Fixed Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 We're having a debate about the shoot to kill policy against suspected suicide bombers and I have to argue against - what arguments are there against it? I'm rather stuck so any little bits of help would be much appreciated - thanks dudes and dudettes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bart Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 this thread is in the wrong section plus their has been thread about this before ! even though its a intresting topic ! :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartswarm Posted November 15, 2005 Share Posted November 15, 2005 I'm against it! There should be due process. The alleged bombers are mere suspects and they should be presumed innocent until proven guilty (beyond reasonable doubt). Most of the civilized countries today have in their Constitution the Bill of Rights wherein it is the policy of the state that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty and property. I think lawmakers formulate laws to be followed by the people. There are legal remedies that can be taken to prove/disprove the guilt of the suspects and these should be resorted into. What if the suspects that they killed were innocent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICK8 Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 I'm for it,shoot the fuckers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now