What do you think about the death Penalty?

We should institute one rule in using the death penalty:

It's okay as long as nobody gets hurt.

That should stop a lot of murders.

Originally posted by saint4God
Hehe, no. What harm is there in me taking another slap?

but then again, where's the harm in not taking another slap? change that to being stabbed...would you stand there and let the person stab you again. all this slapping, seems a little pre-madonna. slapping is normally associated with women...so maybe this comes from women hitting men, and that men shouldn't hit back... hence, turn the other cheek, but don't get angry and strike them back.

Is that because the emotional state would affect my accuracy? I agree, hitting should be done in a cold, calculated manner. There is some logic in there somewhere. When convicting criminals, vengeance and revenge are not relevent to the sentencing. I have twice posted how the death penalty could be applied in a manner that virtually eliminates innocents being executed. If life in prison is inhumane, and the perp. has killed enough victims to deserve that, then, humanely execute the person. My motive for this is I see little chance that a repeat offender can be trusted to re-enter society. And, even though life in prison may be preferable to that person, it is not to me.

I am against the death penalty.

the death penalty would be a good deterrant if it didnt take so long to enforce,there shouldnt be any appeals on the most proven guilty cases(say the ones with the most convincing evidence) and it should be carried out within 2 weeks.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
but then again, where's the harm in not taking another slap?

Anger, revenge, spite, yadda yadda. It's the heart that's the crux.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
change that to being stabbed...would you stand there and let the person stab you again.

Hmm...tough one. Though I have no problem submitting to death (you know we're all going to do it someday) and my company will pay my family 2x my base salary should that happen which pays off half of the house, I'd have to say I would probably plead with her/him to snap out of it and look at what they're doing, repercussions, etc. I'd not want them to go to jail because they had issue with me.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
all this slapping, seems a little pre-madonna. slapping is normally associated with women...

So is kissing, but the men of the Bible encourage each other to do that too. Sorry 'bout the culture shock.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so maybe this comes from women hitting men, and that men shouldn't hit back... hence, turn the other cheek, but don't get angry and strike them back.

By George I think he's got it! Apply to man or woman though. Bottom line: Don't get angry and strike them back. Now, let's apply this philosophy to the topic at hand. The question becomes why execute? It isn't to prevent them from doing it again because we've proven we can lock 'em in a box for the rest of their lives. The result is the same. Many who are looking to execute want retribution. That is to say, they are angry with what the person did and want to see them dead.

[edit on 1-2-2006 by saint4God]

Originally posted by saint4God
Bottom line: Don't get angry and strike them back. Now, let's apply this philosophy to the topic at hand. The question becomes why execute? It isn't to prevent them from doing it again because we've proven we can lock 'em in a box for the rest of their lives. The result is the same. Many who are looking to execute want retribution. That is to say, they are angry with what the person did and want to see them dead.

so is it that we shouldn't get angry? because jesus got angry and threw the tables around in the temple, overturned them etc...you must have some sort of anger in you to do that. so it's not that we shouldn't be angry...more control it perhaps.

lets take a scenario of a person who's been convicted of multiple murders, and for arguements sake, lets say 5. am i angry at him? am i angry at this random person thousands of miles away, who has commited these crimes?...very doubtful. so if i'm not angry, who is? obviously relatives of the victims, the jury who have listened to the case and the judge. and maybe a few people from the town who were close friends of the victims. those will be the ones who are angry. and if so, what right does anyone have, who isn't directly affected by this, to say that their anger is wrong or directed wrong. it's easy to sit here and say the death penalty is wrong when you've never been directly affected. i'm sure if you're whole family was raped, murdered and tortured infront of you...and you were left to live, you would not get up and shake the hand of the person that did that to your family. and if you did...shame on you.

so...lock the person up in a cell for the rest of their life, whilst the victim's friends and family pay taxes so he can stay in that cell, have three meals a day etc. so even though he's away from society, he still gets better treatment than millions around the world, who haven't done anything wrong. so as for 'punishment', the only punishment is that he won't ever be let out in to society again. to me that doesn't really seem at all like a punishment or retribution for 5 murders.

besides them sitting in a cell for the rest of their lives, there has to be something else. and at the moment that 'something else' is the death penalty. whether it's right or wrong, that is the 'something else' apart from a life in prison, that's all we have.

[edit on 1-2-2006 by shaunybaby]

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so is it that we shouldn't get angry? because jesus got angry and threw the tables around in the temple, overturned them etc...you must have some sort of anger in you to do that. so it's not that we shouldn't be angry...more control it perhaps.

I think many believers would agree with that. It complies with what Paul and the book to Timothy has to say about self-discipline. I personally would rather not get angry at all, which avoids the temptation to do wrong full-stop.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
lets take a scenario of a person who's been convicted of multiple murders, and for arguements sake, lets say 5. am i angry at him? am i angry at this random person thousands of miles away, who has commited these crimes?...very doubtful. so if i'm not angry, who is? obviously relatives of the victims, the jury who have listened to the case and the judge. and maybe a few people from the town who were close friends of the victims. those will be the ones who are angry. and if so, what right does anyone have, who isn't directly affected by this, to say that their anger is wrong or directed wrong. it's easy to sit here and say the death penalty is wrong when you've never been directly affected. i'm sure if you're whole family was raped, murdered and tortured infront of you...and you were left to live, you would not get up and shake the hand of the person that did that to your family. and if you did...shame on you.

"Fear is the path of the dark side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering." - Yoda. Seriously though, it parallels both the gospels and epistles.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
so...lock the person up in a cell for the rest of their life, whilst the victim's friends and family pay taxes so he can stay in that cell, have three meals a day etc. so even though he's away from society, he still gets better treatment than millions around the world, who haven't done anything wrong. so as for 'punishment', the only punishment is that he won't ever be let out in to society again. to me that doesn't really seem at all like a punishment or retribution for 5 murders.

Two things. First, I never said to give them a lap of luxury. I believe they should be contributors to society, though removed from it. There's plenty of work they could do. Secondly, from a Godless perspective, how is death a punishment to those who hate this world?

Originally posted by shaunybaby
besides them sitting in a cell for the rest of their lives, there has to be something else. and at the moment that 'something else' is the death penalty. whether it's right or wrong, that is the 'something else' apart from a life in prison, that's all we have.

Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. "Status quo" is not an acceptable answer for me, sorry.

Originally posted by saint4God
Two things. First, I never said to give them a lap of luxury. I believe they should be contributors to society, though removed from it. There's plenty of work they could do.

what would you suggest. and what if they're not in any fit state to contribute any sort of work?

Secondly, from a Godless perspective, how is death a punishment to those who hate this world?

i think the 10 or more years people can spend on death row is punishment enough. that's probably more the punishment...all that waiting.

Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. "Status quo" is not an acceptable answer for me, sorry.

well you aren't suggesting any sort of other way to deal with them. obviously to just put them in a cell wouldn't be enough, but they already have prisoners that do labour and work during their prison life...multiple murderers, just doing that?...doesn't seem like it's a punishment any different from doing a range of crimes.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
what would you suggest. and what if they're not in any fit state to contribute any sort of work?

Telemarketing . Sorry, that was my old job...possibly my new one if this merger doesn't work out. How about coal ming? Folding letters for charity mailings? Landfill maintenance?

Originally posted by shaunybaby
i think the 10 or more years people can spend on death row is punishment enough. that's probably more the punishment...all that waiting.

I agree that living is probably seen as more punishment than death. Working doubly so.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
well you aren't suggesting any sort of other way to deal with them. obviously to just put them in a cell wouldn't be enough, but they already have prisoners that do labour and work during their prison life...multiple murderers, just doing that?...doesn't seem like it's a punishment any different from doing a range of crimes.

We've got all these Criminal Justice majors that graduate from college every year working well below the salary that they should get (by working in security, telesales, customer service, etc). Employ them to find a better way. They've taken Criminal Psychology and such as their course-load. I wouldn't recommend taking my ideas as begin expert, though doesn't mean I'm without ideas or solution.

[edit on 1-2-2006 by saint4God]

Sorry Guys, but I think We need to keep this one!
When most of you were kids do you remember what would keep you from doing most things? Your Mother or Father kicking our butt !!
This is be nice crap is not working for the real bad people out there!
I would not think twice about doing something If I know that I could get away with it if I did not have Honer in myself.
Someone that outright kills someone should be put to death. If they are fond with all the accuseing evidence then that's it. Game over for the bad guy! With-en the week get it over!
I am not one that likes to see others die!!! I do like to see crime and punishment fit.
One of the best laws I have seen come out now is the 10,20,life !
I think We do need to spend more on rehabilitation to help make it so that people that do get out of jail stay out.

the death penalty is lame, since when did doing two wrongs fix a right? doesn't it make more sense for him to have to live his whole life in solitary? i also don't think the prision system is all that anymore. i remember when the prisions ust to be completely self sucificent and now all of our tax dolloars is going to pay for their electricity. don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Originally posted by Mr101Hazardous
Sorry Guys, but I think We need to keep this one!
When most of you were kids do you remember what would keep you from doing most things? Your Mother or Father kicking our butt !!

That is, until we got used to the butt-kicking and didn't care anymore. Or are you saying murders are weak-willed and will be detered by corporal punishment?

Originally posted by Mr101Hazardous
This is be nice crap is not working for the real bad people out there!

Who said being nice? Looking back on the thread, I think I may be the closest to saying such, though the punishment I speak of is probably viewed by the detainee as worse than death.

Originally posted by Mr101Hazardous
I would not think twice about doing something If I know that I could get away with it if I did not have Honer in myself. Someone that outright kills someone should be put to death. If they are fond with all the accuseing evidence then that's it. Game over for the bad guy! With-en the week get it over!

I see, so if you're suicidal, may as well kill some other people first, right? That way someone will kill you for you since you don't seem to have the nerve....

Originally posted by Mr101Hazardous
I am not one that likes to see others die!!!

I'm unconvinced. I'd like to see this tested. Perhaps you and I could witness and execution sometime and see if our feelings have changed. No, don't think I could watch without making a scene. Vengence, retribution, fear, anger, that's why we envoke the death penalty. It's not about justice because the murderer escapes his/her responsibility for her/his actions.

Originally posted by Mr101Hazardous
I do like to see crime and punishment fit.
One of the best laws I have seen come out now is the 10,20,life !

It's interesting, but speaks nothing of the death penalty: www.dc.state.fl.us...

Originally posted by Mr101Hazardous
I think We do need to spend more on rehabilitation to help make it so that people that do get out of jail stay out.

The question is, "Does that work?" I'm open for hearing some thoughts on this.

Originally posted by saint4God
The question is, "Does that work?" I'm open for hearing some thoughts on this.

well, recently in england two boys, who are now aged 18/19 were released in to society, given new identities and new lives. their crime? when they were 12 they took a boy of about 4 or 5, beat him, tortured him and left him on a rail way track to die.

should we rehabilitate murderers, rapists and child molesters? what use are they in our society. would you want a convicted rapist or child molester teaching your child in school? why should these people even get the chance of rehabilitation, because they certainly do not deserve it.

I would agree that rehabilitation does not work, and would invite anyone to substantiate that it does. So, I don't advocate a release back into society. Rather, they've elected a life in a community of people who'd committed the same offense. Should they see the Light and want to share it with others, why then give them to society? Instead they'd do much more good with the people in their brother/sisterhood in the confined community. I think the difficulty with parole is we confuse "good deeds" with being good. That's an ugly mistake, and one that's common not only in the justice system, but in everyday life. Not everyone who does "good" is a good person.

[edit on 3-2-2006 by saint4God]

Originally posted by Submersible
I believe the death penalty should be administered on a much swifter, accurate, and daily routine basis.

Obviously people, hate and war is not the answer, and two wrongs do not make a right....
but you all know damn good and well that there are a lot of monsters that do not deserve, nor do they have the 'right' to be caged and fed for years by all of us after they have destroyed the life of another person.

If a man or woman has proven to be dangerous to the life of others, they does not deserve to live among peacefull loving people, he or she does not deserve the chance to be rehabilitated or serve their time and be released back into the world as a 'free' person.
AFAIC, if you put your hands on another person with the intentions of beating or killing them, then you are an animal and you should be killed.
Somewhere the line has to be drawn,
either kill everybody that has been proven to be quilty of destroying somebody else's life,
or keep feeding them while storing them in a cage untill they die of old age.
To me, the latter is much more inhumane.

The fundamentals of this issue stem to several of the other 'greatest' issues in our world.
When a person choses to act like an animal and prey upon others, there should be someone with the authority to treat them like a sick animal and take away their opportunity to make others live in fear or misery.
Nobody is in control, and it is very likely that anybody or one group of people ever will take control of our evolution. The illusion that we are living free has clouded the reality that unless we are restricted in some form or another, we will remain free just long enough to cause ourselves to become extinct.


Killem' all ! Let their FATHER sort them out.

VERY well said!
My uncle was murdered, he was taken brutally, savagely away from us...his young wife and baby. For no other reason, than the person who did it...was broke,didn't get past the 8th grade,drug addict. Who thought society owed him something. Yea they do..disposing of you. I think the claim of rehabilitation is total BS. You have the mind to kill an innocent person, there is something fatally wrong with you. I don't think that just *POOF* disappears.

Originally posted by saint4God
I would agree that rehabilitation does not work, and would invite anyone to substantiate that it does. So, I don't advocate a release back into society.

well if you don't agree with rehabilitation, yet it still goes on, does that mean that rehabilitation is wrong? sure some people can never be rehabilitated, but that doesn't mean that no one can.

the same as you don't agree with the DP, but that still goes on, does that mean therefore that is wrong also? because maybe some people don't ultimately deserve the DP as they were wrongly convicted or their crimes were not justifiable for the DP, but in many cases it was justified to use the DP for many people.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
well if you don't agree with rehabilitation, yet it still goes on, does that mean that rehabilitation is wrong? sure some people can never be rehabilitated, but that doesn't mean that no one can.

I have no problem with trying to rehabilitate someone, though don't see the justification to release back into society for what appears to be cured. It should be apparent that if it happens again, the person is not cured.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
the same as you don't agree with the DP, but that still goes on, does that mean therefore that is wrong also? because maybe some people don't ultimately deserve the DP as they were wrongly convicted or their crimes were not justifiable for the DP, but in many cases it was justified to use the DP for many people.

I believe it is wrong.

Originally posted by saint4God
I believe it is wrong.

i believe war is wrong, but sometimes it's 'neccessary'.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
i believe war is wrong, but sometimes it's 'neccessary'.

I'd like to discuss this in more detail. Perhaps if you'd like to start a new thread on it or continue on an old one? It is an issue that weighs heavily upon my heart as well.