And here creilmann said you were exaggerating an argument to absurdity. Oh, wait.

it started right here:

Posted by creilmann on 1/25/2011 2:49:00 PM (view original):
But, of course, none of us would have to pull the trigger.  If murder were legal, the assassin/hitman industry would flourish.  Most of congress would be shot by now, making a run for political office akin to suicide.  Divorce rates would drop to virtually nil, because why pay her half or let her have custody when you can hire Vinnie to off her?  Don't wanna deal with the competing business across the street?  That can be fixed.  IRS stopping by for an audit?  Not any more.  There are millions of situations where hiring an assassin would make one's life much easier if murder were legal.  It would be open season on homosexuals for the religious right as they, of course, would find permission to do so in the Bible.  

Still, nowhere did I say that most Americans would choose to kill someone.  You're whole argument is based on the notion that most people do not have it in them to kill another human, which I agree with.  But you do realize that someone can kill more than one person don't you?  Congress for example, I'm not suggesting that 500 separate people would go and kill of 500 separate congresspeople.  One oil baron with millions of dollars at his disposal could simply have the democrats wiped out because their policies might take away profits from him.  These people commit immoral acts that harm people all the time.  Do you honestly think they wouldn't have a group of politicians that might increase taxes on their business, or set stricter environmental policies that would cost them millions, killed?  I can't believe this needs to be explained for you.  What is the word for "beyond naive"?

Posted by creilmann on 1/26/2011 5:14:00 PM (view original):
Still, nowhere did I say that most Americans would choose to kill someone.  You're whole argument is based on the notion that most people do not have it in them to kill another human, which I agree with.  But you do realize that someone can kill more than one person don't you?  Congress for example, I'm not suggesting that 500 separate people would go and kill of 500 separate congresspeople.  One oil baron with millions of dollars at his disposal could simply have the democrats wiped out because their policies might take away profits from him.  These people commit immoral acts that harm people all the time.  Do you honestly think they wouldn't have a group of politicians that might increase taxes on their business, or set stricter environmental policies that would cost them millions, killed?  I can't believe this needs to be explained for you.  What is the word for "beyond naive"?

So a rich oil baron is without a conscience? How much more of the class warfare from the left can we have?

I thought after Tuscon we were going to try not to create an atmosphere of hate?

  I knew it wouldn't take Swamp long to latch on to that comment.

Yes, there would undoubtedly be a conscience-free oil baron out there that would resort to killing people to protect every cent of his profits.  But, to be fair, it could easily be a group of misguided environmental extremists that would convince themselves that they could save the environment by killing off a few GOP'ers.  Happy?

Posted by creilmann on 1/26/2011 5:14:00 PM (view original):
Still, nowhere did I say that most Americans would choose to kill someone.  You're whole argument is based on the notion that most people do not have it in them to kill another human, which I agree with.  But you do realize that someone can kill more than one person don't you?  Congress for example, I'm not suggesting that 500 separate people would go and kill of 500 separate congresspeople.  One oil baron with millions of dollars at his disposal could simply have the democrats wiped out because their policies might take away profits from him.  These people commit immoral acts that harm people all the time.  Do you honestly think they wouldn't have a group of politicians that might increase taxes on their business, or set stricter environmental policies that would cost them millions, killed?  I can't believe this needs to be explained for you.  What is the word for "beyond naive"?

OK, I'll give you that one person will murder "most" of the politicians, "competing" business owners, IRS agents and even the homosexuals.   But will this one person murder the "bad" spouse?   Or will these murders be generated by the other spouse?   Because, if that's the case, that's still a hell of a lot of people who have no courage for murder now who'll just do it because it's legal.

A cop got shot in Indianapolis last week.  I'm not sure if he's technically dead yet, something has to keep the organs fresh.

Posted by creilmann on 1/26/2011 5:45:00 PM (view original):
Yes, there would undoubtedly be a conscience-free oil baron out there that would resort to killing people to protect every cent of his profits.  But, to be fair, it could easily be a group of misguided environmental extremists that would convince themselves that they could save the environment by killing off a few GOP'ers.  Happy?

Dancing a little jig.

It wasn't that long ago that dueling was accepted by society and a way that extremely educated men settled their differences.

It wasn't that long ago that it was acceptable to own black people.   Doesn't that seem like a crazy idea these days?   Do you think, if slavery were legalized, that people would line-up at the slave shop to get one?

The only people who'd want one are the people who don't understand why it's a bad thing.   Much like the only people who'd go on a murder spree with legalized murder are the people who could do it now.

It's not a question of a murder spree. That's how your whole argument is exaggerated. It wouldn't be a matter of everyone's inner John Wayne Gacy gleefully killing everything in sight. But, say, an unscrupulous landlord who might have cheated you out of thousands of dollars? Might be another story.

If you were capable of killing someone over a couple of thousand dollars, the law, as is, is not stopping you.   That's what you don't seem to understand.   People can get angry enough to say "I'll kill you!!" but they don't follow thru.  Because they aren't capable of doing it.   It's not because of a law.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/27/2011 11:10:00 AM (view original):
It wasn't that long ago that it was acceptable to own black people.   Doesn't that seem like a crazy idea these days?   Do you think, if slavery were legalized, that people would line-up at the slave shop to get one?

The only people who'd want one are the people who don't understand why it's a bad thing.   Much like the only people who'd go on a murder spree with legalized murder are the people who could do it now.

Exactly.  It was accepted by society and not against the law, so it was practiced by alot of people who were well educated, including the founding fathers. 

You have two pretty barbaric things in slavery and dueling, yet they were practiced by arguably the most educated and influential Americans while they were legal. 

It's not a hard stretch to imagine that people wouldn't be so shy to murder if they could get away with it. 

I don't have time to dig on it right now, but check out the results of the Harvard(I think) experiment that created a prisonlike atmosphere with regular students/people being guards and prisoners.  I think it was from the 60's.