Jump to content

Delfia

Member
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never
  • Medals

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Delfia

  • Rank
    Rookie
  1. Delfia

    human rights for the al-queda terrorists

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> No? How about he is captured at the scene with the smoking gun in his hand? he never leaves the sight of the witnesses? Oh, I know; They all have a grudge against him.<span id='postcolor'> This almost NEVER happens, you know, so this kind of argument cannot be used when discussing general policy. Besides, what if some moron just picked up a dropped gun just before the cops stormed in? Or the witnesses just wanted to get somebody punished and picked a random innocent bloke from the line-up to blame (happened to my friend), what then? BESIDES, even if he is bloody guilty, inprisonment is both more humane and more punishing than death penalty. What distinguishes "normal" people from the criminals is that they should not use inhumane means even when confronted by an enemy using inhumane means. Also, sometimes people actually stop being bad in the slammer and live perfectly lawfully ever after (quite rare I admit). By the way, if I was captured on the scene with the smoking gun in my hand, I'd know I have nothing to lose, because I'm going to get the chair anyway. So I'd just blaze away and try to waste as many cops as possible, before they got me. There's more dignity in dying like that than getting butchered like an animal.
  2. Delfia

    human rights for the al-queda terrorists

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let me put to you a hypothetical situation, one far more plausable than "Mammy and daddy have somehow been legally hassled and killed someone;" A man draws a gun in a bank, grabs money and starts shooting, and kills. When he is captured he threatens to kill any witnesses who testify. It comes out later that he has a previous record of violence, including against people who testified against him at a previous trial, what do you do with him?<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, let me put you even a MORE plausible situation. SOMEBODY draws a gun in a bank, grabs money, starts shooting and kills in Texas. Police rush to the scene and investigates. The media goes crazy when the investigation lasts for weeks without arrests. Finally a black man with a previous record of violence is arrested. Since he is poor, he gets a crappy lawyer. The court finds him guilty and the judge sentences him to death, filled with godly wrath. The media and public are ecstatic as the man is put to death. Politicians get re-elected. The only thing that you can be sure about is that SOMEBODY killed a lot of people and that the government killed one human being as a retaliatory action. (Heh. Reminds me of the War on Terror, except the retaliatory action didn's waste just one dupe.) If he was innocent, put yourself in his place and think how it must feel to win the national death lottery. (That's right. It can happen to you too, even if you're not black.) If he was guilty, well, it sure as hell tortures you more to be locked up for life than to be painlessly offed. You can NEVER absolutely prove whether somebody is guilty or not.
  3. Delfia

    Human Rights for Guinea Pigs

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">First of all, veggie food isn't necessarily bad tasting. Ahem, as a matter of fact, I cook EXCELLENT veggie food which even my meat-eating friends find rather good.<span id='postcolor'> This is completely a matter of taste. I have eaten whatnot and can say that veggie food sucks (in my opinion). If you want to stop me eating meat, you'll have to kill me. Let's drop this issue, though. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Second, the whole "overpopulation explanation" is half crap. If the resources of the world were used efficiently and distributed evenly, the world could support 12 - 30 billion people (yes, 30 billion is rather optimistic, estimations vary). While education, especially educating women, decreases birth rate, it doesn't solve the problem. The real problem is poverty. While the precious and scarse farmland is owned by very few people, most of which use the land to produce exports for the industrialized world, the poor cannot afford food even if there was enough of it. Labor force is the only thing the poor people have to sell, more children means more people trying to earn a living for the family. Not to mention that children are supposed to take care of their parents when they grow older.<span id='postcolor'> If you look at the current world population, we are not that far from that 12 billion. Anyway, supporting 12-30 billion people means that everyone of those people is equally poor. Since all life is programmed to struggle for its own betterment, this kind of equally divided poverty does not work in real life, not with humans, not with gerbils, not with bacteria. While I admit that in Finland we have a nice social security network, Finland has struggled horribly to get to where it is. And there simply isn't enough stuff to go around to give everyone this kind of standard of living. Not everyone can be rich. A lot of people need to die, because we do not fit on this globe. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The "population explosion" is largely a myth and exists to justify the extremely biased distribution of world resources.<span id='postcolor'> It has been proven that all mammalian species multiply following a sigmoidal curve. The upper limit of population is defined either by predators or the supporting capability of the environment. Since nobody hunts us, our population is limited by the supporting capability of the environment. Since we are now so near this limit, there is a lot of struggle between individuals (nations and single people) trying to grab as much of the limited stack as possible. Hence poverty and unrest. The strongest will survive. It's just the way life works. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Did you know that the richest 20% of population own more than 80% of the world's resources? Or that Michael Jordan is paid more for a Nike ad campaign than the 70000 Indonesians are paid a year for  manufacturing the damn sneakers? Or that a Western kid consumes approximately 30 times the resources an African kid does?<span id='postcolor'> I don't mind if you rein in the corporations, even if you do it because of your humanist morals, which have no validity in the natural world. This monopolism thing by the big corporations isn't a good thing. But if you try to take something of mine, I will fight you. I have struggled to get to where I am.
  4. Delfia

    Human Rights for Guinea Pigs

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, but since you can produce more vegetarian food with the same resources, I think it's stupid and selfish for people to eat meat while millions are starving. The steak won't end up on someone's plate in the third world, but the truth is that many third world countries export huge amounts of agricultural products to industrialized countries. Most of that gets fed to pigs and cows. So, indirectly, that steak you ate could have been someone's dinner in South America or Africa.<span id='postcolor'> This is just bollocks. If you feed all of your veggie (bad tasting) products to humans it just takes a couple of years for people to multiply to a point where even this is not enough. And then somebody will starve. Starvation is INEVITABLE at some timepoint (barring colonization of space) as long as there are people who reproduce as crazy. No westerner need to feel bad for eating their steaks. Instead, we should educate the third world to make fewer babies. I just hate it when these so called "alternative" political movements are led by some dumb humanists who live in some fairy tale. A little natural science education is just fabulous in showing you what kind of world we really live in and how it works. Animals are not that different from humans. So, "alternatives", back to the drawing board with you.
  5. Delfia

    does sniper takes diazepam in real life?

    Beta blockers that slow the heart rate and lessen shaking of hands are considered doping in sports shooting. Thus I'd say it is beneficial for a sniper to pop some beta blockers.
×