On Strong Opinions about Guns.

[Blind groper]

Most murders are "crimes of passion." As I showed from FBI figures earlier, 25% of all murders in the USA are two people (usually young men) who get into a passionate argument, till one loses his rag, pulls out a hand gun, and shoots the other.

Are those guys to be let off lightly because they lost their tempers?

Why are loose cannons like that allowed hand guns in the first place?

[Jason]

Everyone has a breaking point. They don't get off because they lost their tempers, it is only a mitigating factor in the judgment if the court decides so. Of course, sometimes, that little mitigation is enough to tip the scales in favour of 'not guilty'.

[Robert_S]

IMO, the person who starts the day with honest intentions but losses their way should get a lighter sentence than someone who starts the day with malicious plans.

[Audley Strange]

IMO, the person who starts the day with honest intentions but losses their way should get a lighter sentence than someone who starts the day with malicious plans.

I disagree. The latter is at least stable enough to commit to something, the former a chimp with the delusion of humanity, diminished responsibility should carry harsher sentencing because it is mindless violence, such people are unstable and cannot be trusted to be in public, predominantly this would be young men.

[Blind groper]

Audley
I totally agree with you.

[Robert_S]

thinking of the day when murderers try to fabricate evidence of premeditation instead of hide it.

[Robert_S]

[Jason]

Audley, I could not disagree with you more.

Unless you're trolling, you have an absurd conception of human nature.

[Robert_S]

When I think of that guy I almost murdered that time...

He went on to try to rape a friend of mine and continue to steal and make everyone around him miserable. He's in a wheelchair now 'cause he stole from his father one too many times.

I hate to think you'd get more time for losing it on that shithead than deliberately killing someone for money.

[Blind groper]

Robert

I do not think anyone said they would do more time. However, anyone who is such a loose cannon that he can lose his temper and commit murder is a big risk to society.

Should people who are such a risk be free to commit more murders?

[Jason]

Robert

I do not think anyone said they would do more time. However, anyone who is such a loose cannon that he can lose his temper and commit murder is a big risk to society.

Everyone poses such a risk. Step out of your vacuum bubble.

Should people who are such a risk be free to commit more murders?

That might be the single dumbest thing you've ever written here to my knowledge.

[JimC]

Robert

I do not think anyone said they would do more time. However, anyone who is such a loose cannon that he can lose his temper and commit murder is a big risk to society.

Should people who are such a risk be free to commit more murders?

They may in fact be more amenable to corrective psychological treatment than a coolly calculating psychopath. If they can be "fixed", then Audley's point is moot. If not, he may well have a point. In some ways, it is all about risk assessment of an individual's likelihood of causing harm to others in the future.

[Blind groper]

That might be the single dumbest thing you've ever written here to my knowledge.

Take another look, smartass. That was a question, not a statement. In other words, an invitation to an intelligent answer, rather than a snide and stupid comment.