Do You Support the Death Penalty? (1 Viewer)

[what971]

Yes, for felons.

 

[jimmayyy]

Death penalty for recidivists (?) only.

Those who commit heinous crimes but show obvious remorse, or there were mitigating circumstances, should not be given the death penalty.

Those who derive humor from their heinous crimes must die.

Painfully.

-P_D

thank you good sir, for being a beacon of intelligence unto this thread

 

[cy91]

no not all

i doesnt make it better killing another person

 

[townie]

so if a some evil bastard rapes, tortues and kills ur mum in the most horrific way, admits it, shows no remose, no sign he is sorry, in fact, he liked doing it and was planning on doing it to your little sisters, and had already done it to 384234 other women, he shouldnt be killed?

sorry, i just cant see ur logic.

i think in some and the most extreme cases, the state killing a person is perfectly fine. saddam hussien for example, deserved it.

and plus, wats the point if u r going to do it painlessly?

if they are gonna do it, it shouldnt be all humane and shit, then it IS the easy way out

hanging, firing squad or chair i say

well, considering that i know for a fact my mum holds the exact same views, then no, i still dont think he should be put to death.

no crime, at all, is worth the cost of a human life, i fail to see the logic in: lolz, killing is bad, so lets kill people who kill others to punish them

 

[kokodamonkey]

well, considering that i know for a fact my mum holds the exact same views, then no, i still dont think he should be put to death.

no crime, at all, is worth the cost of a human life, i fail to see the logic in: lolz, killing is bad, so lets kill people who kill others to punish them

yes because they dont deserve to be shown the same respect they failed to show to others. Even for rape.. a little girl gets raped, she is scarred for life..

Plus it costs money to keep prisoners in jail, cheaper to shoot them.

 

[invertedmemes]

In a recent copy of TIME magazine, I found only 3% of all those on death row in the US are eventually executed. More and more states are beginning to ban it; it is being constitutionally reviewed to assess the torture factor; it is applied inconsistently and is more expensive to the tax payers as a result of exclusive appeals available to death-row inmates.

What a process.

 

[invertedmemes]

And you can rage against it doing Engineering at UTS!

 

[coley99]

no...i dont think anyone has the right to choose who lives and dies...nobody should play God. However that does not mean that i dont think some of those bastards deserve to die, i just think if we kill them it makes us just as bad as them.
oh and btw, i know intvertedmemes and he knows what he is talking about lol:uhhuh:

 

[quixote studios]

Rule of the law, punishment to fit the crime, etc. So yeah; most people waste their lives anyways, might as well save some tax money.

Fuck, if this was back in China, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[mzduxx2006]

yes and no.

yes= only if they know 10000000% that the person committed it and THERE IS NO WAY that any evidence can challenge his guiltyness.

no= cause i think sometimes they shouldnt have the priveledge of dying for their crime, they should be made to rot in a jail cell for life...untill they die and live a terrible life. remembering what they did,

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I know I've said it before, heh, but it seems somewhat hypocritical to despise capital punishment, and yet support the act of putting someone in prison as a means of punishment. I mean, I know that I believe that half of the criminal justice system is about rehabilitation, but I'm aware that the other half is about punishing people, right? So like, how can I support taking part of someone's life away by locking them up, but not support killing someone for a far, far worse crime? In either case, I'm taking away someone's liberty.

So seeing as how I believe that people ought to be punished for doing wrong to others, there's no reason on moral grounds for me to not support capital punishment.

There are other aspects. It's not my place to take a life. It's not anybody's place. It's not fair to the family of the accused to kill their father/mother/son/daughter/husband/wife. There's always the possibility of them being innocent. What happens when one legalises capital punishment? Does society as a whole suffer? I don't want to sound like a racist prick here, but if I'm to compare, say, Sweden to the US, or India to Pakistan, I'd say that there appears to be a correlation between capital punishment and the level of violence in a society. Gah! It's such a complicated issue!

So I suppose, once again in my case, that provided that there's a 100% chance of guilt, provided they have no family, provided that I couldn't stop it and provided I still believe in punishment for doing wrong, then hey, I don't have any problem with killing someone for killing someone else. That's the extreme circumstance, for me.

That was just me thinking aloud again in this thread, heh.

 

[invertedmemes]

Great in theory I suppose- but once again the 3% ''success'' rate of killing those sentenced to execution goes to show that inequality is actually far more prominent when people are sentenced to death, as opposed to life imprisonment with others of lesser crimes.

Also, referring to one BOSer who said we could save tax payers money- it's actually more expensive to sentence someone to death row, due to the exclusive appeals process they're granted, than what it actually is to incarcerate them for life.

 

[sam04u]

Yes.

Rape, murder, faggotry, adultery.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

No, this is the case in democratic countries, such as America where the legal recourse can go on for years. Countries like Vietnam, you are found guilty and exectuion takes place swiftly (Van Nguyen anybody?)

It depends on the system. Check Saudi Arabia, they are up to something like 30 executions in 2008 already. I doubt there'd be much taxpayer money going to waste in a democratic process.

a) That was Sinagpore
b) Instead of wasting taxpayers money, barbaric countries like Saudi Arabia waste human lives instead. And look at the quality of life they lead!

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

You won't be saying that when you're raped by a gang of thuggish brutes and then charged for homosexuality.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Wrong. The criminal justice system is not "half" about rehabilitation and half about punishment. You're forgetting its primary goal which is protecting the community. Imprisoning people for life is a deprivation of liberty necessary for protecting the community from very serious offenders. Killing them does not achieve any greater level of protection than life imprisonment so this further deprivation is unecessary.

Well ok, if you insist that's the primary goal then I'll take your word for it

though I disagree
<_<
>_>
<_<
But uh, I'd disagree that killing someone doesn't offer a society any more protection on the basis that it's possible to break out of prison. Not possible to break out of death.

Slippery slope fallacy. Supporting one form of deprivation does not mean you can't oppose other.

Yes it does, if the properties are identical.

Especially when the nature and effects of the deprivation are so significantly different. For one, the death penalty prevents any chance of correcting a wrongful conviction.

Yeah, as I said, I'd only support it if there was a 100% chance of guilt. Once that's provided, I don't see too much difference between the two. 'Cept maybe that you could argue that ending a life is a little nicer than letting someone enjoy no liberty for another fifty years.

Given the flaws you point out can never be corrected, it is logical for you, based on your own reasoning process, to oppose capital punishment.

And it's just as logical for me, based on my own reasoning, to support capital punishment in the most extreme circumstances, which is what I voted for in the first place. Jeez.

However, there has been a lot of interesting research into the intellectual processes of revenge in the natural methods of grieving and it seems that revenge in some instances does in fact have a palliative nature... but that's it.

If that were the case, then add that to my pro list.

 

[HalcyonSky]

Personally i think rape and unprovoked assault should be punished with 16 hours a day strapped to one of those dildo machines.

 

[katie_tully]

I'm just meh @ this topic.

We don't have the death penalty in Australia anymore. So why do we care if it happens elsewhere. If the Saudis and the Indonesians and the Yanks want to knock people on the head, so be it.

If this thread was created purely due to the plight of some Aussies on death row overseas, then I continue to meh.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I'm just meh @ this topic.

We don't have the death penalty in Australia anymore. So why do we care if it happens elsewhere. If the Saudis and the Indonesians and the Yanks want to knock people on the head, so be it.

If this thread was created purely due to the plight of some Aussies on death row overseas, then I continue to meh.

You answered your own question, dumb dumb.

Clearly you don't watch nearly enough 24.

I've never watched an episode. Dang it, I ain't gonna let no liberal ass TV show rule my opinion on executions!

Personally i think rape and unprovoked assault should be punished with 16 hours a day strapped to one of those dildo machines.

Shouldn't people who assult people be given plain assault themselves, rather than sexual assault?

 

[Stevo.]

Oh lawdy, so if I sexually assaulted someone the crime would be that they sexually assault me in return! I'm starting to like this eye for an eye rule!