|
|
 Originally Posted by JL
Originally Posted by DaddyDeez
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
Not to sound like the jackass I typically am cast off as being, but what's so bad about some 13 year old piece of shit getting shot anyway. World population control has got to start some place, and it might as well be a dumbass kid who hasn't had a chance to knock up some stupid bitch dumb enough to have sex with him and fuck up the world even more with 6-7 retarded ass kids. You know each of those kids is going to knock up some trailer park slut at least 4-5 times each. Imagine the number of welfare checks that were avoided by this little bastard getting shot.
THIS^^^^^^^
IS
DEAD
ON
No this is harsh.
Everyone does dumbass shit when they are younger.
You can't just assume that the kid is going to become some worthless waste of skin and never change his ways.
I agree that it's harsh, but remember my premise: world population control has to start somewhere. It's not like this kid was going to win the Nobel Prize for curing cancer. His death is not really a great loss.
Moreover, not everyone gets a group of their friends and breaks into someone's house as a kid. If they're doing that when they're 13, what are they going to be doing when they're 15? 18? 25?
Of course it's possible he could turn his life around into something useful, but it's less likely than one of his peers who was home studying or something. That makes his death more +EV (or less -EV, whichever way you want to look at it) than the death of the hypothetical peer. That's why I'm not terribly upset about it.
|
Reply With Quote