Forgive and Forget? Not in this small New Hampshire town where residents have threatened to burn down the Pastor's house (Lee: violent crime, buy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
people object because they don't like the law that allowed the murderer to be released after 35 years.
obviously the law needs to be changed.
I feel the guy did the crime and served his time. He should be allowed to live somewhere.....and children are everywhere. If it was felt that he would murder again, then he shouldn't have been released from prison.
I feel the guy did the crime and served his time. He should be allowed to live somewhere.....and children are everywhere. If it was felt that he would murder again, then he shouldn't have been released from prison.
Well there's the problem. A level 3 sex offender is classified as "Likely to offend again" and they are released after doing as you like to call it "their time".
Until we start treating violent criminals like violent criminals our crime rates will continue to be high.
Revenge killing of a murderer is appropriate in my book, but then I've carried a rifle in a foreign country so I understand that certain things must be done no matter how horrible you may feel they are.
.
Uh, what does that have to do with this? I've "carried a rifle in a foreign country" as well, and?
My point is that you're a pacifist and think a law is necessary to protect murderers.
My point is I've seen bad people, murderers, up close and personal, they need to die. Period.
Does your husband know you're posting on the internet?
I'm not exactly sure where you get the idea I'm a pacifist.
I've seen "bad people" up close and personal as well, although I'm not sure what that has to do with this argument.
Certainly there are many bad people in the world, Mr. Guay obviously being one of them, and he should have been kept imprisoned. However, he served his time and was released, whether you or I like or agree with it.
Advocating vigilante or extrajudicial killings is not really the answer though, I'd say.
Again, applying your logic, what should have been done with the man in Louisiana who killed an unarmed Japanese exchange student simply looking for a party? Sorry as he may have been, I'd consider that an example of a "bad person".
Does your husband know you're on the interwebs? Projection?
I'm sorry I must have missed the story of the high profile murder of the Japanese exchange student looking for tail.
For tail? Tail? It was Halloween, and he was looking for a Halloween party.
At any rate, it happened in 1992, and at the time, it was a well-reported international story.
Point being, when you say that all murderers should be killed, period, where do you draw the line? So, if the parents of this kid decided to come to the US and run this guy through with a sword, that would have been justified?
If the parents flew in and killed the murderer I would have no problem with it. Was it murder or man slaughter?
Ahh, but now you're talking about legal definitions of killing. Why do we need courts or laws?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Welcome to Hell....
