Some things make execution the public’s job. And I’m tied of pretending otherwise.
I should be able to post a video of myself killing Nick Fuentes, for example, and receive nothing but favorable responses.
I don’t understand the argument when someone is a total negative in every way, with absolutely zero redeeming characteristics.
I am not typically a violent person, but with someone out there causing actual harm to people, promoting more harm, with a completely objective negative amount of humanity and worth, there is definitely a line where the cost of keeping them alive outweighs every single good thing they’ve ever (and will ever) do.
The line for this is really murky down here in peasant world, but the leaders should be the absolute peak of humanity.
And when their death provides an amazing benefit as well, then I say bring on the Luigis. I don’t say that lightly either. This isn’t a “kill everyone meeting this criteria” kinda thing. This is very specific.
The ones not quite worth messing still deserve the next worst punishment forever. And there are plenty of groups that fit into this. Nazis is the obvious one. That specifically should be a crime by itself, but that argument has issues too, but that’s just my opinion until I hear a better one.
You don’t deserve to participate in society just for being born. You deserve it by being a contributor to it. All you deserve for being born is a fair chance not to be evil. The price for crossing that line should be everything.
I realize the line of thinking is dangerously close to theirs. But it isn’t based on arbitrary issues like beliefs or race. It’s just being a decent person. That line should be pretty clear and obvious.
Nobody should be intentionally harmful to anyone- except for evil people. I don’t think we’ll ever evolve to that point though. Not inside of at digit number of years at the very least.
Some things make execution the public’s job. And I’m tied of pretending otherwise.
I should be able to post a video of myself killing Nick Fuentes, for example, and receive nothing but favorable responses.
I don’t understand the argument when someone is a total negative in every way, with absolutely zero redeeming characteristics.
I am not typically a violent person, but with someone out there causing actual harm to people, promoting more harm, with a completely objective negative amount of humanity and worth, there is definitely a line where the cost of keeping them alive outweighs every single good thing they’ve ever (and will ever) do.
The line for this is really murky down here in peasant world, but the leaders should be the absolute peak of humanity.
And when their death provides an amazing benefit as well, then I say bring on the Luigis. I don’t say that lightly either. This isn’t a “kill everyone meeting this criteria” kinda thing. This is very specific.
The ones not quite worth messing still deserve the next worst punishment forever. And there are plenty of groups that fit into this. Nazis is the obvious one. That specifically should be a crime by itself, but that argument has issues too, but that’s just my opinion until I hear a better one.
You don’t deserve to participate in society just for being born. You deserve it by being a contributor to it. All you deserve for being born is a fair chance not to be evil. The price for crossing that line should be everything.
I realize the line of thinking is dangerously close to theirs. But it isn’t based on arbitrary issues like beliefs or race. It’s just being a decent person. That line should be pretty clear and obvious.
Nobody should be intentionally harmful to anyone- except for evil people. I don’t think we’ll ever evolve to that point though. Not inside of at digit number of years at the very least.