The Death Penalty: A Steaming Pile of Horsecrap

[ZeroVX]

Being that you made the claim, you have the burden of proof. So yes, please provide one iota of evidence. It will be the most evidence you have ever provided.

Penn and Teller. Look it up.

Great, in some situation. Did I ever say it was 100% effective? Fuck no, I didn't. But, if it has saved any lives, which you can't prove it hasn't, just like you can't prove any one has been falsely put to death, then you have no legs to stand on.

And on the other hand, you can't prove that it has saved any lives, nor that no one hasn't been put to death under false pretenses. It's the issue that it CAN happen.

How did I put words in your mouth. I merely proved that your arguments about compassion are bullshit because you are only against killing when it fits your agenda.

There, you did it again. What "agenda" do I supposedly have?

This is a stupid argument. By both of us. This is what deserves another thread. My point is that you have no problem ending the life of a child while complaining about ending the life of a murderer. That doesn't work.

I already suggested that you make another thread. You chose not to. Your own fault there. And again, it's not the life of a child if it's not even alive yet.

OK, that's not a political argument. That is a you are a liberal argument. Liberal is ideology, not politics. You don't know the difference. That's OK. I don't expect intelligence from you. Debating you is like when we used to practice against the JV. We got our reps in and it helped us get ready to face real competition.

Liberalism is primarily used in politics. If you can name an example where liberal ideology is used in something besides that, please do so.

So, now you are saying that people shouldn't have to face consequences for their action. Pregnancy happens and sex is how it happens. If you go into sex expecting no consequences, then you are an idiot. But hey, no death penalty and yes abortion, so I am guessing that consequences aren't too important for you. I mean, why worry about what could go wrong when you live in Zero's fantasy world where it's all OK and eighth place gets a ribbon. Not only are you an idiot, but people like you are symptomatic of what's wrong with the world today.

They're called condoms. They can break. Therefore, accident. I'm the virgin here, and yet I think of this stuff. That's funny.

At what point do they stop being accidents and start becoming signs of reckless behavior? Making excuses and rationalizing everything is the first step in the path to complete and utter chaos. There must be some system of punishment, and you seem to be completely OK with undermining it to make sure everyone can continue to behave with complete disregard for order.

And now you bring in the "people would be irresponsible" argument. Yeah, some people will abuse it, so let everyone else suffer. That's totally fair.

OK dumbass. I gave two scenarios. Separate them, understand the premise, and then reject it because you aren't smart enough to answer it.

Well, maybe you should type the scenarios as separate paragrpahs so as to be coherent.

In fact, let me explain it to you. The woman gets the full decision on whether or not both of the people in the pregnancy have to take any responsibility, and that is unfair and stupid.

If the woman doesn't want a man's input as to whether or not she should abort the baby, then she shouldn't have to receive it. If she decides not to abort it, then yes, the man should have some input on what to do.

But, you haven't addressed the people who aren't on death row, and it's why you fail. You will never find someone who says they didn't kill because of the death penalty but I guarantee they exist.

And neither will you, so your argument holds no water. How can you guarantee something that you don't know?

Actually, it's not my call. You see, in the US, there is a group of twelve people impaneled to make those decisions. Those people are called a jury. They decide innocence and guilt. Then, there is a judge. He decides the appropriate punishment.

He's a judge. Not a God. He didn't create life, so he shouldn't have the right to take it. This applies to pretty much every human being on the plant.

But, we can agree on one thing. Murderers are bad people, right? I mean, even you can understand that, right?

Obviously. Hence why the death penalty is a bad idea. Regardless of the motivations behind it, it's still murder. Whether it's to someone who has or hasn't murdered already.

Yeah, they should. Why not? This is another blanket statement that you have made in your supposed case by case analysis of the situation.

If they don't create life, they shouldn't be able to take it.

Why not? In that case, groups of representatives shouldn't determine when life starts either. Which one is it? Killing is good or killing is bad. You have made both arguments time and again, and it's just one of your contradictions.

I have never once said that killing is good. You're once again putting words in my mouth. You are right in that groups of representatives shouldn't make the judgment call involving the beginning of life, however.

You are the stupidest fucking person alive. You are the one who's orginal post is one giant blanket statement. Now, all of a sudden you are looking at things in a case by case basis. My Lord, after reading your posts I am not only for abortion, I am for forced abortion.

Again, I can look at things from more than one perspective, while you can't. You group every case into the one that happens the most because it's easier for you.

You see, I do it on purpose. Your name is stupid, so I make fun of it.

That's pretty lame. That's like me calling you FromSouthernStates.

Pot, meet kettle.

Is depression now not a disease? Is the entire AMA wrong because it doesn't fit in your ******ed arguments? Seriously? Depression is a disease. It's why people commit suicide and all.

I just said I'm not going into this. Make another thread if you want to discuss this and placate your ego even more.

You say this about the section that was voted section of the year by the members of this site. Hey look, it's your dumb ass not letting facts get in the way of your pointless idiotic rants.

Almost all of the threads in here have the same people posting in them, with very few posts in them save for the ones involving you and me, or you and Razor. Infer from that what you will.

 

[The Gribbler]

Screw the circumstances. Screw the law. The end result is the same. They're dead, due to murder. I don't care how they killed or were killed, they're still dead. It's simply not right.

It's got nothing to do with religion. It has to do with morals. And it is morally wrong to kill someone. That is what we are taught. It's not "It's wrong to kill someone, unless they did this and this and this".

I take a couple of issues with your statement - Why is someone being killed morally wrong? I wasn't taught that killing is wrong, I was taught that MURDER is wrong but there is a different definition as far as I am concerned.

I don't know what upbringing you had but don't assume that mine was the same by saying "we were taught this this and this" because you don't know what I was taught.

Everyone in the world has a different viewpoint on what is morally right and wrong, there are no absolute moral truths my friend.

As far as my moral conscience, if someone slaughters innocent people or rapes an innocent person; I would feel completely morally clear in shooting that sick son of a bitch in the head.

Im sorry but the greater good really is on the line here. I don't want to pay to look after these criminals in prisons, I don't want them alive and at risk to society (people do break out of prison, even if thats one in ever ten million thats one to many that get a second crack at murdering innocent people) and really, I just don't feel that they deserve to live.

Just My Opinion

 

[Jack-Hammer]

When it comes to the Death Penalty, I'm not certain where I stand. I'm not an overly religious person but I've been taught that judgement is ultimately in the hands of God. Now, while that might be true, we have to muttle along through this plane of existence the best we can. We may not always be right or wrong in the eyes of God, but all we have to go on is what we feel is right. That's part of what free will is all about.

For me, the Death Penalty should apply only in very very very rare circumstances in which there is no doubt of both the severity of the crime and that the person or persons convincted of said crime or crimes is guilty. There are far too many incidents in which people are sent to prison for crimes that they didn't commit. I've seen several stories shown on CNN over the past year telling of men released from prison after serving years, decades in some cases, after DNA testing proved that they weren't responsible for the crimes.

Too often people are convicted on evidence that is entirely circumstantial, some of which isn't very reliable at all. More people have been sent to prison based on eyewitness accounts than anything else, yet eyewitness testimony has been proven time and time again to be unreliable in many situations. As bad as it is to be wrongly convicted, and I can't begin to imagine the kind of hell that is, people can be released from prison. Once you strap them to the table and shove a needle full of poison into their veins, that's something different.

Also, if there is evidence to suggest that a person might be innocent of the crime or crimes they've been convicted of, it can be hell sometimes even getting someone to listen. Too often, courts are more concerned with procedures, regulations and ceremony rather than a person's life. There are too many judges and d.a.s interested in their own reputations and what their part in convicting someone can mean to the potential advancement of their own careers.

If a convict's attorney bases his/her client's appeal based on DNA information, they have to go through all the paperwork, filing forms for this, filling out these documents to obtain that, etc. that it takes forever to even get before the appeals court in some cases and, even then, it may all be for nothing. There are instances in which DNA has shown to prove the innocence of some but isn't permitted to be used in appeals court because it hadn't been obtained properly or the warrant to collect the sample wasn't properly signed or this or that. I suppose my point is that there are a thousand different little technicalities that judges sometimes do and sometimes don't pay attention to that can determine a person's fate. The law can make you its bitch in so many different ways that you'll feel like you just got fucked by a freight train.

As I said earlier, if there is no doubt at all that a person is guilty and the crime is heinous enough, then I suppose I do favor the death penalty. A little more than 10 years ago, a friend of mine was raped on New Year's Eve 2000 by her date, a guy she'd known for several years. He beat her, brutally raped her, sodomized her, etc. He beat her so severely that she still suffers effects from it to this day. She has to have kidney dialysis about 10 times a year and it's probably something that will only worsen as she gets older, as things like that tend to do. She had his skin under her fingernails, his semen inside and all over her, she was so frightened of him during her testimony in court that she threw up on the witness stand, they had numerous pictures of her injuries, etc. The guy was convicted and he only got 10 years. He eventually wound up committing suicide inside. She also has post traumatic stress disorder and has flashbacks sometimes, been seeing a therapist on and off since that time, sleeps maybe 2 hours a night, sometimes dreams about him and the thought of another man touching her sexually makes her physically ill. In short, the man that raped my friend has basically ruined her life and there's no doubt whatsoever to the man's guilt. In some ways, what he's done to her was worse than killing her. I think he deserved to die for what he did to her and that's not because of how severe the crime was against her, but because I know for a rock hard fact that he did it. It's not a hunch, not a gut feeling, it's not something that I heard from someone on a witness stand that may have saw him leaving her house at a certain time or any of the other circumstantial stuff. She didn't beat herself, she didn't kick herself repeatedly in the kidneys, his skin didn't mystically appear under her nails nor did his semen teleport itself on her.

Is the Death Penalty sometimes imposed unfairly? In my opinion, absolutely. There are many cases in which too many questions remain. There are real monsters in this world, only they don't look like the monsterous boogeymen from film and television. They look just like the rest of us. If such a person commits a crime, is caught and proven beyond any doubt to be guilty, then I have no problem with said person being put to death.

 

[ZeroVX]

I take a couple of issues with your statement - Why is someone being killed morally wrong? I wasn't taught that killing is wrong, I was taught that MURDER is wrong but there is a different definition as far as I am concerned.

I don't know what upbringing you had but don't assume that mine was the same by saying "we were taught this this and this" because you don't know what I was taught.

Everyone in the world has a different viewpoint on what is morally right and wrong, there are no absolute moral truths my friend.

As far as my moral conscience, if someone slaughters innocent people or rapes an innocent person; I would feel completely morally clear in shooting that sick son of a bitch in the head.

Im sorry but the greater good really is on the line here. I don't want to pay to look after these criminals in prisons, I don't want them alive and at risk to society (people do break out of prison, even if thats one in ever ten million thats one to many that get a second crack at murdering innocent people) and really, I just don't feel that they deserve to live.

Killing a human being = murder. It's the same thing. The act is the same, regardless of the intentions behind it. I would hope what you were taught falls into that general category.

And how can you say you would be morally clear in that situation if you've never been in that situation? You can theorize all you like, until you actually have the gun pointed at someone's head, you don't know.

If you don't want to pay for criminals in jail, and would rather send them to death, then that would mean you'd send people to death row for even the most minor crimes. Taxes include everyone in prison, regardless of what crime they committed. And again, human beings should not have the right to decide who deserves to live and who doesn't. No human can comprehend how a person's life or lack thereof will affect the rest of the world.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

And how can you say you would be morally clear in that situation if you've never been in that situation? You can theorize all you like, until you actually have the gun pointed at someone's head, you don't know.

I've been in such a situation. I'm a Corrections Officer and I've had prisoners pull shanks pulled on me made from toothbrushes, pieces of metal taken from an inmate's bunk, a piece broken from a sink and honed, pens, pencils, steel pipes, even had one that used to be a pez dispenser. Self preservation is the oldest instinct a human being has, it's also the most basic. I've been fortunate enough in my time to be able to, with the aid of other officers, to handle inmates with such weapons and often with a minimum of injury. However, if I'm ever in such a situation and me being able to see another sunrise means that I'd be forced to put an inmate down permanently, I'd do it and wouldn't lose a moment's sleep over it. I wouldn't be happy or get some thrill from it, but I could live with it. Some of those monsters I mentioned in a previous post are individuals that I've encountered over the course of my career. I've handled men to whom the rights, privledges and lives of other human beings don't mean anything whatsoever. To them, their needs are all that matters.

If you don't want to pay for criminals in jail, and would rather send them to death, then that would mean you'd send people to death row for even the most minor crimes. Taxes include everyone in prison, regardless of what crime they committed. And again, human beings should not have the right to decide who deserves to live and who doesn't. No human can comprehend how a person's life or lack thereof will affect the rest of the world.

Well, a major problem with the overpopulation in prisons is due to the fact that there are many prisoners incarcerated for non-violent offenses. In fact, most of the inmates in the facility I work are in prison for crimes that didn't result in the injury or death of anyone else. Maybe their actions could have potentially led to the injury or death of someone in some cases, but that's neither here nor there. There are prisoners that are truly rehabilitated and there are others that eventually go back to their criminal ways, but simply lumping most of them altogether for periods of incarceration within a correctional facility regardless of their crimes is an outdated and ineffective system in my view.

 

[The Gribbler]

Killing a human being = murder. It's the same thing. The act is the same, regardless of the intentions behind it. I would hope what you were taught falls into that general category.

And how can you say you would be morally clear in that situation if you've never been in that situation? You can theorize all you like, until you actually have the gun pointed at someone's head, you don't know.

If you don't want to pay for criminals in jail, and would rather send them to death, then that would mean you'd send people to death row for even the most minor crimes. Taxes include everyone in prison, regardless of what crime they committed. And again, human beings should not have the right to decide who deserves to live and who doesn't. No human can comprehend how a person's life or lack thereof will affect the rest of the world.

Killing a human being is not always murder. Self defence is not murder. Preserving your family is not murder, saving the lives of innocent people is not murder. I don't care if the act is the same - the circumstances surrounding it are different and thats the important part.

And don't come back at me with some bullshit about it being the same, because if you look to the letter of the law or even in life if you do something bad the entire situation is examined, not just the incident itself.

You punch someone, the law will look at the fact that he had a gun to your head. You shoot someone who was breaking into your house, possibly to perform some heinous act, the law will look at the fact that you acted out of self defence.

Circumstance matters.

You would hope that what I was taught falls into that general categotry? Stop treating our upbringings like they are supposed to be identical or even similar. I was raised in a respectful home with both of my parents, I was well diciplined, have never been in trouble with the law, have a good social life a steady girlfriend and am in university and yet I believe VERY differently than you do.

So stop saying "We were taught..." or "We all know..." because is generalising bullshit.

Your right I haven't been in that situation, I can only theorize. But I would rather stick with theorizing for now

And I can put my hatred for paying taxes to keep petty criminals in jail, but to those who are in the category I mentioned earlier, they just plain don't deserve treatment that nice.

 

[Razor]

The death penalty is State Sponsored Revenge. Plain and simple. Let me think of places that say "Hey, no revenge mmkay?"

Oh yeah.

The United States Penal Code: You can not attack someone based off of revenge. You can not steal someone's property simply because they stole your pencil. This is not an "eye for an eye" society.

Jesus motherflippin' Christ: Remember that dude that people like claim the Penal System of America is based off of (Bonus Points: It's not)? Yeah, I'm pretty sure "Turn the other cheek" means "Hey, don't kill a dude because he killed your mom."

God: Yeah, I'm counting him double. Christianity thinks that Jesus is God, but whatevs. God has been set up as the only person who can take vengeance on man for committing sins. Unless God himself came down to an Israelite and said "Kill him for me, will ya?" revenge killing wasn't really kosher.

So a man killed 15 people. Okay, he's in jail for life. Jail is not a happy place to be, guys. People shanking you, stealing your food, trying to rape you, beating you, the like.

What makes killing that man any better than killing 15 people?

I remember someone....somewhere...

Hey, Thou Shalt Not Kill

Or, really,

Murder: Don't do it.

According to God, (Christianity, Judaism, Islam), sins are all equal. Killing 15 is the same as killing one.

According to the Justice System, murder gets you a set amount of years in jail. Killing 15 just gets you more counts.

Him killing someone is just as bad as us killing him. In the eyes of your God, in the yes of the Justice System, in the eyes of everyone not blinded by revenge.

Oh yeah, and anyone else notice the sheer amount of Christians that are in favor of the Death Penalty in America? You'd think that they would know the very first Commandment. I mean, I understand if they didn't quite make it to the tenth. But the first? Not even cool, man.

 

[The Roid Rage]

Wow guys, I just realized how much I absolutely don't give a shit about the death penalty. I don't foresee myself on death row anytime soon, so it's really of no concern to me. I think if that is what you are sentenced for than you must have fucked up bad and that's shitty. But hey playboy guess what? You knew the rules of the game before you played, you rolled the dice and crapped out so fuck you, move along, next asshole in line please ?!

I can't say for sure what the answer is and I'm not going to pretend I do. Obviously it's questionable enough that you could all argue it well, which tells me neither side is right or else your argument could not be countered or points negotiated. But, whether it is totally right or wrong I can not say. What I can say is that I have no pity, mercy, or remorse for those in that situation. You make a hard bed, you have to lie in it, but that is a thought based on emotion and opinion which should have no bearing on deciding the right or wrong in the scenario.

It was very entertaining to read all your posts on this one. There were so many good points made by a lot of different people, and it seemed like most of you really put some thought into this topic. It was nothing short of electrifying watching FTS and Zero go at it a bit either. Good job guys, very vicious. I've said my peace.

 

[FromTheSouth]

The death penalty is State Sponsored Revenge. Plain and simple. Let me think of places that say "Hey, no revenge mmkay?"

You are assuming that capital punishment is revenge. It is not. it is the most logical step to maintain order under the Lockean social contract. Government has a reciprocal obligation to limit a criminal's rights in accordance to the liberties infringed upon by their action. We can apportion a value of stolen goods to days in jail, but when a life is taken, it there an appropriate amount of jail that equals the value of a life? Of course not. Capital punishment is what allows government to maintain order.

Oh yeah.

The United States Penal Code: You can not attack someone based off of revenge. You can not steal someone's property simply because they stole your pencil. This is not an "eye for an eye" society.

It's not revenge. Revenge is an action taken by the violated. This is a simple matter of the state stepping into it's role as arbiter on behalf of social order.

Jesus motherflippin' Christ:

Remember that dude that people like claim the Penal System of America is based off of (Bonus Points: It's not)? Yeah, I'm pretty sure "Turn the other cheek" means "Hey, don't kill a dude because he killed your mom."

I just want to make sure that a certified lefty is citing Jesus as the ultimate arbiter of what is right and wrong in a secular society. Umm, yeah, that's what I see. There is a reason that we didn't pull our penal code right out of King James misinterpretation of the Bible. That reason is that Jesus is soft. Jesus would never punish anyone. But that's cool. Let's abandon the legal system and just ask, WWJD?

God:

Yeah, I'm counting him double. Christianity thinks that Jesus is God, but whatevs. God has been set up as the only person who can take vengeance on man for committing sins. Unless God himself came down to an Israelite and said "Kill him for me, will ya?" revenge killing wasn't really kosher.

Well, once again, you are making a massive assumption based on this misguided idea that capital punishment is revenge. It is not. It is the state's responsibility to maintain order through appropriate punishment that justifies the death penalty.

So a man killed 15 people. Okay, he's in jail for life. Jail is not a happy place to be, guys. People shanking you, stealing your food, trying to rape you, beating you, the like.

I think this may convice me to join your side. The death penalty is too soft of a punishment. Perhaps we should rape and torture criminals in the name of saving humanity. Terrible argument.

What makes killing that man any better than killing 15 people?

I remember someone....somewhere...



Or, really,



According to God, (Christianity, Judaism, Islam), sins are all equal. Killing 15 is the same as killing one.

Well, the commandemnt is thous shalt not murder, not kill. Otherwise, eating meat would be a sin. Furthermore, you will have a tough time convincing anyone that the state is murdering and not killing. Their is a difference.

According to the Justice System, murder gets you a set amount of years in jail. Killing 15 just gets you more counts.

Him killing someone is just as bad as us killing him. In the eyes of your God, in the yes of the Justice System, in the eyes of everyone not blinded by revenge.

WHy would I be vengeful if no one in my family has been murdered. I understand that there is no financial value that can be placed on a life, so life is the only appropriate payment of restitution.


[/quote]Oh yeah, and anyone else notice the sheer amount of Christians that are in favor of the Death Penalty in America? You'd think that they would know the very first Commandment. I mean, I understand if they didn't quite make it to the tenth. But the first? Not even cool, man.[/quote]

I'm sorry, thou shalt not kill is the first commandment? What ever happened to "I am the Lord, your God, and there shall be not other Gods before me?" Did a panel of ACLU dumbasses change it and forget to tell me? Not murdering is the sixth commandment.

 

[Mufasa]

I'm sorry BladeRunner, but this argument that some people are truly "evil" is fucking absurd and is nothing more than a hysterical attempt to try and explain what would lead some people to certain actions. Every person is just that---a person. No one is born with a fucking dark soul and can be branded as irrefutably evil for all of their lives. This is no different from the Puritans blaming all of the problems in early American settler live on witchcraft. It's a hackneyed and half-assed attempt to try and explain things that are just too hard and difficult for some of to want or be able to understand.

Every murderer, rapist, torturer, pedophile, and every other kind of violent criminal on this planet, every single one of them is a person, not a monster. Mental illness is the root of their unspeakable acts, not a damned demonic possession.

As for the death penalty, I'm obviously against it. There is a difference between revenge and justice, and the death penalty is the former. Taking one life in exchange for another solves no problems, it only creates new ones. It sucks but it's true people.

Great Post.

I think rarely if ever do murderers just pop out of thin air. No one is destined at birth to grow up to become murderers due to inheriting some kind of evil. I think evil is a bit of an absurd concept. It doesn't really exist.

We are human. Humans are prone to do certain things when placed under certain kinds of conditions. I think most every human has the capacity to commit murder if placed under the right conditions. Just look at our ancestors. We come from a barbaric past.

Look at statistics. Certain cities have much higher murder rates than others. Why is that? Is it because evil likes to congregate with the poor? I don't think so. I think the environment contributes directly to the amount of people being murdered. Murder isn't just individual wrong doing, it is societal wrongdoing, and society is where individuals are created, so when addressing murder, society is where we should place the bulk of our emphasis. Instead of spending long hours deliberating on whether not it was premeditated murder, a crime of passion, etc... We should be spending long hours trying to figure out why do certain cities have three times as many homicides as other cities of the same size.

I think if the richest country in the history of the world would no longer have failing schools or ghettos then there would be a measurable decrease in violent crime. An individual murder trial cost millions of dollars. Our prisons are costing us in the tens of billions of dollars. I think it makes both ethical and economical sense to try to alleviate the conditions that spawn large number of criminals.

The American strategy to handling crime is to remove key individuals without addressing the root cause and then declare that we have arrived at justice. To me justice will never come from killing a detained man. Justice can only come from reducing crime itself by cleaning up the areas that are most likely to produce criminals. Creating a safer world is what will provide justice for the victims. Executing a man who is already safely detained does nothing.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

The fact is the death Penalty is needed, the system has allowed rapists and pedophiles out of prison to harm children, there are more and more cases of this happening and children are being left either to die or to get assaulted by these people is this right?.

Shouldnt they die for their crimes so that they cant do it to anyone else, the state has proven that this system doesnt work, rehabilitation doesnt work because 9 times out of 10 they will go out and re- offend, anyone remember Ian Huntley?, what did he do to those poor girls in sohem?.

Or what about the sick little boys who murdered James Bulger they where given new identities and one of them is now back in prison is this fair to the family who lost their baby boy?, do you think X that they have rights to see those idiots go down for murdering their son but instead where treated like human beings and given new lives in order to hopefully come out of prison as rehabilitated criminals.

The fact is that isn't going to happen no matter how much you want to think that everyone is basically decent that isn't the case.

Heres a prime example:

[youtube]rn8ojxGMHZE&[/youtube]

This Decent person gave a young 15 year old kid aids after assaulting him over and over whilst luring the young man to his apartment after meeting him on myspace, is he a decent human being?, the fact that this perve basically assaulted a young kid and has now shorten the poor young mans life span and basically ruined his life means that this kid will never be the same again.

As far as im concerned the severity of the crime should be upheld and the fact that these sickos are out there means that we need the death penalty to stop them from doing this to anyone else, no matter what you think about it or how you feel that everyone is decent sometimes that isnt the case.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

I really hate to go Boondock Saints mode on this thread, but I'm gonna:

Murder...no matter who, no matter why, no matter where....has ALWAYS been around. Religion does it, but forbids it. The government does it, but says they are against it. Even we as human beings catch ourselves thinking "This is wrong, nobody deserves to die."

O rly?

*BANG* someone shot your loved one. That one person you won't get to see anymore. That certain person you most likely spent time with on a regular basis is now gone. How do you feel? First emotion is most likely devastation. Second- maybe anger to a higher power and a confusion on why it happened. Third-resolve. You want this person brought to justice, but in today's society this person will be out doing whatever he does because let's face it- the government has its loopholes and the Law can do nothing but hold the killer over for a good amount of years, if you're lucky.

Now I know this is a pretty frigid scenario, but we live in a world where this happens ALL of the time to other people. Yeah we can say how we don't want others to die even though they take other's lives away, but when faced with that problem face-on, what would you want? A few years (cuz thats exactly what it is to criminals, because eventually with no Death Penalty they will be out, living the life they only know) in the pen and scot-free? Where is the justice, really, in that?

Yeah, Christians and other groups will say they don't want a criminal to die, but will go overseas and kill off other people for their government.

Riddle me this: Where is the Justice in that?

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

Killing a human being = murder. It's the same thing. The act is the same, regardless of the intentions behind it. I would hope what you were taught falls into that general category.

And how can you say you would be morally clear in that situation if you've never been in that situation? You can theorize all you like, until you actually have the gun pointed at someone's head, you don't know.

If you don't want to pay for criminals in jail, and would rather send them to death, then that would mean you'd send people to death row for even the most minor crimes. Taxes include everyone in prison, regardless of what crime they committed. And again, human beings should not have the right to decide who deserves to live and who doesn't. No human can comprehend how a person's life or lack thereof will affect the rest of the world.

And here's where I take the issue that Killing=Murder. IT IS NOT. Murder=killing with prejudice and is punishable under law. Zero do you realize how much money it takes to keep murderers on death row? Millions. Even Billions.

 

[TSG]

Well, I guess it's time to throw my two cents in.

I believe that there is a fine line between justice and keeping the peace and brutally and coldly killing a man. There are just certain things that should be universally morally wrong. Should a murderer kill a person? No, that answer is simple. But the justice systems, the governments of the world are supposed to be above those level, the levels of those muderers or rapists or whatever they are convicted and sentenced for. And by coldly and brutally murdering these people, are we any better than they were? No, and we should be. Better are better ways to keep the peace and ensure justice then sending someone to walk the last mile, by sending electricity through their body and injecting them with a lethal substance. I would like to think that we are better than that. Just throw them in jail. Guard their cell heavily, take away their freedoms. But at least let them live. People are put on Earth by something, wether you believe it to be a God or not, your belief, to live their life. To take that away becuase they were low enough to do it to someone else, doesn't make it right. It just makes us wrong, like they were. The death sentence is not right. It is morally wrong, it is inhumane, and their is no reason, no matter what someone does, to deprive them of what they were put on this Earth for, which is to live and breathe.