: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:08 pm  

I don't know why anyone is continuing the discussion.

You can't educate pork.

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:09 pm  

So after all this am I really naughty boy for my opinions ?












Shall i sit in that corner >>>>.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................V

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:09 pm  

McLaren_Field wrote:

So wait a minute.

In LS13's world there's now a scale of offences for having sex with an U16 ?

And the family of the underage person gets to pick the punishment, ranging from "just" a beating to killing them ?



I'll stick to the legal system that we already have if you don't mind.

I think there is actually an age where the offense differes. It may be 13, I'm not sure though. the punishments are much more severe below this threashold.

LS13's justice system is funny though. You should have a tyre punctured for doing 71 on a motorway, or it crushed for running a red light.

Maybe you should have your TV taken if found guilty of robbery?

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:13 pm  

Well done leicester_rhino..You getting the idea

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:27 pm  

LS13 wrote:

There is proof that in places where the death penalty exists the number of people re-offending after servibg their 'sentence' is a big fat zero .

Where does the death penalty exist for child abuse then?

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:40 pm  

I don't know . You going to tell me ?

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:43 pm  

LS13 wrote:

I don't know . You going to tell me ?

You tell us.

LS13 wrote:

There is proof that in places where the death penalty exists the number of people re-offending after servibg their 'sentence' is a big fat zero .

What empirical evidence do you have that shows those who have abused children have not re offended where the death penalty is in place for such a crime.

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:47 pm  

Obsessed .
I was referring to the lack of re-offenders after they have been killed .
I was not referring to any specific type of offender .

HTH

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:50 pm  

LS13 wrote:

Obsessed

No. Just attempting to educate a clown.

LS13 wrote:

I was referring to the lack of re-offenders after they have been killed

Ya dont say

LS13 wrote:

I was not referring to any specific type of offender .

So what relevance does it have then?

LS13 wrote:

HTH

Yup, it helps prove the point raised by G1

: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:59 pm  

I was replying to a question posted by Gateaux .. Here is her question ...

Is there any proof that in places where the death penalty exists the number of people committing the offences is any less? (I am sure I read once that the figures were similar but not 100% sure)

Here it the reply ...

LS13 wrote: There is proof that in places where the death penalty exists the number of people re-offending after servibg their 'sentence' is a big fat zero .

What is so difficult to understand about that for a person as highly educated as yourself ?