Search results

I don't think Leeds will be anywhere near it, to be honest. Kasper on the way out and no big names in (yet, admittedly). Leicester & Forest I reckon will be the two pushing for it, IMHO West Ham will have to settle for the play-offs. Maybe we'll see them at Wembley...

That is great news; it means they can give priority to long-distance supporters on match days! What?

Just brilliant - and as hillianseagull says above that's a brilliant dedication on the plaque. Be proud of yourselves. :clap2:

Really? I'm basing that on statements like this, that have all been written in this thread: "If they are breaking into your house(full stop) kill the vermin" "knob head got what he deserved scum" "Kill the dirty f***ing wankers" What other way is there to read these? An interesting...

As you say, Shipman was obviously intelligent. He knew that if he was caught he would spent the rest of his days behind bars. Any free life was over, simple. That didn't deter him; he still chose to systematically murder 215 people. Given this, I see no reason to even suspect that the death...

I already agreed in my last post that if you need to kill an intruder to protect your life or your family, then obviously the law should protect you. My point was that if you don't need to kill them, then don't kill them. And the presence of an intruder doesn't automatically mean you need to...

Well what scale are you measuring it on? If you want to compare to the rest of the world, then a quick list: We have universal healthcare; 164/196 countries don't. You have electricity in your house; most of the world doesn't. You have running water in your home; most of the world doesn't...

Of course you would do everything in your power. That isn't the point I'm arguing with. There is a massive difference between doing what's necessary to protect yourself (and your son) and a burglar deserving to die. On the previous page you made the latter assertion - which is why I made the...

Bit of confusion here maybe (on my part, not yours). I was (and have been) talking about the general case, what should the law say, rather than this specific case. Again, if it was kill or be killed, then I agree that no is the correct ending. But we have no idea - IMHO we don't know enough...

Simply by saying there's 4 of them, and that they're thugs, is taking this debate away from the general picture and making it specific. What if it's one teenager who's a complete f***ing coward but is desperate for some cash, so figures he'll jump in an open window and nick a watch quickly...

There's another thread on here just about the death penalty: Death Penalty. It was posts just like this that made me set it up. The basic question - what crimes do you think mean the person deserves death? I'll have a guess though... you think people should die for: Murder - probably Burglary -...

Can't argue with a well supported and evidenced post like that. :thumbsup: :facepalm:

Is it? (*lights touchpaper and retreats*)

You're probably right. Of course, another thing to take into account is other reasons for doing it. Particularly when it comes to crimes such as rape, there is an argument for giving the accused an incentive to plead guilty - to avoid putting the victim through the further ordeal of having to...

The example you give, of the maltreatment of old people, is an example showing that cost does play a part. It doesn't in anyway show that cost should play a part in the debate. If anything, it suggests the opposite, as you do imply by mentioning "an ideal world". As I said, I didn't want to...

Really? Where do you draw the line? If cost can override moral rights & wrongs then there must be a price on anything? I could suggest all kinds of ludicrous examples and say "so if it would benefit the economy/taxpayer would you also agree with doing X?" Obviously you wouldn't support doing...

Your argument is based on cost, rather than the morals of the punishment itself (or even reward, in a suicide bomber's opinion?)? I don't think the debate should even touch on cost and, whichever way it goes, it's a far more fundamental moral debate...

At the risk of sounding pedantic, define "terrorist"? I assume you mean those committing (or intending to commit) mass murder, but do you only include intended suicide bombers such as those on the tube, or also (for example) IRA bombers? Either way, I understand, but for me there are a couple...

The fact that murder rates are not affected when the death penalty is introduced/abolished doesn't provide enough evidence for this?

Now this is a joke right, using Old Testament law to oppose the death penalty? The old testament demands the death penalty for, among other crimes: murder, adultery, incest, kidnapping, blasphemy, working on the sabbath, attacking of your own parents, prostitution, and homosexuality. The 6th...