Oh, cry me a river, Dork. This doctor has no problem with capital punishment and believes it should be swifter and used more frequently. It is 100% effective in preventing recidivism.
Agreed, Joe. Being a physician and supporting the concept of capital punishment are not mutually exclusive. I also vigorously support the concept of gun ownership and personal/home defense. That has nothing to do with my medical practice.I would, however, gladly provide medical assistance to the home intruder who dared test my preparedness, but I would expect it would be unnecessrary after the smoke cleared.
You're my kinda guy, scalpel. If any fool is stupid enough to break into my home after ignoring the 2 police cars parked across the street and the 2 big dogs in the yard, he'll get to meet a pretty mean veteran with a shotgun. "Not that I need to be at this distance but I'm a f*ckin' surgeon with this shotgun." Kill Bill 2.
"cry me a river, Dork"Perhaps I'm a bit of a weeny, compared to you guys...We differ mayhap on the gun issue. Does my tabby count as a defence kitty ??
If he's anything like this dreaded creature, then yes.
CholeraJoe, it also provides a 100% guarantee that innocents are murdered by the state. Which state was it in the US that suspended executions when it found a third of death row convictions were somewhere between dubious and outright wrong?
I don't like capital punishment, either, but I don't think it's because I'm a doctor. Here's a thought: is executing Saddam Hussein going to do any good? Rodgerd, the state is Illinois.
I agree Dork. As a physician I feel a moral obligation to oppose capital punishment. I feel this is fundamentally different from protecting ones home and family.
If someone attacked my family, I would do whatever I could to stop him/her--including going for the carotids with a pencil, if needed (no guns in this doctor's house). If death results, well, then, I would be a murderer. Them's ugly words to own up to. But if someone is trying to hurt, say, my child, there is no question in my mind that such a person is guilty and that my child should be protected however possible.That being said, I don't think the states have a very good track record of judging guilty vs not guilty ex post facto. Furthermore, I don't believe there is such a thing as an impartial jury or an impartial legal system in the US anymore. I think that murder, committed by the state under such vague circumstances, is therefore wrong.Am I talking out of both sides of my mouth? Sure.And "The Mercy Seat" is very, very powerful. Thanks for that.
"I would be a murderer."No you wouldn't. Killing in self defense is justifiable homicide, not murder. No charges would even be filed against you at all. The state does not commit "murder" when executing criminals either. Murder is the unlawful intentional killing of another. Execution is lawful as carried out by the state.Your terminology is incorrect and unnecessarily inflammatory.
I don't believe in any form of state sponsored capital punishment. It is barbaric to murder a person made helpless by captivity. Further, it is the one punishment that has no possibility for parole or appeal. Conversely, I would have no problem whatsoever in killing someone in self-defense. In such a situation, it is they who treated their life with disregard, not me.
Me too, softie.
Post a Comment