FaithNoMore Wrote:I understand your point and agree it is a slippery slope to deem someone not worth living. Is that a reason to avoid the situation, or to strictly define the parameters of which it should be applied? I guess I would need first hand experience in the legal system to truly answer that.
What is acceptable varies by person... I accept torture in the streets. So something that could lead to it isn't a slippery slope to me
There's more than two choices here... I choose to deal out death when I think it is worth it. 9 times out of 10 and still more: a criminal is more useful alive and working than killed for haste's sake. If you are rid of your poor: you've lost the wide majority of your criminals. If you don't hold things out of your people's reach: you've lost most of the rest. What remains are then mostly people like me: who weren't following the law in the first place.
And many of us are not evil so much as free-sprited. And what you have left come mostly in 2 varieties: the people you should employ... and the psychotic. It's not even worth taking the time to make laws for people that fit in none of these... they are a small enough group to manage case-by-case. Most of them being the 'rich criminals'... or greed whores as I call them. Take their money and they are usually well-handled.
Of all the criminals: it's only the rich criminals and the psychos I have no appreciation of as people. And they can still be made use of (take the first one's money, stick the second in a country you don't like).
The better resource argument is thus: recycle, reuse, refit.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
