One day, they'll be together in prison.

You know the first page of this is weird to me. This dude deserves the death sentence. If a dude snaps and accidently kills a man in a fit of rage, I think he should get penalized and reformed or whatever, or if a tragic accident happens then something should be done, but this guy isn't going to contribute anything. He had a shit ton of guns and riot gear, grenades etc, marched into a theater and shot the shit out of 70 people killing a good handful of them. He booby trapped his entire apartment hoping to kill cops who went looking in there, and when he's being questioned he has absolutely no remorse for it and jokes about wanting to be the joker. This dudes fucking lost. He can't reform, he can't "contribute" to society after taking so much away, and I don't see a point of keeping him around after this event. A man should have some sort of chance at redemption, but crazies like this clearly have no intent to redeem. Edit: Sure can't wait to be called a psycho, my opinion stands though.

By saying this dude deserves the death sentence, you are also saying that this dude deserves the hours and hours of court-work and paper-work, costing any state or country hundreds of thousands if not more. Not sure about the pricing, but you get my point. This guy's motives and problems should be addressed, not publicly necessarily. But locked in a cell or a prison of sorts, trying to understand what the fuck is the guy's problem and thoughts and motives, and go from there about treating him and/or seeing whether he even welcomes any help from a third party.

There's a guy who is now preparing to sue WB and the cinema after he avoided injury but his friend died of a chest wound. That's a bit of an arsey thing to do.

[QUOTE=Memobot;36914715]There's a guy who is now preparing to sue WB and the cinema after he avoided injury but his friend died of a chest wound. That's a bit of an arsey thing to do.[/QUOTE] There's always dickweeds where there's money to be made.

This whole idea of capital punishment comes in place when this kinda stuff happeneds. Take a look at Norway after last years shooting and bombing in Oslo and Utoya. They do not support capital punishment and their maximum prison sentance is (i belive) 30 years. And if I am not wrong you can get a life sentance in US just for a triple murder (correct me if I am wrong), so this guy and others who do this kind of thing should first visit a psychotherapist and if they are evaluated as sane they shoul be shot or poisoned or whatever is appropriate. But these kind of stuff should be prevented. Why does these mass shootings happen and how on earth can 24 year olds buy shitload of guns without Police or FBI noticing that.