Autistic teenager punched & kicked to death

Post Reply New Topic

f*****g hell!
Who made you God?

You republicans piss me off so much, seriously, can none of you see what is wrong????
Urgh, I'm going to log out before I do something I seriously regret!! !

Where's the ignorance? I don't see any here.

Well, by your logic, I can see you as ignorant... Throwing a hissy fit doesn't go down very well.

As for Jesus? He'd probably rip their hearts out and cast them into a fiery pit.

You don't need to be God to judge another person. You only need a brain. Who the f**k are you to judge murdererous chavs as decent people?

Also, I'm not a republican, I'm a Liberal Democrat and a centrist.

As for Jesus? He'd probably rip their hearts out and cast them into a fiery pit.

Jesus is a murderer too? ah f*ck it then.. you're entitled to hate people needlessly if you want, let me know how that works out eh? :/

The argument that the world is "overpopulated" and therefore the death penalty is righteous is f*****g hilarious. How about expanding your mind a bit?
Anyway, you all should read this: Click here.

Who was saying that? That is a lame argument as only a few people would die due to it.

It's not important who said it but for your information: Second page, first post.

Ok... for those who are pro-death penalty, I'd like you to imagine this scenario.

You believe that people who are "bad" or have done acts you think are wrong should be violently and brutally killed, am I right?

Ok - what if the person who did that wrong act in the first place believed the same thing about the person they hurt? They might also believe the person they hurt deserved it.

What makes you different from the people you want violently killed?

People are not inherently "evil" (unless you believe in the devil and all that). People always do things for a *reason* - they might believe that the person they have raped or killed isn't worth anything, or "deserves" the treatment (in the same way death penalty supporters believe murderers deserve to die or be tortured etc). It's called "brainwashing" or being brought up the wrong way, or falling under a bad influence. People need to be reeducated, not murdered.

...and who is going to "re-educate" them? You? If this plan were to be implemented instead of the death penalty, how long do think it would take before you'd see more criminals on the streets? People would know they could kill all day long and get a "re-education"...another term for a slap on the wrist, and set back loose into society. While I don't believe in the death penalty, I do believe they deserve much more than a "re-education". Perhaps make them useful...like sending them to foreign countries to be stationed at military bases and be put into combat zones...to fight for their country. Maybe then and only then, they can learn the meaning of really taking a life and the consequences that follow. This way, they're not hogging our tax dollars rotting on death row 15 years while they find God.

I do not believe that people are inherently bad i do not believe they should be brutally or violently killed these are all assumptions that should not be made

I believe that when there is no question to a persons guilt in regards to a violent crime(that they are likely to repeat.) and they cannot be reeducated they should be killed(by the most painless way available) instead of wasting money keeping them alive. i also think that a pearson who has been hurt enough by another person should be able to take there revenge but that they should also spend the rest of there life in confinement and that they should be prepared to make the trade.

i do not appreciate the stereotype you've attempted to push on me.

EDIT: you cannot allow people to use there reasons as an excuse for innocence because every action has a reason and that would make every murderer innocent.(unless you think your fit to decide what is and isn't a good reason for murder, and i don't think you see yourself like that?)

People are not inherently "good", either.

Don't try using that argument. If it was a case of revenge, then that changes the game entirely. The fact is that this person was targeted because of their disability, not that the killer had any remotely just reason to kill them. You have to be a worthless scumbag in the first place to want to kill people like that. Their feelings, were most likely that it's fine to kill autistics.
The motivation does matter, and in this case it was an unprovoked attack.
They must pay for their wrongdoing, even if they regret it now. They are mean people who have shown their willingness to kill others and participate in such actions. They chose to do it, whether they did or didn't think clearly about it. It's their damn fault, they killed that autistic boy, and that is ultimately what they should be judged upon.

Are you seriously suggesting that they have some sort of self-justifying reason to kill? If you go by that logic, everyone has. There is a cause and effect for everything, after all. And the "rationale" of these teenagers was probably something like "hey, let's beat this autistic person to death because they're stupid f**ktards who are different from us!" hardly shining examples of humanity.
They are murderers, they crossed the line when they killed someone. Oh, they could have a "good" side to them as well. Yet that good persona which shows itself is overshadowed by the side of them which killed an autistic kid. People who say that capital punishment supporters appeal to emotion are hypocrites, especially those who use the argument that "murderers and rapists are humans too!" Yeah, I know that they are of the same species, dumb f**k. It doesn't mean we can't judge them to be inherently mean, cruel individuals. It doesn't mean we can't judge our kind as "evil" in the face of evidence. What are you going to do, let all criminals free eventually because you see a redeemable side to them?

Let's say I don't even care about their redeemable side because of what they've done. I believe some people are unforgivable.

They can't reverse their actions, nothing can. The only thing we can do is inflict the punishment upon them which they so deserve. The people in question aren't very good people with many redeeming characteristics, but lowlives who make trouble for others. They are killers who kill others for fun. If there is no chance of redemption and these people are of negative value to the human race, we should execute them.

Re-education? Don't make me laugh. They don't respond at all to education, or carry out their acts willingly despite their education. How is re-education going to do anything but reward them for what they've done, give them a chance to start out fresh despite having killed another person.
Even if they somehow had the ability to succeed, they don't deserve it. People who kill wrongly and commit rape willingly and do not feel remorse deserve nothing but death. We should give people what they deserve for their very real actions which had an impact in the real world.

Also, there's another thing you have wrong. Murder is killing illegally, with malevolent intent. Not killing legally, with justified reason. Are you called a murderer if you kill in self-defence?

Last edited by Anubis on 06 Jun 2009, 7:17 am, edited 2 times in total.

There are plenty of people out there who have not broken a single law who have caused suffering, grief, loss of life and done so with their own free-will. Your problem is you are deciding wether people are good or bad via the legal system and the rule of law. You're basically saying the "successful" deserve life, and those who are less successful don't. Where is the magic line that describes someone as "successful"?


You've already judged all the assailents as murderous chavs? I'm assuming you were there and you saw exactly what happened? Sure, someone hit this kid and killed him, but who? what were the others doing? The dead-guys brother says.... Haha omg, such a reliable witness, perhaps he is filled with rage that two people just stood by and watched his brother get killed? and he wants them to pay? And tell me, what happens if the "murderer" and one of the others decide to gang up on the remaining guy and blame him for the death? So you're basically just arguing for vengence and you don't care who gets it.


LOL, did someone really try to use this arguement? I'm not even going to try and contend it, i'd probably die from laughter. (And if that were to happen, he'd have to die for his horrible crime!)


And what if the victim decides that they don't want the assailent punished? Stockholm Syndrome can be inconvenient at times. Anyway, your idea would never be implemented, it makes the victim a target, the idea of laws is to protect people, not make them into targets.

Good point. And I believe that no matter what their background, people should pay for their crimes. Whether they are poor teenagers or high-flying executives, whilst an executive is much more valuable to society economically, they are just as guilty.



Yeah, I'm judging them as working class, illiterate, and delinquent because only murderous chavs and immigrant gangs kill in such a way and attack autistic people they don't even know, randomly.
Well, it is natural that someone who has actually suffered a personal loss and been attacked along with the direct victim of the crime should die. It is all good and well that he wants them to die, and that is what they should get.

Naturally, all of the murderers should pay. The people who committed the crime directly should die, and those who didn't should be given lighter sentences...
That's a fuzzy way of putting it, you're losing the plot.
It isn't about vengeance, it's about punishing people for a very real crime. The witness would have little reason to lie despite his justified rage, anger, and sorrow at his loss and the trauma of the incident.

Of course I care about who gets it The guilty person should get it, of course...

I don't see myself like that, and that's entirely that point I'm trying to make. I do believe that every action has a reason, and that at least 50% of the population could be a murderer - given the right environment and influences. Obviously murder and rape etc are bad for the human race (terrible things) so they need to be reeducated out of our system.

I don't believe in good and evil. I don't believe the murderers and rapists are inherently different from other people - they are more likely normal people with anger issues/violent tendencies, who have been exposed to the wrong influences and environment somehow, that has warped their ideas of right and wrong.

No person is innocent of their actions, but the actions do occur for a reason. And I don't think revenge is a good justification for killing someone.