:lol: I don't think I want my laws based on your "common sense".[/quoteRed Robin said:CattleRMe said:Plus just common sense gave me the definiton that it was a hate crime.
I don't think I asked for your reply or even respect it.
:lol: I don't think I want my laws based on your "common sense".[/quoteRed Robin said:CattleRMe said:Plus just common sense gave me the definiton that it was a hate crime.
Our discussion isn't about you asking for my opinion or respecting my opinion. You said that gay bashing is or should be a hate crime. I say our laws need to be just. No unfair treatment for anyone for any reason. We have laws on the books that make assult , murder, rape , etc illegal. To raise a crime to another level because it was committed against a set of people who happen to have gay sex is stupid.CattleRMe said:Red Robin said::lol: I don't think I want my laws based on your "common sense".[/quoteCattleRMe said:Plus just common sense gave me the definiton that it was a hate crime.
I don't think I asked for your reply or even respect it.
Red Robin said:CattleRMe said:Our discussion isn't about you asking for my opinion or respecting my opinion. You said that gay bashing is or should be a hate crime. I say our laws need to be just. No unfair treatment for anyone for any reason. We have laws on the books that make assult , murder, rape , etc illegal. To raise a crime to another level because it was committed against a set of people who happen to have gay sex is stupid.Red Robin said::lol: I don't think I want my laws based on your "common sense".[/quote
I don't think I asked for your reply or even respect it.
CattleRMe said:When it's anger motivated isn't that like premeditated?
Soapweed said:CattleRMe said:When it's anger motivated isn't that like premeditated?
What difference does it make? A crime is a crime. Pre-meditated or spontaneous, when the deed is done, there is no going back. The punishment should fit the crime.
An offender being let off because of "temporary insanity" is total nonsense. Even if a moment of quick temper results in a bad crime committed, the punishment should be the same as if it were pre-meditated. If a quick temper gets a person into trouble, that person should learn to count to ten before re-acting.
Common sense should prevail.
If you plan and plan to make a killing, or you just kill someone because of instant spontaneous anger, what difference does it make? The other person is dead, no matter what. Is one way of murdering any less of a crime than the other? I personally think both crimes should have equal punishment. If the killer's temper is so bad that they can have a temper tantrum and kill someone, maybe they should realize their problem long before any act is committed, and practice anger management. Temporary insanity should not be any kind of an excuse.CattleRMe said:Soapweed said:CattleRMe said:When it's anger motivated isn't that like premeditated?
What difference does it make? A crime is a crime. Pre-meditated or spontaneous, when the deed is done, there is no going back. The punishment should fit the crime.
An offender being let off because of "temporary insanity" is total nonsense. Even if a moment of quick temper results in a bad crime committed, the punishment should be the same as if it were pre-meditated. If a quick temper gets a person into trouble, that person should learn to count to ten before re-acting.
Common sense should prevail.
So you don't think a person that plots and plans for months to commit a crime is no more guilty then someone who just reacts?
Soapweed said:If you plan and plan to make a killing, or you just kill someone because of instant spontaneous anger, what difference does it make? The other person is dead, no matter what. Is one way of murdering any less of a crime than the other? I personally think both crimes should have equal punishment. If the killer's temper is so bad that they can have a temper tantrum and kill someone, maybe they should realize their problem long before any act is committed, and practice anger management. Temporary insanity should not be any kind of an excuse.CattleRMe said:Soapweed said:What difference does it make? A crime is a crime. Pre-meditated or spontaneous, when the deed is done, there is no going back. The punishment should fit the crime.
An offender being let off because of "temporary insanity" is total nonsense. Even if a moment of quick temper results in a bad crime committed, the punishment should be the same as if it were pre-meditated. If a quick temper gets a person into trouble, that person should learn to count to ten before re-acting.
Common sense should prevail.
So you don't think a person that plots and plans for months to commit a crime is no more guilty then someone who just reacts?
Bob I can assure you the God that I worship makes a distinction between someone killing as an act of war and someone brutally murdering innocent people. Where did you get that from soapweeds post anyway?Bob_Frapples said:Soapweed said:If you plan and plan to make a killing, or you just kill someone because of instant spontaneous anger, what difference does it make? The other person is dead, no matter what. Is one way of murdering any less of a crime than the other? I personally think both crimes should have equal punishment. If the killer's temper is so bad that they can have a temper tantrum and kill someone, maybe they should realize their problem long before any act is committed, and practice anger management. Temporary insanity should not be any kind of an excuse.CattleRMe said:So you don't think a person that plots and plans for months to commit a crime is no more guilty then someone who just reacts?
First of all,killing is not murder or the USA and Canada are guilty as charged.If you lump all killings as murders and then many soldiers may not go to heaven.
The crime of murder must have levels to it or circumstance,just as stealing or lying do.Was Exxon's lies any worse then someone telling a creditor they are not home when answering their phone.Both are lies told to hide from others?If billy bob punches a bothersome patron in a bar after being challenge to a fight,not hit just challenged.You are telling me that incident deserves the same scrutiny under the law,then the man who repeatedly stabs Billy bob afterwards for spilling his beer?Its insane to lump killing no matter how it is done as equal.What if a neighbor threatens your family for years even after you had court orders for him to stay away but never anything the police could do.Would you take him out to save your child when he got to close?If so,do you deserve to die in prison for that? You may not see soldiers killing others as murder,I just wonder how God see's it.It seems that religion is your motivation in this thread.I could be wrong.
Red Robin said:Bob I can assure you the God that I worship makes a distinction between someone killing as an act of war and someone brutally murdering innocent people. Where did you get that from soapweeds post anyway?Bob_Frapples said:Soapweed said:If you plan and plan to make a killing, or you just kill someone because of instant spontaneous anger, what difference does it make? The other person is dead, no matter what. Is one way of murdering any less of a crime than the other? I personally think both crimes should have equal punishment. If the killer's temper is so bad that they can have a temper tantrum and kill someone, maybe they should realize their problem long before any act is committed, and practice anger management. Temporary insanity should not be any kind of an excuse.
First of all,killing is not murder or the USA and Canada are guilty as charged.If you lump all killings as murders and then many soldiers may not go to heaven.
The crime of murder must have levels to it or circumstance,just as stealing or lying do.Was Exxon's lies any worse then someone telling a creditor they are not home when answering their phone.Both are lies told to hide from others?If billy bob punches a bothersome patron in a bar after being challenge to a fight,not hit just challenged.You are telling me that incident deserves the same scrutiny under the law,then the man who repeatedly stabs Billy bob afterwards for spilling his beer?Its insane to lump killing no matter how it is done as equal.What if a neighbor threatens your family for years even after you had court orders for him to stay away but never anything the police could do.Would you take him out to save your child when he got to close?If so,do you deserve to die in prison for that? You may not see soldiers killing others as murder,I just wonder how God see's it.It seems that religion is your motivation in this thread.I could be wrong.
RoperAB said:There is a big difference in murder and killing somebody.
Example killing a goblin to prevent them from hurting somebody else. Police and soldiers do it all the time.
RoperAB said:There is a big difference in murder and killing somebody.
Example killing a goblin to prevent them from hurting somebody else. Police and soldiers do it all the time.