thou shall not kill

paul_valaru

100% Pure Canadian Beef
I know there are other threads about this, but one again.

Death Penalty.

for or against, and why?

I am for it, someone kills rapes or molests they have no place in our world.

why pay so much to substain them. and then release them.
 
What? No poll?

Anyhow...I think that the some crimes are so heinous that keeping the perpetrator alive is a crime itself. Premeditated murder, rape, any sexual offense against a child, most 'white collar' crimes, and any crime commited with a firearm fall into this catagory.
 
I say let them rot in the darkest cell you can leave them in... death is too good for them, lets them forget... I say don't let them forget, replay the 911 recordings, anything you have on them everyday just to make sure they don't forget.
 
A rapist shouldn't be let out at all.... They weren't getting any before (obviously) and now they certainly won't so you're just asking for trouble all over again
 
Liliandra said:
A rapist shouldn't be let out at all.... They weren't getting any before (obviously) and now they certainly won't so you're just asking for trouble all over again

Once again, somebody confuses what rape is. It's not about sex. It's about power and control. The fact of the rapist 'not getting any' before is not the issue. He/she was probably getting plenty/enough, but wanted to humiliate the victim.
 
True enough, and my appologies on that one... was ranting about something else elsewhere and lost what I was saying.... anyways...
 
For it in what are considered capital cases now, plus a few more. There are certain types of offenders who have no business ever taking any place in society ever again, and any risk that they may escape is unacceptable. The only way to absolutely, positively guarantee that is execution.

You use what you have. Once you've fried him, that particular offender's recidivism rate WILL be zero.
 
I support the death penalty for certain offenses. These include but shall not be limited to:

Premeditated murder
Serial murder
Serial rape
Serial arson
Mayhem, or more commonly known as dismemberment
Necrophilia
Aggravated rape
Aggravated rape of a child
Acts of terrorism


That may seem more forgiving than other lists. I have a good reason for that. In my job, I deal with convicted felons. That includes child molestors and rapists. I have supervised folks convicted of each offense who I honestly have doubt as to their legitimate guilt. Each of those cases involved one victim, and no prior arrests or subsequent arrests. For anything. Even littering. I could give specifics. I won't. It would only be disected by a thousand fingers, and I ain't got time nor inclination to extrapolate on these cases in detail.

I support the death penalty in part because the Bible commands it. I support it for other reasons as well. I agree about the zero recidivism rate...three minutes in ol' Sparky cures anybody of anything.

There are cases other than those I listed I could support it in, but I'm painting with a broad brush here.

I have seen first hand people with murder convictions reform and become productive citizens. I have seen habitual traffic offenders go out and commit more serious crimes after that conviction. There are no absolutes when one deals in the stock and trade of human beings and their lives. I learned that fact early on in my career. That being said, there is a line that, if crossed, should be a point of no return.
 
Put a limit on the endless appeals and suddenly the "it's cheaper to lock someone up for life" argument will magically disappear.
 
For the death penalty!

BUT...

you have to do something about the pre-Zapp timeline. What's the point of holding onto the perp for 5-10 years while s/he goes through every legal loophole to extend and delay the actual sentence? If s/he is found guilty the first time, and the first appeal and the second...goddamnit. Fry'em already!

Some would say that you have to be absolutely sure that s/he is the perp. DNA testing and all that crap, but frankly...the percentage of erronious arrests and jailings for crimes like SnP and others listed above is so small that the one time per year where they fry the wrong person, s/he probably did something else to deserve it where they hadn't gotten caught...yet.
 
Because no one can completely determine someone's guilt or innocence I believe that regardless of the crime it is enough that they spend their life in prison. You must ask is it justice or revenge for their act? No one can undo what has been done but the accused criminal may not have done anything at all. What if you or someone you loved was accused and standing trial would you feel so steadfast in your judgment?
 
ekahs retsam said:
Because no one can completely determine someone's guilt or innocence I believe that regardless of the crime it is enough that they spend their life in prison. You must ask is it justice or revenge for their act? No one can undo what has been done but the accused criminal may not have done anything at all. What if you or someone you loved was accused and standing trial would you feel so steadfast in your judgment?

Typical liberal argument. Of course not...but, then, it's not my decision, is it? ;)

Also...justice and revenge are not always seperate.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Typical liberal argument. Of course not...but, then, it's not my decision, is it? ;)

Also...justice and revenge are not always seperate.
That's why there is a judge and a jury of peers... to place as much seperation between justice and revenge.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Typical liberal argument. Of course not...but, then, it's not my decision, is it? ;)

It is your decision if you vote.

Gato_Solo said:
Also...justice and revenge are not always seperate.

They are very different.

Revenge is born of hatred, retaliation, and violence.

Justice may appear as a form of punishment but it is a far greater thing because it sets out not to hurt but to settle and resolve things deemed morally unfair.

There is a simple test to determine if an act is revenge or justice. Has the dispute been resolved without compromising any other moral or ethical imperatives?
 
ekahs retsam said:
It is your decision if you vote.

Okay then. I still say that I'm for the death penalty.


er said:
They are very different.

Revenge is born of hatred, retaliation, and violence.

And what is justice but a retaliation to either hatred or violence?

er said:
Justice may appear as a form of punishment but it is a far greater thing because it sets out not to hurt but to settle and resolve things deemed morally unfair.

Punishment is the main force behind justice. Be it a fine (monetary), or seclusion (prison), that is a form of punishment.

er said:
There is a simple test to determine if an act is revenge or justice. Has the dispute been resolved without compromising any other moral or ethical imperatives?

Doesn't matter. We look upon the jails of the 1940's and 1950's as cruel, but they were no more cruel then than our jails will seem 50 to 60 years from now. You wish to candy-coat the facts. Incarceration, fines, community service, etc are called justice, but are no more than revenge for an act commited, and given a nice name to keep the public happy. Is it more humane for you to lock a human being up like an animal for life than it is to put them out of their misery?
 
ekahs retsam said:
Revenge is born of hatred, retaliation, and violence.

In a human society, these are legitimate justifications. Flout them at your peril.

Also, I believe that making the jails "nicer" is the single biggest contributing factor to the growth of crime. If it isn't "cruel and unusual" it isn't punishment.
 
Liliandra said:
I say let them rot in the darkest cell you can leave them in... death is too good for them, lets them forget... I say don't let them forget, replay the 911 recordings, anything you have on them everyday just to make sure they don't forget.
That's how I feel on it too. Death is too easy.
 
Back
Top