What do you think about the death Penalty?

Originally posted by Panzeroth
They have already as I mentioned earlier, proved that they dont fit in. Why give them a second chance when there is such a high risk at stake?
Statistially, ex convicts are more likely to commit crimes again. There is no need to predict, they already did it.

Yes,they are more likely to commit crimes again, but what I am saying is that there are alternatives to the death penalty. We don't live in a besieged society, in a fundamentalist society. We don't need to apply the harsh measures that would be justified in exceptional times.

Because in my opinion killing one person already qualifies you for the death penalty. There is no point in giving them a milder punishment because some other guy killed two, three or fifty seven.

This is a little incoherent. If you support death penalty because of justice, you can't at the same time treat different crimes in the same way. It is a basic principle that punishment should be proportional to the crime. It seems that you consider that beyond a certain point, a crime is "beyond comprehension", and therefore we should "leave it to God" (some kind of atheist God, I think).

Originally posted by StarBreather
How good it is to recline on a chair in front of my computer screen and say, "I am safe".
Someone said: "they do not deserve to be a part of society".
But this is not the point. Being alive has nothing to do with being a part of society. They don't need to be a part of society, but they can be left alive.
You who are so careful about society, do you know how extreme acts can shape a society? In the middle ages
there were hanging devices everywhere, in public sight. Surely this must have had an influence.

This debate all comes to this point: what kind of society do you want to live in? Why do you baheve today as if you were a bunch of medieval ignorants?

Whats the point in keeping them alive in a cell? It only costs money and the ones left with one family member less because of that particular person's actions are always in fear of him/her getting out somehow, believe me, me and my family are in that exact situation. Or do you mean deport them to a place where they can't escape but not cause danger either like they did in Australia back then? utterly, utterly, utterly pointless.
More common use of capital punishment doesnt in any way lead to a society that resembles the medieval times, as any other law based system it requires caution and proper rule. it doesnt mean that we have to run around with swords yelling and piillage neighbouring countries.

There is one personal experience related here in this thread, the experience of the person who has been victimized be the death of someone close.

There is another kind of personal experience, which is: with all your convictions, if you are exposed to a situation where "they" tell you to do something (like, in the extreme: apply the "death penalty" to this person here), how would you react?

Many have reacted by not obeying, by deserting their "duties" to their particular society and going somewhere better

If you don't balance the welfare of society with the safety of the individual, you are just making society into another God, a very demanding and capricious God, just like the one we don't want.

What do you think about the death Penalty?

OK, I know this is going to be unpopular but working in Corrections will let a person see the underbelly of society.

I'm all for the DP. I would extend it to serial rapists and peodophiles. They are not rehabilitatable. That's a fact.

The theory that "an innocent" may get put down, yup, like a dog, is invalid in todays scientific world. We're talking serial here, not a stupid kid with rhohibnol.

Murderers that plan to whack somebody, this includes organized crime, peodophiles and serial predators cease being human imo, they are playing by THEIR rules. They should have their own punishments.

Originally posted by Panzeroth
Whats the point in keeping them alive in a cell? It only costs money and the ones left with one family member less because of that particular person's actions are always in fear of him/her getting out somehow, believe me, me and my family are in that exact situation. Or do you mean deport them to a place where they can't escape but not cause danger either like they did in Australia back then? utterly, utterly, utterly pointless.

If we lived 1000 years, we all would have members of our families that are victims, as well as perpetrators. If we lived longer, there would be more probability of finding ourselves on either side. I do not mean to make less of experiences I don't have, but I don't think personal contingencies can be a solid basis for argument.
The alternatives to the death penalty are just like you said, basically prison, deportation or forced work. Given so many alternatives, the death penalty seems pointless.

More common use of capital punishment doesnt in any way lead to a society that resembles the medieval times, as any other law based system it requires caution and proper rule. it doesnt mean that we have to run around with swords yelling and piillage neighbouring countries.

I hope not. On the other hand it is just the same, but now death is even legalized. After the death penalty, what's next? This way of thinking keeps working in the background, independent of anything else, like a subconscious process. At the end of the process, you will see the fruits of this way of thinking. Over a long time, it gives rise to extreme prejudice. The only reason why this is not apparent in places like the United States is because there hasn't been enough time yet.

Hey hunny you should move to Texas......they strongly believe in the death penalty and you would be closer to me

Any way I see both sides of the arugument.....
You make a very good point Knut.....but to me I have a conflict with the whole two wrongs don't make a right. Aren't we making the same mistake he/she did?.....Does this teach that it is ok to kill in revenge? I dunno. it's a tough one to me. I can't handle the moral issues with it. I find it hard to imagine killing out side of self defense. Also I think rotting in jail is more of a punishment. There is the issue with space and money it eats up though.
I dunno that is a tough one for me.

And let me say I grew up in Malaysia when I was young child and they had hangings open to public I think it was every wenesday or friday....so yes to this day they still punish like in the dark ages...k.

Originally posted by TetraSpace5
but to me I have a conflict with the whole two wrongs don't make a right. Aren't we making the same mistake he/she did?

Nope, you're missing the point, these people are NOT going to be rehabillitated, it's not an eye for an eye, it's removing individuals that would further hurt/kill innocent people. It's removing the contamination that would further stain humanity. Remove them for what they did AND what they will continue to do.

Rehabilitation is like many things: it doesn't work but you have to keep trying. Not to try is to give up on humanity.
And rehabilitation is just the smallest part of what can be done as an alternative. Meaning that rehabilitation should be a part of any long imprisonment term. In some cases it might even work.

Originally posted by StarBreather
Rehabilitation is like many things: it doesn't work but you have to keep trying. Not to try is to give up on humanity.
And rehabilitation is just the smallest part of what can be done as an alternative. Meaning that rehabilitation should be a part of any long imprisonment term. In some cases it might even work.

Yup and chalk up more victims that will live with what happened to them for the rest of their lives. The Lucky ones, the rest are dead.

Originally posted by intrepid
Yup and chalk up more victims that will live with what happened to them for the rest of their lives. The Lucky ones, the rest are dead.

The way I see rehabilitation is not with the unrealistic goal of releasing someone dangerous into society. Rehabilitation is a way of making some improvements where we can, no more. Another way of seeing it is this: with a certain kind of rehablitation you get a certain rate of success, lets say 1%. less reincidence. With a better kind of rehabiltation, you could get a rate of 2%, and so on. If you don't value rehabilitation, you won't find better methods.
The problem with the victims is that there is very little we can do for them. On the other hand, there is a lot we can do for the perpetrators. There is a choice we still have here; if we apply the death penalty, there is no choice. We will have stemmed the problem, but we will have made no contribution to the solution, in the long run.

StarBreather, I think you just made my point for me. Unless what you are saying that further victims is a viable option so that we might cure these predators. Personally, I don't see that as viable. Screw the deviants, protect the innocents imo.

Originally posted by intrepid
StarBreather, I think you just made my point for me. Unless what you are saying that further victims is a viable option so that we might cure these predators. Personally, I don't see that as viable. Screw the deviants, protect the innocents imo.

To protect the innocents you don't need the death penalty. The predators are a very small minority, then life imprisonment can't be so expensive that we, as a society, can't afford it. Then there is standards: if you have low standards for the treatment of the useless, it lowers the standards overall.

Sorry SB, do you know anything about the criminal justice system? Read that as lawyers. It's their job to "get them out". And they do. Karla Holmoka is out now. Murderess/sex felon.

I'm NOT talking about "an eye for an eye", I'm talking reality, can't cure them, let them out to ruin other lives? HELL NO imo. Do you think you would have a different opinion if this issue touched your life? Are you willing to gamble with other peoples innocence?

I'm not!

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
"Punishment must be unusual or it serves no purpose." Lt. Col DuBois Terran Mobile Infantry - From Heinlein's "Starship Troopers"


well if we dont execute em then what do we do with them? let them sit there and think about what they've done?

i agree...

murders, and pedifilers.....are those that deserve the death penalty..

especially pedifilers....

why does the goverment waste tax payers dollars trying to rehabilatate these sickos...there has never once been a succesful rehabilatation of a convicted pedifiler....i say just get rid of em

[edit on 26-1-2006 by Big_BIRD]

I am somewhat torn on the subject. Part of me says its right, and part of me says its wrong. The part of me that says its right tells me that there are people who certainly do not deserve to walk the Earth for the things they do and have done. This is purely due to the grotesque nature of their crimes. The other part says that these people who commit these sadistic crimes need help or just need to be put in prison for the rest of their days. I take no pleasure in knowing that people are dying, but I can not help but get so angry when I hear of these sadists who kill for pleasure. Its really easy to want to do to them(and love it) what they have done to others, essentially turning yourself into what you most despise. Its a tough issue to debate and thats because its an emotional issue.

Originally posted by ludaChris
I am somewhat torn on the subject. Part of me says its right, and part of me says its wrong. The part of me that says its right tells me that there are people who certainly do not deserve to walk the Earth for the things they do and have done. This is purely due to the grotesque nature of their crimes. The other part says that these people who commit these sadistic crimes need help or just need to be put in prison for the rest of their days. I take no pleasure in knowing that people are dying, but I can not help but get so angry when I hear of these sadists who kill for pleasure. Its really easy to want to do to them(and love it) what they have done to others, essentially turning yourself into what you most despise. Its a tough issue to debate and thats because its an emotional issue.

I quote your reply in it's entirety as it seems to encapsulate the issue in it's entirety.

By supporting what may feel right, emotionally, we are actually supporting that which we condemn.

So, the question remains, do we continue the status quo of an eye for an eye, or do we review and restructure our entire approach to dealing with the core issue, the cause. Obviously, there are no clear nor simple answers to that question. By simply revising the sentencing, to exclude a death penalty, we are still skirting the source. Perhaps the ultimate Catch-22.

Just my $.02 ... for now

''if it ain't broken, don't fix it''.

there is no flaw in the death penalty. if an innocent man ends up on death row and ultimately gets the DP...that's not a flaw in the DP. that's a flaw somewhere else in the system, starting with the lawyers, jury and judge. as it is their job to find the guilty people. so there's not much point bringing up the situation of innocent people dying on death row, as it's the fault of the justice system way before they even get on death row.

there's a few that seem to think overall god is the judge, hence we shouldn't be doing the judging ourselves. well in that case, surely by us using the DP, we are sending those people to heaven...to the pearly white gates, and if god wants them, then he takes them...if not they go to hell. so i'm not sure what these god-lovers arguement is, as god still supposedly judges the people that get the DP...we're just sending them sooner rather than later.

having a lethal injection, is most likely no different to a general anesthetic...you go to sleep. it's probably the most humane way, even though the people on death row deserve to face a rifle squad.

the thing is, the DP isn't going anywhere too fast, so get used to it. also you've probably got the most christian and god-loving person in american government (george bush)...and if he thought that god ultimately didn't like the DP, he'd probably do something about it. although then again his god also doesn't mind that he goes to other countries and slaughters innocent people. and that's the hypocrisy of it all. it's ok to slaughter innocent people during war, but it's not ok to kill a murderer humanely.

Originally posted by Panzeroth
Not that way silly willy, I meant a rule by humans who use their head instead of an book that was written ages ago by people who lived under completely different circumstances, in a completely different world and in need of completely different things to give their life meaning without opposing what was then conidered logical.

Thanks for clarifying, and glad that what I heard was misunderstanding because that sounded very personal. I'm good, back in the game now, let's play!

Double-backing to your second point from post previous to this one:

Originally posted by Panzeroth
Interesting view this god of your has on justice. I'm open for discussion, but biblical quotes and references are by no means concidered valid argument to me. What is more interesting and on topic is whether or not criminals to this extent can contribute to the progression of mankind and it's already sky high list of problems. In my opinion they arent, and trash goes in the garbage.

Hokay, I have a problem with any life being considered "garbage" despite how despicable their acts. Yes they need to be in chains, yes they should have an armed guard to blow-out their kneecaps if they try to run (my 7th grade teacher was a prison guard at night, interesting stories he'd tell), but no we shouldn't be giving them freedom from their responsibilities to society. A lot of people pick on the slave-system of the Bible, but scholars will tell you that it was implemented to work off a debt or other "wrong". Great idea huh? We've got loads of work to do in this country, why are we wasting physical resources and at the same time educating violators of the law what it means to be a contributing member of society?

Originally posted by Panzeroth
You're born with a brain, use it.

I don't want to. Kidding! Kidding...oh please don't take me seriously this time....

Originally posted by Panzeroth
How come in a biblical point of view you are allowed to defend yourself against attakers, killing them if neccesary, but not discharge of potential re-killers?

I hear what you're saying and though you'll have as many different shades of answers as you would colors in a Deluxe Crayola Box, I had recently discussed this with thelibra (kudos for his help in exploring the topic). I believe I would use force to restrain my brother who was about to commit a heinous act, brute if necessary, but not kill. I don't think the words, "You shall not..." are open to interpretation.

Originally posted by Panzeroth
It's basially the same thing, only difference is that the "re-killers" have already commited the crime once.

Anyone who kills is a killer: www.m-w.com... . I don't care how many merit badges society gives you, whether your part of the government, law enforcement, or military, the definition stands. I understand the military has a point and a purpose and am not one to argue with the president's decision in using them from my little chair, but law enforcement does have options with current technology with stun-effect weaponry and gas grenades.

Originally posted by Panzeroth
I'm not saying everybody who are done serving time in jail for a murder kill again, but really there is no point in giving them a chance to MAYBE not repeat themselves.

I'm not advocating the release of murders.

Originally posted by Panzeroth
Besides, as I already said, they've spilled their share of milk. Trash -> trashcan.

Again with the "trash" analogy. To that I say I hope you haven't made any mistakes to where anyone would consider you "trash" as well.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so that's what it's all about? you believe in god so you are forgiven...it's like built in guilt you have or something?

I believe that Christ died and was resurrected to pay the sin debt I've accumulated and am forgiven. It's not a "guilt-patch" as being represented here. It's recognition that I'm imperfect. Are you perfect shauny?

Thanks intrepid for bringing your daily experiences here. I think in doing so will be invaluable for this discussion. I repect and appreciate it.

Originally posted by intrepid
OK, I know this is going to be unpopular but working in Corrections will let a person see the underbelly of society.

I'm all for the DP. I would extend it to serial rapists and peodophiles. They are not rehabilitatable. That's a fact.

Wait a sec, you say you work in "Corrections" yet "they are not rehabilitatable". Does anyone else see a problem with this statement?

Originally posted by intrepid
The theory that "an innocent" may get put down, yup, like a dog, is invalid in todays scientific world.

It's a low probability, not invalid. By that thinking, no-one should ever hope for a miracle...and having zero faith is candidly disheartening.

Originally posted by intrepid
We're talking serial here, not a stupid kid with rhohibnol.

Murderers that plan to whack somebody, this includes organized crime, peodophiles and serial predators cease being human imo, they are playing by THEIR rules. They should have their own punishments.

Agreed. But wouldn't implimenting the death penalty to a great extent significantly reduce the number of employees in your profession? Do you believe what you do has a positive effect on the people (criminals though they may be) you're working with?

[edit on 27-1-2006 by saint4God]

[edit on 27-1-2006 by saint4God]