i am for it because prison's are crowded enough as it is.
Are you for or against the death penalty?
- Thread starter McRocket
- Start date
jdb67 said:
Actually charging somebody with the death penalty is pretty expensive, it isn't like they just go up and shoot him in the head. There is a ton of lawyers and appeals, and just years and years of taking up the judicial systems time. You can't just start killing people without giving them appeals, and sometimes it takes more money to do that than to just keep them in jail.
Vegas Yankee said:
If somebody is that untreatable then put them in prison for the rest of their life. For everybody else I think their debt to society is fulfilled when they get out. A lot of the reason our system fails and people repeat offenses is do in large part because we set them up to fail when they get out. When you have no money, no job and you probably won't get hired anywhere, no where to go, no education, and you though them out on the street after they have lived in a situation where they had to watch their backs for years on end to make sure it didn't get stabbed what do you expect. At that point we either make sure they have a world that they can come back to or we will just have to kill almost every criminal, including people who only do things like drugs or theft, because they are going to commit the offenses again. They will do that because that is all they know, or that is what they have to do to survive. A lot of the reason people resort to crime in the first place is economic in nature.
jdb67 said:
There are problems with this. First unless the evidence is concrete nobody should ever get punished in a criminal case, so why reserve punishment to where the evidence is absolutely concrete just to capital cases.
Also, I wouldn’t like executing somebody that just confessed to the crime. I would be too afraid that the authorities tried to "extract" the confession out of him.
Hello All,
To all of you that have stated they are against the death penalty, let me guess ,you and your family have luckily never been victims of extreme violence/rape/murder. For this I can only say THANK YOU LORD. But why not think from the other side, in a civilized society there are rules that all must abide by. If I started a flame war on this forum wouldn't I get banned, which in essence is "killing me off" of this site. Mighty big penalty for just words on a screen, but those are the rules that we all must abide by.
I knew the rules and broke them so I must pay the price.
We have all been taught that there are consequences to all our actions,from our earliest years of life. At first it was a smack on the bottom only, but as we grew and learned more, the further we went astray from the rules,the stronger the penalty became.
We also all know other simple things, such as jumping in front of a fast moving train is very bad ,and that you will most likely die. Correct?? So unless your course of action is not to die a sane person would not do this.
Same thing with murder/rape/abusing children, WE ALL KNOW THIS IS WRONG FROM A VERY YOUNG AGE, NO SURPRISES HERE!!! So if the person knows the consequences and is not insane, then why shouldn't this piece of living garbage pay for his or her crimes with their lives.
I don't relish the idea of the death penalty but I do believe we need it and I think it should be used even more.
To all of you that have stated they are against the death penalty, let me guess ,you and your family have luckily never been victims of extreme violence/rape/murder. For this I can only say THANK YOU LORD. But why not think from the other side, in a civilized society there are rules that all must abide by. If I started a flame war on this forum wouldn't I get banned, which in essence is "killing me off" of this site. Mighty big penalty for just words on a screen, but those are the rules that we all must abide by.
I knew the rules and broke them so I must pay the price.
We have all been taught that there are consequences to all our actions,from our earliest years of life. At first it was a smack on the bottom only, but as we grew and learned more, the further we went astray from the rules,the stronger the penalty became.
We also all know other simple things, such as jumping in front of a fast moving train is very bad ,and that you will most likely die. Correct?? So unless your course of action is not to die a sane person would not do this.
Same thing with murder/rape/abusing children, WE ALL KNOW THIS IS WRONG FROM A VERY YOUNG AGE, NO SURPRISES HERE!!! So if the person knows the consequences and is not insane, then why shouldn't this piece of living garbage pay for his or her crimes with their lives.
I don't relish the idea of the death penalty but I do believe we need it and I think it should be used even more.
D-rock said:
I beg to differ on that, It is about how much money you have and the quality of your Legal team. How many "rich" people have been found guilty of murder, Rape etc???
The U.S. Legal system is a Circus!!! What the fuck is Court TV, Judge Judy and the rest of that shit??? Yes we get all of that Bullshit down here via Cable!!! The Micheal Jackson case was another peice of crap broadcasted all over the world!!!
It's about rating and controversy, not about Justice!!!
D-rock said:
When I say " admit to the Crime" I am refering to those freely admit through their Legal Reps via the Media, those that scream with Jubilation of commiting the crime, those that are seeking their 15 minutes of fame.
The Bali Bombers or Terrorists who have stood up in open court and screamed that they were responsible for the deaths of 202 people in the Sari Club on 12th October 2002. These are the people I am refering to.
Bear said:
Not me (maybe). My big brother died in very mysterious circumstances. He was burned to death. Now the police have left the case open, but unofficially they think it was suicide (which is what I probably believe). But they are not sure.
But what if he was murdered? He was found leaning over his engine compartment of his relatively new vehicle in the middle of nowhere. Sounds pretty fishy to most people I would think. And who actually burns themselves to death?
And even if someone came forward and admitted to killing him most horribly - and burning to death is pretty horrible (the coroner states that he was probably alive when the fire started). And even though I loved him very much and miss him;
I would still vote no to the death penalty.
I'm against, or atleast i'm gripping the fence and dangling on that side. I wouldn't mind a rapist having to spend a lifetime with a bunch of guys raping him. Wouldn't that be ironic.
A murderer put in a dark cell, no human contact....give him burnt toast and rotten milk...something out of a dumpster. Treat him to worse conditions then a homeless man. Then give his home to a homeless man. Win - Win....what bs right.
Yea I know, our legal system always screws up somewhere along the lines. Nobody is 100% with perfection....and wether you are for or against....you have to admit each has an upside and a downside. I'll take what they give me...both choices scare me...but I was brought up to respect another person. Laws don't stop me from putting a gun down, I was raised not to pick one up.
good posts all around...this has been a good thread. IMO
A murderer put in a dark cell, no human contact....give him burnt toast and rotten milk...something out of a dumpster. Treat him to worse conditions then a homeless man. Then give his home to a homeless man. Win - Win....what bs right.
Yea I know, our legal system always screws up somewhere along the lines. Nobody is 100% with perfection....and wether you are for or against....you have to admit each has an upside and a downside. I'll take what they give me...both choices scare me...but I was brought up to respect another person. Laws don't stop me from putting a gun down, I was raised not to pick one up.
good posts all around...this has been a good thread. IMO
Vegas Yankee said:
A police officer for some reason decides to attack you (maybe he couldnt take the pressure) when u are walking in the line of a demonstration. You see the officer aim his gun at your chest. Half a second later you stab the officer in self defense. In the court they find you guilty of first degree murder and ruthless manslaughter or whatever its called. You get death penalty.
Who made the mistake? Who is the one that put themselves outside the system?
This acutally happened in Italy during the G8 demonstration but as we all know they dont have death penalty there so the Para executed the guy on sight. All the guy did was to defend himself against another Para-police who used live ammo. My point here is that there will always be situations where someone will be jugded as bad and good. The question is who will be who and who will be the jugde?
Opatagio said:
That reminds me...I am still MAJORLY pissed off at the London cops that held down and killed that guy a month or two ago in the 'tube'. I saw his mother and family on BBC the other day. I do not give a fuck what their orders were or what had happened days earlier. It was an act of cowards or idiots or both - imo.
I realize it is unrelated.
Last edited:
i didn't weigh in on this one right away as i wanted to organize my thoughts and read some of the responses before saying anything...
meanwhile, it's my opinion that no person or state has the right to take life. of course, there are extreme instances, such as when one state is at war with another, in which it is, in theory, in self-defence or in defence of another person or state. war of aggression or conquest would be considered murder.
with that in mind, the death penalty is nothing more than revenge killing, and is nothing more than state-supported murder.
we could take other factors into account, such as the pain and suffering of the family, how many people an individual killed, the brutality of the murder, or even the cost of housing an inmate for his or her natural life. however, i think those factors cloud the issue and are not really relevant to the absolute question: is it right to kill another human being? to that i believe the answer is clear: unless your life or the life of someone else is in danger, then it is not right.
one last thought...i believe in life after death, and i also believe that that life, is at least some measures better than what we have here (topic for another thread mcrocket). i think the taking of freedom is far worse than the taking of life, and in terms of pure punishment, imprisonment is far worse than death.
great thread mcrocket...i see you're back on your existential meds...
meanwhile, it's my opinion that no person or state has the right to take life. of course, there are extreme instances, such as when one state is at war with another, in which it is, in theory, in self-defence or in defence of another person or state. war of aggression or conquest would be considered murder.
with that in mind, the death penalty is nothing more than revenge killing, and is nothing more than state-supported murder.
we could take other factors into account, such as the pain and suffering of the family, how many people an individual killed, the brutality of the murder, or even the cost of housing an inmate for his or her natural life. however, i think those factors cloud the issue and are not really relevant to the absolute question: is it right to kill another human being? to that i believe the answer is clear: unless your life or the life of someone else is in danger, then it is not right.
one last thought...i believe in life after death, and i also believe that that life, is at least some measures better than what we have here (topic for another thread mcrocket). i think the taking of freedom is far worse than the taking of life, and in terms of pure punishment, imprisonment is far worse than death.
great thread mcrocket...i see you're back on your existential meds...
Bear said:
Well that is sort of a loaded question. If I said I thought that somebody should die because they did something to my family then I would be undermining the argument I was trying to make. If I said I still didn't want the person to receive capital punishment then everybody would say the that there is no way that I could know, and I haven’t been put in that situation and ect….So that question in a way doesn't give me an answer that I could possibly reply to correctly. I would think and hope that my principles held up and I still wouldn't want the person put to death. Not if he couldn't hurt anybody anymore. I just think taking a life in the absence of self-defense is wrong in principle. Even for the people who are victoms or family members of victoms it isn't like they own this issue any more than the other people in this country.
My point was if there are established rules, like THOUGH SHALL NOT KILL, and established consequences [death penalty] if someone is stupid enough to break the rules then he should suffer the penalty.Why is this so hard to concieve? Why should the rest of society have to pay this persons way for years and years when he will never contribute anything. Shouldn't any money being spent on this trash be put to better use? Maybe other lives can be saved with the money spent paying for this scum of the world.
By the way,Thank God, no such tragedy has ever happened to anyone near and dear to me.
By the way,Thank God, no such tragedy has ever happened to anyone near and dear to me.
