You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
To bad there wasn't a cure for STUPID...............
- Thread starter CattleRMe
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
Red Robin
Well-known member
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.
When it's anger motivated isn't that like premeditated?
Soapweed
Well-known member
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.
IL Rancher
Well-known member
A crime committed by anger usually wouldn't premeditated.. Well it could be as in I was really ticked off ast someone went home and planned to do bodiliy harm to them... But it could also be the person who rear ends someone and than gets out of the car and pummels them because the accident made them angry.. Anger can have very, very little to do with premiditiaton.
Unfortunetly Soap, comon sense and the law went different directions years ago.
Unfortunetly Soap, comon sense and the law went different directions years ago.
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
Well-known member
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?
Faster horses
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 30,239
- Reaction score
- 1,423
Soapweed, I ABSOLUTELY agree with you.
But that's not how it works and I think I know why.
In going through our defuct contractor experience, I found
out that the laws are interperted in different ways so LAWYERS
have jobs.
If the laws were simple and protected the innocent, what would the
lawyers do? Sure, there'd be work for some, but not what we have now.
Here's a little story that happened last week and the week before at
the newspaper. We get a phone call from a guy in Texas. Asked us to look up something that happened in January 2004. "It was a death caused by an agricultural accident." Well, I looked and looked and couldn't find anything. I ask him what it is for. He is doing investigative work for attorneys so they can contact the families to see if there is any grounds for a lawsuit. He called again last week and asked for something else. I knew what this was and gave it to him. Then he wanted the relatives phone number and that is where I balked. If he calls again, I'm not giving out any information. He told me they would pay me for my research.
Well, I'm not for sale. Not in that kind of deal.
But that's not how it works and I think I know why.
In going through our defuct contractor experience, I found
out that the laws are interperted in different ways so LAWYERS
have jobs.
If the laws were simple and protected the innocent, what would the
lawyers do? Sure, there'd be work for some, but not what we have now.
Here's a little story that happened last week and the week before at
the newspaper. We get a phone call from a guy in Texas. Asked us to look up something that happened in January 2004. "It was a death caused by an agricultural accident." Well, I looked and looked and couldn't find anything. I ask him what it is for. He is doing investigative work for attorneys so they can contact the families to see if there is any grounds for a lawsuit. He called again last week and asked for something else. I knew what this was and gave it to him. Then he wanted the relatives phone number and that is where I balked. If he calls again, I'm not giving out any information. He told me they would pay me for my research.
Well, I'm not for sale. Not in that kind of deal.
Bob_Frapples
Well-known member
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?
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
Well-known member
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.
Bob_Frapples
Well-known member
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.
First off,I read that persons post as killing is killing,dead is dead there is no different.I did also say i could be wrong in my presumptions.
You can have your beliefs and your God as you put it to.So that being said,you too like myself,believe that killing is not always so cut and dry.I also beg to differ that innocents do not die Brutally during war times.I suspect many innocent people die tragically and brutally during war time.If I am to understand God and his beliefs,that taking another's life is considered a sin,how can you say with out hypocrisy that god will make a distinction?Had you said that it was an act of self defense,I would of at least,in most cases of war,agreed.You cant,just decide what God will do or not.If the bible is his mandate,then those that take another's life will have to answer for that.As long as they truly are sincere in their admittance of sin,it will be then that they will find their home with god.Yes even those brutal murders are given the chance for redemption,as i understand it.
If you only pick out small samples to complain about,please stop.Anyone can take a small section of others words and twist them how they feel.Either attack the whole peice or nothing.Had you read it all,you would of had your questions answered,without the need for this thread.
Red Robin
Well-known member
Bobforapples , I really have no idea what you said. Have a good one. BTW God doesn't have beliefs. He has commands.
Your sentence structure is sure familiar.
Your sentence structure is sure familiar.
Northern Rancher
Well-known member
Dead is dead the rest is just semantics.
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.
Murder is murder? If there is a difference in killing and murder why isn't there a difference in premeditated murder and a murder done on a whim? :???:
Bob_Frapples
Well-known member
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.
Did Billbo Baggins get killed by the cops?. :lol:
