Jump to content
Jazzy Jeff & Fresh Prince Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Ale

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi punched in the face and bloodied at Milan rally

Recommended Posts

They justified violence tho. I would not punch Berlusconi in the face nether, if anything I'd shake his hand because he gots to be one of the biggest G's ever :pound:

IMO, it's a shame to fight violence with violence. But I guess sometimes it's the only way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They justified violence tho. I would not punch Berlusconi in the face nether, if anything I'd shake his hand because he gots to be one of the biggest G's ever :pound:

IMO, it's a shame to fight violence with violence. But I guess sometimes it's the only way.

I don't know if it every is... self-defence is one thing but other than that, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They justified violence tho. I would not punch Berlusconi in the face nether, if anything I'd shake his hand because he gots to be one of the biggest G's ever :pound:

IMO, it's a shame to fight violence with violence. But I guess sometimes it's the only way.

I don't know if it every is... self-defence is one thing but other than that, I don't know.

Exactly, that's why I'll never support things like the death penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They justified violence tho. I would not punch Berlusconi in the face nether, if anything I'd shake his hand because he gots to be one of the biggest G's ever :pound:

IMO, it's a shame to fight violence with violence. But I guess sometimes it's the only way.

I don't know if it every is... self-defence is one thing but other than that, I don't know.

Exactly, that's why I'll never support things like the death penalty.

The death penalty is extreme, but, why does a murderer deserve to live when the victim cant?

Look at what the punishment would be, life in prison. Not only do they get to keep their life, they also still get to see their family, both things the victim cant do. Prison these days, certainly in the UK, is like putting someone up in a slightly dirty hotel for the duration of their punishment. Take Saddam Hussein as an example, all the lives he ruined, all the people he killed, why does he deserve to keep his life? He deserved to be hanging from the rafters. I'm not condoning violence as a whole, but in certain circumstances, for me at least, it is the only way to bring justice to a crime, in extreme cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next to that, it is very expensive to lock sickos up for 25 years,

Yeah, not only do they get to keep their life, every tax payer is paying for them to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, that's why I'll never support things like the death penalty.

The death penalty is extreme, but, why does a murderer deserve to live when the victim cant?

Look at what the punishment would be, life in prison. Not only do they get to keep their life, they also still get to see their family, both things the victim cant do. Prison these days, certainly in the UK, is like putting someone up in a slightly dirty hotel for the duration of their punishment. Take Saddam Hussein as an example, all the lives he ruined, all the people he killed, why does he deserve to keep his life? He deserved to be hanging from the rafters. I'm not condoning violence as a whole, but in certain circumstances, for me at least, it is the only way to bring justice to a crime, in extreme cases.

Okay, I agree with what you guys are saying about Saddam Hussein. What about George Bush? Why does he deserve to live? In my opinion, he's as guilty as Hussein. He just happened to be the President of the most powerful country in the world.

Justice should be applied fairly to everyone, but, as I said before, I don't think the death penalty is the solution. You're doing exactly what the murderer did. You're taking someone's life. Not to mention the amount of innocent people that have been executed. Or the people that have been executed with no real proof of their crimes.

Take Todd Willingham's story as an example.

Read this article: http://socialistworker.org/2006-1/588/588_12_Texas.shtml

Or watch these videos:

Next to that, it is very expensive to lock sickos up for 25 years,

When I'm talking about someone's life, I don't give a damn about money.

Edited by Ale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my knowledge, Bush has never plotted to kill as many people as Saddam did. He may not have handled things very well that caused death. Whilst Saddam/Bin Laden sent out suicide bombers to kill people, Bush, as misguided as it may have been, it was in an attempt to stop terror. Yes, subsequently lives have been lost, but it wasnt a "lets go in and kill a few, then come back again". I do agree though, you need stone wall evidence, or an admission before you can even think about the death penalty and only in extreme cases. Saddam Hussein = death penalty.... Ronnie Biggs = just lock him up. The hypocrisy is, that if Ronnie Biggs commmited a murder today, he'd get less time in prison than for his original crime. Rob a train, got to prison for life, kill someone and get 25 years. How is that justice?

On the money thing, we have to consider that the amount of money it costs to keep someone in prison is ridiculous. Which subsequently costs tax payers money, which will slow to the economy which contributes to a world wide recession. In America, as far as I'm aware, life in prison, means you aint leaving until your dead. Why should the countries money situation suffer as a result of keeping a murderer alive? Its not the counties fault this person killed someone, its not tax payers fault either, but they all suffer as a result of it. Again, I think only in extreme cases you should turn to the death penalty, but surely, somewhere along the lines, its necessary.

You cant say violence is NEVER the answer and then agree that in some cases it is.

Edited by Big Willie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is ridiculous to compare Bush to Husein or Osama, you cant do it. There is a big diffrence between what Bush did and what they did. Bush did not handle everything the way he should have, but he was on" the good side", to put it simple. Beeing the Persident of a country that goes to war (f.e. against a country with a insane leader) does not make you a murderer, and having a prison that threats his people the wrong way does not make you a Dictator that does not care about human rights at all.

Edited by Turntable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Bush started an unnecessary war in Iraq. He knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. He wanted to invade Iraq even before he was elected. For me, he's a killer. And yes, I know Spain was one of the countries that supported that war.

Justice system is f*cked up. Totally agree. But I still think that you can't take someone's life.

You cant say violence is NEVER the answer and then agree that in some cases it is.

Violence is never the answer. I was just saying that sometimes it's the only way, like, as Lerkot said, in self-defence cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Bush started an unnecessary war in Iraq. He knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. He wanted to invade Iraq even before he was elected. For me, he's a killer. And yes, I know Spain was one of the countries that supported that war.

Justice system is f*cked up. Totally agree. But I still think that you can't take someone's life.

You cant say violence is NEVER the answer and then agree that in some cases it is.

Violence is never the answer.

basically and on theory - yeah ,but the practice didnt show that !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Bush started an unnecessary war in Iraq. He knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. He wanted to invade Iraq even before he was elected. For me, he's a killer. And yes, I know Spain was one of the countries that supported that war.

Justice system is f*cked up. Totally agree. But I still think that you can't take someone's life.

You cant say violence is NEVER the answer and then agree that in some cases it is.

Violence is never the answer. I was just saying that sometimes it's the only way, like, as Lerkot said, in self-defence cases.

Talk about contradicting yourself. If in some cases its the only way, then that makes it the ANSWER for that situation.

Taking your country to war to stop a terrorists dictatorship, is not the same as blowing up building (or whatever) for fun. I agree, Bush has been a complete moron at times, but to compare him to Saddam in the terms of what we are discussing, is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about contradicting yourself. If in some cases its the only way, then that makes it the ANSWER for that situation.

When I say "answer" I mean the right solution to something. A violent act is never the right solution, but, sometimes, it's unavoidable. That doesn't mean I have to like it. For example, when you have to fight to defend your country from other attacks. The problem resides in the one who starts the violence.

Bush was a liar.

Edited by Ale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×