All-Dumbest, thanks for stating that you don't believe in good and evil, and that your moral compass is purely a construct of subjective psychology. I'll let my wife, who'd survived the Killing Fields of Cambodia, know that you think Pol Pot wasn't an evil person, but was simply suffering from a mental illness, and that if he'd been caught, he should've just been studied. The poor guy.
You can type as slow as you like, your comparison, your entire diatribe, is idiotic. Vaccine against evil, only the most arrogant of people like you would even think that such a thing were possible. Good and evil is only a trait of human beings, not of viruses. I think that it's far more important for scientists to study liberals like yourself you go to silly and extreme intellectual lengths to argue against what is simply right. Liberalism is probably the greatest mental illness afflicting our society over the last thirty or forty years, and can certainly be proven by the damage it's caused our society. So hand yourself over please to the proper scientific authorities.
Why the hell would you want to study a mass murderer, it'd be a total waste of time and money, completely illogical. What led to it is that this guy was evil and committed an evil act, and so you deal with him like you would any vermon that comes into your house, you kill it. You sound like the jerk on the Alien movies who wanted to keep them alive to study them.
So it's simple minded people who want to execute a mass murderer? Again, F$%k deterrence, it's about simple punishment, and about getting vermon out of our existence. You'll never get rid of violent crazy people who do things like this, no laws or good vibes will ever do that, so you just get rid of them like you would snakes and scorpions from your own house. The money argument is spurious, what were the lives of 12 people worth?
All-WiseAss: I say only fools would allow an emotional juror who's against the death penalty to over-rule common sense. A judge will be more objective, and should stick to the letter and intent of the law.
First of all, Chickenlooper is a coward, and would rather engage in meaningless intellectual and irrelevant discussion about the death penalty, than just come out and say he's against it. If there are any two killers who ever deserved the death penalty in Colorado, they are Holmes and the Chucky Cheese killer Nathan Dunlap. The death penalty isn't about anything other than righteous punishment, period. It's not murder, and it's asinine for TC to suggest that making the decision to put down a dirty dog like Holmes is equivalent to his decision to murder 12 people. What an idiotic comparison. Also, the decision to apply or not apply the death penalty should be taken out of the hands of juries and left solely to a level-headed judge.
Sorry but I think that a first degree murder charge is excessive. I doubt very much that even a few seconds prior to his killing the trooper, that he had the clearly formed intention to kill the tropper. I may be wrong, but I doubt it.
Yes, Obama is in fact a certified narcissist. He uses the words "me" or "I" in his speeches far more than any other President ever has. Also it's clear to anyone with a brain that he looks down on the average person as a lower life form that doesn't have intelligence enough to know what's good for them, but he does.
Dear "My Own So-called Truth is Pure Bullshit to Others":
The article also stated that the documented bias against Republicans is three times that of bias against Democrats. We all know the reason for that is because most journalists in America are liberals and no longer believe that neutrality is an important part of their job. May I remind everyone here too: When Hillary ran for President four years ago, she publicly stated that the interview she had with Bill O'Reilly was the fairest interview she had ever participated in. What the hell does THAT tell you?
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Brainchild