What's new
By:

Terrorism in Charleston, SC

Gameface said:
Yeah, you totally missed my point I guess.

The right to due process is something advocates of the second amendment don't seem to give a **** about even though it's right there in the Constitution as well.

You're original statement is pretty popular and to me it means you care more about making sure a person is killed quickly, with minimal thought or deliberation, because somehow killing that person for some sense of vengence is more important than us all acting like intelligent civilized creatures and making damn sure a person should be killed before doing it.

I'm not going to apologize for saying I think that's some ignorant stupid person talk. You can talk that way all you want and you can justify it however you want. It's dumb. We shouldn't take people behind the shed and kill them the same day we capture them. That's a ****ing nightmare.
Click to expand...

That's fine.

And I will not apologize for saying that I hope this killer is convicted and sentenced to death. A sentance that is carried out immediately. I am not a fan of 30 year death row sentences.

Nor am I a fan of giving certain killers and criminals endless appeal rights. the thought and diliberation will come during the intial court case. That is when he gets his due process.

You want to consider that stupid? OK, have at it. I consider it stupid and foolish to provide all that, or advocate for it, on open and shut cases.

Edit: Yes, I misunderstood your initial post. I thought you meant I was advocating this as 2nd amendment issue. My mistake.
 
BabyPeterzz said:
According to witnesses he said, "You rape our women and you’re taking over our country — and you have to go."
Click to expand...

Oh, but it's not a hate crime.

It's a crime on Christians.

Clearly wasn't motivated by race. In fact, when he was talking about "raping our women" and "taking over the country" he meant that Christians were raping women and that Christians were taking over the country.

Clearly wasn't suggesting that blacks were the ones doing this. And the fact that the church was all black has nothing to do with it. It just as easily could have been a Mormon or Catholic church. He just wandered aimlessly to the nearest Christian church. That, I am sure of.

Cuz the talking box playing Fox told me.

personally, I blame Obama.

And, the only way to stop these attacks is for pastors to start packing heat!
 
If there was a chance that a jury, even an all white jury, was going to let this dude walk there may be something to all this "hate crime" designation stuff. He's going to get convicted and likely to get the death penalty without any involvement from race hustlers. Dude is sick and evidently known by law enforcement, just like Adam Laughner was here in Tucson.
 
I kinda think this is mass murder not Terrorism. Terrorism makes me think of an organized group. Maybe he is part of a larger group planning this stuff(hopefully not) but until we see evidence of that I don't see what is wrong with the term mass murderer.
 
framer said:
If there was a chance that a jury, even an all white jury, was going to let this dude walk there may be something to all this "hate crime" designation stuff. He's going to get convicted and likely to get the death penalty without any involvement from race hustlers. Dude is sick and evidently known by law enforcement, just like Adam Laughner was here in Tucson.
Click to expand...

That's not the point of hate crimes. If you are charged with a hate crime you still get a jury trial. The increased penalties are supposed to act as a deterrent. Of course it is probably not an effective deterrent for mass murder but the extra penalty may be enough to keep people from painting swastikas on people's homes. Normally an individual would be charged for just vandalism but because in this situation the person is clearly using the vandalism to try and intimidate an entire community rather than just being a regular jerk. We increase the penalty.
 
The Thriller said:
Oh, but it's not a hate crime.

It's a crime on Christians.

Clearly wasn't motivated by race. In fact, when he was talking about "raping our women" and "taking over the country" he meant that Christians were raping women and that Christians were taking over the country.

Clearly wasn't suggesting that blacks were the ones doing this. And the fact that the church was all black has nothing to do with it. It just as easily could have been a Mormon or Catholic church. He just wandered aimlessly to the nearest Christian church. That, I am sure of.

Cuz the talking box playing Fox told me.

personally, I blame Obama.

And, the only way to stop these attacks is for pastors to start packing heat!
Click to expand...

Thriller, if you know fox is going to say something controversial, and you are going to get worked up over it why do you still tune in? Just click it off and they stop having power over you. You will feel better and live a longer healthier life.
 
mellow said:
Thriller, if you know fox is going to say something controversial, and you are going to get worked up over it why do you still tune in? Just click it off and they stop having power over you. You will feel better and live a longer healthier life.
Click to expand...

But but but they're fair and balanced
 
Supposedly the dude was a pill popper in high school and was recently (in April) arrested for drugs.

A racist pill popping white guy with bad hair. So basically your sterotypical southern white guy.

What a dump. Wish Lincoln had never brought the south back
 
Should pastors and other church leaders pack heat? Maybe even hide it in their bible so they can blow away any potential threat?
 
Even if he target them because they are Christians that would still qualify as a hate crime.

Pastors should carry if that individual pastor and church think he should. A general "yes" or "no" wouldn't work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top