Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
casablancas

What's your view? Justice or murder?

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Wymeswold fox said:

Don't really know, but have seen too many news reports about parents killing their own toddlers..

I can't for the life of me get my head around it. I work as a mental health nurse and have worked with some violent violent people. But this turns my stomach and I have heard and seen a hell of a lot. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, casablancas said:

Father who punched his baby daughter to death is found dead in prison ...

 

 

 

Goodo ...   Hope the cvnt suffered a bit.

Posted
4 minutes ago, casablancas said:

I can't for the life of me get my head around it. I work as a mental health nurse and have worked with some violent violent people. But this turns my stomach and I have heard and seen a hell of a lot. 

Fair play to you, must be both mentally and physically exhausting especially in not knowing what these people could do to who and when..

Can't vulnerable people like him be assessed beforehand, prior to deciding whether the local authorities have the custody of their children/newborns?

Posted

The inmates who killed him are most likely total scum themselves. I'm not sorry the man is dead but I won't praise his killers either.

Posted

"The court heard that Deane punched the baby in the face, shook her and squeezed her."

"She died in intensive care at Leeds infirmary after suffering “catastrophic brain injuries”.

 

imagining that little girl crying is really doing a number on my nerves! 

Posted
22 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

It's not justice. Justice is him living knowing what he's done, living with that guilt. That's far worse than death.

Not for everyone. Some people just don't give a shit. Some people are psychopaths.

 

A life for a life is fairer than any 'justice' a court can give out.

 

It's not about 2 wrongs making a right either, it's about balancing the world out. Some people need to go to stop the place being overrun with scumbags.

Posted
1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

His suffering is over now. Whether you think that is just or not is entirely subjective.

if you think that he didn't deserve to die after he punched a 2 DAYS OLD GIRL TO DEATH than something is wrong here.
 

Posted
Just now, the fox said:

if you think that he didn't deserve to die after he punched a 2 DAYS OLD GIRL TO DEATH than something is wrong here.
 

I think that he deserved to suffer - through pain and loneliness - for a lot longer than he did.

Posted
2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

His suffering is over now. Whether you think that is just or not is entirely subjective.

Everybody dies, his suffering will have meant nothing the moment he goes into the eternal abyss of death. As will any pleasure he may have had in life, I might add.

 

It's amazing how most people are so terrified to die yet view it as the end of suffering so often. People underestimate death.

 

For the living, the world they have left behind is more important than the fate of the dead anyway. Objectively, is the world better off without people who kill the defenceless? Most would say yes.

Posted
30 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

It's not justice. Justice is him living knowing what he's done, living with that guilt. That's far worse than death.

i'm kinda struggling to see how that sub-human could punch his own 2 day old daughter to death and manage feel guilty.

Posted
Just now, Kitchandro said:

Everybody dies, his suffering will have meant nothing the moment he goes into the eternal abyss of death. As will any pleasure he may have had in life, I might add.

 

It's amazing how most people are so terrified to die yet view it as the end of suffering so often. People underestimate death.

 

For the living, the world they have left behind is more important than the fate of the dead anyway. Objectively, is the world better off without people who kill the defenceless? Most would say yes.

Death is absolutely the end of suffering, unless you're of the religious persuasion and then it's a matter of faith rather than proof anyway. The feat comes from the oblivion part of it, I think.

 

I think folks are getting a little turned round here - my opinion is that the world is better off without him, but not before he has spent a good long time suffering for what he wrought. This, in my own view, wasn't enough.

Posted
Just now, leicsmac said:

I think that he deserved to suffer - through pain and loneliness - for a lot longer than he did.

How do you know he was suffering? Not every murderer suffers, not every killer feels guilt.

 

Besides, who is getting the benefit of them suffering? Is it worth taxpayer's money? Isn't it just better that certain people don't exist?

 

I'm not an advocate of the death penalty btw, but if a lowlife ends up getting shanked in the showers why complain?

Posted
12 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

Not for everyone. Some people just don't give a shit. Some people are psychopaths.

 

A life for a life is fairer than any 'justice' a court can give out.

 

It's not about 2 wrongs making a right either, it's about balancing the world out. Some people need to go to stop the place being overrun with scumbags.

A life for a life is not fair justice, it's the descent into barbarism. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

 

And that justifies vigilante justice? That justifies murder?

 

5 minutes ago, the fox said:

i'm kinda struggling to see how that sub-human could punch his own 2 day old daughter to death and manage feel guilty.

What he did was utterly repugnant, but it doesn't then mean he has to be a psychopath. 

Posted
1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

What he did was utterly repugnant, but it doesn't then mean he has to be a sociopath. 

a sane person won't punch a baby to death. 

Posted
Just now, leicsmac said:

Death is absolutely the end of suffering, unless you're of the religious persuasion and then it's a matter of faith rather than proof anyway. The feat comes from the oblivion part of it, I think.

 

I think folks are getting a little turned round here - my opinion is that the world is better off without him, but not before he has spent a good long time suffering for what he wrought. This, in my own view, wasn't enough.

There is no relief in eternal oblivion. It's not a great laugh being dead. You cease to exist. That's not relief. I mean there is no worldly comparison so it's difficult to explain but unless you believe in an afterlife there is no feeling of 'ahhhhh I'm not suffering anymore'. The man is dead. ONLY if you're religious do you think there is some sort of respite in death.

 

And again, you're assuming he was suffering anyway. That's not necessarily true.

Posted
Just now, Kitchandro said:

How do you know he was suffering? Not every murderer suffers, not every killer feels guilt.

 

Besides, who is getting the benefit of them suffering? Is it worth taxpayer's money? Isn't it just better that certain people don't exist?

 

I'm not an advocate of the death penalty btw, but if a lowlife ends up getting shanked in the showers why complain?

Well, a guy got to him in order to kill him, so it would follow that they would also get to him to hurt him too. I would prefer the latter - at least for a time. I agree that some people do not feel guilt and the like, but whether or not that is the case here someone was clearly able to introduce very physical suffering to his life.

 

I'll say again here - the only issue I have with this is the timing.

 

We are touching on a pretty interesting debate here - if you want payment for a heinous crime, do you grant someone death and the end of their pain...or do you guarantee them a good long time alive where all kinds of pain - physical, emotional, whatever - are a possiblity? Not necessarily actually happening - I'm no torture advocate - but at least the possibility that someone, each and every day you live, would be there to perhaps, just maybe, put you through the wringer?

Posted
3 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

A life for a life is not fair justice, it's the descent into barbarism. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

 

Half blind.

Posted
Just now, Kitchandro said:

There is no relief in eternal oblivion. It's not a great laugh being dead. You cease to exist. That's not relief. I mean there is no worldly comparison so it's difficult to explain but unless you believe in an afterlife there is no feeling of 'ahhhhh I'm not suffering anymore'. The man is dead. ONLY if you're religious do you think there is some sort of respite in death.

 

And again, you're assuming he was suffering anyway. That's not necessarily true.

I guess it comes down to whether you think a good long time suffering or oblivion is to be feared more. And that is a very difficult question IMO, and you'll likely get different answers from different people.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...