lawyers who get paid to defend child molestors shouldn't make laws to begin with

or advocate or anything

i dunno man it seems like they take cash no matter what

why cant we just go back to public executions

like in the center of town square

leave the bodies rot in the open so ppl wont want to break laws

most lawyers defending child molesters get paid dogshit by the state as public defenders

well

i mean thats good

dont defend the shitty public ud get paid more

I and Foucault agree with you on public executions

its save us so much money and time

esp if its proven without a doubt

just takem from the court to the hangin block

or heck even pillarys

those are fun

Pillorys

i think the prison system is a joke tbh

its too cushy compared to some places. its a money grab as well. and the "death row" people who never actually get killed at the end of the day costs the tax payers more than what some folk make in a year

i think what we should do is do a clean sweep of the prison system once the wall is buily

purge them all. empty it. minor offenses/nonviolent crimes should be given a mandatory service in our military under a special branch or something and made to earn their freedom back

the rest can be dealt with more permanently.

now im not saying to just round them up and shooting them or whatever.

why not just starve them out or something.

i dunno man the world is weird

explain

Hmm i think that the last sentence explains it quite well, what is unclear for you?

that last message makes sense

sorta like how me and my sister got in a fight over rent

she wont pay her half unless i give her spending money

so she wont pay cus i said no

so she violated

But consequently if she doesnt pay shell have an eviction on her record

not I

since shes the renter and im just payin to stay til college

that makes a lot more sense if you use real life exaples

well arguments about the definition of "law" are kinda esoteric and the picture you linked makes no argument. It just says what does and doesn't count as law. But jurisprudence scholars like Hart or Dworkin would disagree on many points.

But I'm asking what the picture you linked is relevant to?

its could just be a pic he linked

sometimes puddles are just puddles