I assure you I have no interest in anything as trivial as deliberately insulting people. I tell you that I have not yet begun to insult and have no intention of starting. But it takes me enough time just to correct my typos, I don't have any time left over to imagine if someone who cares about insults would feel insulted by what I write.
If you want you can go into all the posts in which that passage has been quoted and replace it with the new passage. Since it has mostly been reproduced by people arguing against me I see no reason to do it myself.
Okay, I just rewote that section in post # 144 because that ws one of my posts.
One of the posts in which it has been quoted is # 144. it is followed by a quote box of xRiikox's comments and then by my reply to his comments. In it I use the case of a hypothetical person A deciding to kill person B and say that it is obviously wrong for person A to kill person C. I also say that it would be even more wrong to kill a random free person, such are yourself, because of the real but slight possibility that you might someday kill somebody, a possibility that is even slighter than the possibility that person C might someday kill a countryman of person A.
And then I go on to say that it would be even more wrong to kill a homicidal manic like Euphemia instead of confining them if the decision was based on the possibility that they might kill someone in the future, since a confined person has even less chance of killing someone than a free person such as yourself does and thus it is even less right to kill someone instead of confining them than it would be to kill a free person such as yourself.
Thus I set up an hierarchy in which it is obviously wrong for person A to kill person C based on the slight chance that person C might kill some countryman of person A, compared to the even wronger case of killing a free person such as yourself based on the even slighter chance that you might kill someone and wrongest still to kill someone like Euphemia instead of confining them based on the even slighter still chance that if confined she might kill someone.
You may think that it is entirely impossible for you to ever commit a murder instead of, very, very unlikely, maybe one chance in a million or whatever, but many people believe that everyone has a slight chance of committing murder, no matter how tiny that its.
And I did not suggest that you should be killed because of the chance that you might commit murder, merely that it is obvious to an impartial observer that any free person, such as you or me, has a greater chance of someday committing a murder than a person who is confined.
If you acknowledge that you will have to admit that it makes more sense to kill any random free person, such as your or me, than to kill someone instead of confining them, for fear they might escape and kill somebody.
Therefore since you and I both believe that it would be wrong to kill us for fear that we might kill someone someday, we must logically also believe that it is ever more wrong to kill Euphemia, instead of confining her, based on fear she might escape and kill someone some day.
I hope that makes my point without insulting you.
And when I spoke about the potential danger of a confined Euphemia ever killing someone being less than the potential danger that a free person might kill some one, I was speaking about the potential danger in the future if she was captured and confined. I was not suggesting that the geass command had not used her body to kill people before Lelouch faced her and had his last chance to change his mind.
For example, Charles Manson killed people before he was arrested. And he has been locked up for almost forty years. During that time millions of innocent children who each seemed millions of times less dangerous than him have grown up and committed murders, while he has not managed to kill anyone. Clearly the potential danger represented by a Charles Mansion in confinement is much less than the potential danger represented by any free and innocent child who might grow up to be a killer.