The thing is, you've got to put the safety of the public first. In my opinion, anyway.
I totally agree that no one should automatically be written of because of their past, but it should be among the factors that are considered.
It takes a certain kind of person to be capable of something like murder or rape, so I feel we should be very sure that they are no longer the same person before we expose the public to them again. I'm talking in general now, not this case in particular.
Of course murder is a lot different from manslaughter. Sometimes I hear a murder verdict in a case and I'm puzzled as to how it wasn't just manslaughter. To me, murder requires some level of premeditation.
I totally agree that no one should automatically be written of because of their past, but it should be among the factors that are considered.
It takes a certain kind of person to be capable of something like murder or rape, so I feel we should be very sure that they are no longer the same person before we expose the public to them again. I'm talking in general now, not this case in particular.
Of course murder is a lot different from manslaughter. Sometimes I hear a murder verdict in a case and I'm puzzled as to how it wasn't just manslaughter. To me, murder requires some level of premeditation.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum