Ohio School shooter sentenced to life in prison

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Clearly we don't know much about each other then, because anyone who knows me, would tell you I'm not a fan of things biblical (or more specifically evangelism ).

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I was reminding that eye for an eye has its origin in the bible - and this book is quite outdated.

I agree to disagree though.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by Nippelspanner

I was reminding that eye for an eye has its origin in the bible - and this book is quite outdated.

Even the Bible agrees that the law is outdated. I'm pretty sure that Jesus said something along the lines of 'two wrongs don't make a right'.

[Sailor Steve]

The law predates the Bible, originally coming from the Code of Hammurabi. the purpose wasn't to create an equal punishment, but to limit it. The usual reaction to someone gouging out an eye is to kill him. The code limited the punishment to no worse than the crime.

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

Even the Bible agrees that the law is outdated. I'm pretty sure that Jesus said something along the lines of 'two wrongs don't make a right'.

"You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

"You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

And then the nice policeman comes by with a piece of chalk and outlines you with your cheek to one side.

[Jimbuna]

Good point

Bundy escaped from jail. Twice. And killed again while he was free.

Good point Steve.
However he wasn't convicted of murder then, so executing people convicted of murder wouldn't have worked there either.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Good point Steve.
However he wasn't convicted of murder then, so executing people convicted of murder wouldn't have worked there either.

That's true too. Sure, if he was locked up all these years he wouldn't have killed anybody, and his escapes were from courthouses and jails, not from an actual prison. On the other hand he confessed to more than 30 murders before his execution, so which would be better - keeping him contained or just getting rid of him?

As I said, I'm not sure of my own feelings on this half the time, and I can see the merits of both arguments.