The Death Penalty Debate, do you support the Death Penalty

Sure, kill murderers. No big loss. They should feel the fear, the helplessness, the pain, and the misery they have inflicted upon their victims. Hell, if I had my way they'd be killed as close as is possible to the way that they killed. I don't care about justice/balance, and I don't care about the morality of the action. It's not about making me feel better, about being the "better" person, nor do I look at the cost. It's about enlightening these people to the suffering they have done unto others. And if it doesn't open their eyes before their demise, it's what they deserve anyway and is still a benefit to this planet to remove them from society.

The only reason I don't and will never support the death penalty is because in practice it's prone to error and innocents are at risk. In theory, if we all were living in a perfect world, I'm 100% for it. But then again, if we were living in a perfect world, we wouldn't need it. But hey....I've always had no problem with revenge.

I don't have a strong opinion on this one. This affects such a tiny number of people, that I can't be bothered to care about it too much. The entire criminal justice system is a mess.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

The new thing here is to disguise spam links as images. Without the .jpg ending, nothing shows up. You can see the links if you quote the damnedable spammers.

Iszdope

Oh.

Cheers pseudo grammar Nazi!*

* it's 'damnable'. Welcommen.

Touche.

I fully support public executions. Bring back the gallows. We need to start scaring people. We need to scare the f*** out of people. You commit a murder and the evidence is solid. Off with his head and stick it on a spike. Did you rob a store? Wont throw you in jail. We'll chop your hands off. You have to make the consequences so bad that the action is never commited to begin with.

Motokid6

The only thing your kind do better than anyone is to drag the society backward, thankfully though, the society refuse to the dragged backward. Death Penalty, among many other things, will eventually be eliminated and will be a dark page in human history.

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

People calling for public executions and extremely harsh punishments (cutting off hands, etc) are idiots and have completely forgotten about the 8th Amendment.

Motokid6

So if someone commits a crude and unusual crime we cant inflict crude and unusual punishments... yea. Thats why this country is f***** and is the way it is. This needs to be fixed. Simple as that. America needs to be de-pussified. And fast.

because you're not them, if the justice system is not on a moral highground to prosecute, then get the **** out, don't even pretend to be a justice system, just call it a mob revenge system. Well, the country of US already have the highest incarceration rate in the world, and tax payers and offenders are both caught in the system anyway, why not just stop pretending to have a justice system.

A state void of capital punishment has no validity in its existence, as its laws and ethics are baseless.

Socijalisticka

Any state with capital punishment do not have a justice system, because it's morally contradictory.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] Well, at least capital punishment isn't murder. thegerg

This again?

Let me refresh this for you : State sanctioned premeditated first degree murder of its citizens against their will = Capital Punishment.

[QUOTE="thegerg"]Capital punishment is not an unlawful killing.Ace6301

yes, that's the problem with that "lawful killing" right there. "law of land" meaning absolutely nothing when it faces the law of humanity "life is inviolable", or else you'd having to side with killing gays and rape victims because they'd be "laws of the land" somewhere.

To make it simple, Capital Punishment should always be "unlawful killing".

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="thegerg"]Capital punishment is the legal process by which one is put to death by the state. thegerg

you seem to be confused, it is illegal when it was outlawed twice for peacetime crime and wartime crime in 1976/1998, the timeline is of course different from country to country. It has been written off, but once existed, there's no problem calling it "illegal", because obviously performing capital punishment in Canada, or any other country that abolished death penalty (which let's face it, majority of sane countries) are illegal.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"]If a homicide is justifiable it is not murder. A murder is, by definition, an unlawful killing. If a killing is justified (thus, not unlawful) then it can't be murder. You seem to be very confused.thegerg

A murder is, fundamentally, an unlawful killing. If a killing is lawfully justified then it can't, by definition, be murder.

It's quite clear at this point that you don't know the meaning of the words which you are using.

well, being gay can be convicted and justified as well because it is definitely written in the laws of a certain number of countries.

But in that case people would have absolutely no problem calling it state sanctioned murder, why the double standard?

If I can make a bet to you, I'd bet my life on it, future generations will look back on history and see capital punishment as what it is,state sanctioned murder, or state sanction premiditated first degree carelly planned killing of citizens against their/their families' will, whichever you prefer.

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]

A state void of capital punishment has no validity in its existence, as its laws and ethics are baseless.

Ncsoftlover

Any state with capital punishment do not have a justice system, because it's morally contradictory.

Depends on your ethical standards...

Yes i do. Why give mercy to people when they didn't show any to the ones they murdered? it also costs less than life sentencing.

I don't understand what is supposed to be so valuable about this institution that it is worth the lives of innocent people and the higher cost.

it also costs less than life sentencing.dissonantblack

yes

If one can be 100% certain, sure why not, the only problem is if that guy/girl has a family to raise....FMAB_GTO

Someone in jail even for life will nto be raising any family, even if him or her has kids.

[QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"]If one can be 100% certain, sure why not, the only problem is if that guy/girl has a family to raise....WhiteKnight77

Someone in jail even for life will nto be raising any family, even if him or her has kids.

I have seen no advantages to it.. IT doesn't lower crime rates, its more expensive, and it doesn't some how bring the victims back.. Fact of the matter is you can't call your self a fiscal conservative and support the death penalty. sSubZerOo

That is my exact reasoning behind my change of believes with the death penalty. The process is so drawn out I suspect it causes the relatives of the victim more grief.

Yeah, why not. What's one dead scumbag to me?

[QUOTE="SPBoss"]What about a death penalty only when there is 100% proof such as cctv.thegerg

There is no way to prove guilt with no doubt.

Hypothetically, if there were, would you support it?

In most states it costs 45,000 dollars a year to house inmates. I Think anyone who is against the death penalty are criminals within themselves. there is no honesty in forgiveness, there is no loyalty to the people to set the convicted free (after a certain amount of time) and there is no hope for america in giving them 3hots and a cot. We house the worlds largest prison population of non-violent offenders along with the most violent. I once worked in corrections and I've seen the damage it does. I gave up on my christian beliefs for the true answer long ago when I saw how how the innocent have been brain washed to caring for murderers and rapists, but will imprison a man if he is unable to find work (due to capitalism and local economics). BTW psychology is still work in progress, so is social science.

In most states it costs 45,000 dollars a year to house inmates. I Think anyone who is against the death penalty are criminals within themselves. there is no honesty in forgiveness, there is no loyalty to the people to set the convicted free (after a certain amount of time) and there is no hope for america in giving them 3hots and a cot. We house the worlds largest prison population of non-violent offenders along with the most violent. I once worked in corrections and I've seen the damage it does. I gave up on my christian beliefs for the true answer long ago when I saw how how the innocent have been brain washed to caring for murderers and rapists, but will imprison a man if he is unable to find work (due to capitalism and local economics). BTW psychology is still work in progress, so is social science.

carloas27

That is some flawless logic right there.

In theory, yes. In execution (pun intended)....no. too many innocent people are murdered. Anyone who doesn't agree that a murderer should lose his life after they took someone else's though, is a fcking idiot.

No, its ridiculous to trust the state government with the right to take lives.

I support the death penalty. Generally I am in favour of giving non-violent criminals a second chance. Violent criminals or other criminals who are a danger to society should be imprisoned. Repeat offenders of non-violent and non-dangerous should be imprisoned. Repeat offenders of violent crime or those who commit incredibly heinous crimes should be executed. And no, execution is not murder. It is justice.Crunchy_Nuts

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

[QUOTE="Crunchy_Nuts"]I support the death penalty. Generally I am in favour of giving non-violent criminals a second chance. Violent criminals or other criminals who are a danger to society should be imprisoned. Repeat offenders of non-violent and non-dangerous should be imprisoned. Repeat offenders of violent crime or those who commit incredibly heinous crimes should be executed. And no, execution is not murder. It is justice.Ncsoftlover

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

I'm amused that many of the people that don't have faith in the government to do anything right are the same people that support the government executing people, claiming the government is pretty good at only executing the guilty. :)genfactor

they are generally the same group of people because their brain cannot function without constant contradiction.

It's funny because libertarians are such an inconsistent group of people that they don't even have a consensus on the death penalty issue, instead, it's the european (especially northern european) "nanny government" countries that are dead against death penalty.

It makes you wonder what is the real incentive behind this "libertarian minded" thinking, as long as the government doesn't care for the poor and doesn't provided adequate health care for those who can't afford it, we don't care if it's big government and is capable of murdering its citizen, as long as it doesn't help the poor, it's all good.:shock:

[QUOTE="Ncsoftlover"]

[QUOTE="Crunchy_Nuts"]I support the death penalty. Generally I am in favour of giving non-violent criminals a second chance. Violent criminals or other criminals who are a danger to society should be imprisoned. Repeat offenders of non-violent and non-dangerous should be imprisoned. Repeat offenders of violent crime or those who commit incredibly heinous crimes should be executed. And no, execution is not murder. It is justice.Rich3232

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

I don't care about your legal definition, which is (let's face it) subjected to change throughout human history. There is no murder more premeditated and more planned than Capital punishment.

Don't give me that Law of the land thing again, or you'll have to defend executing gays and executing rape victims. You'll have to defend all the atrocities that our "government" has done throughout histories, you'll have to defend executing people for believing in the wrong religion, witchcraft and adultery. If you can't defend those, you can't defend "law of the land". Any government can write in the law that a certain crime is "punishable by death and justified", however that doesn't not make it any less of a murder.

I will bet you my life that hundred of years later, collectively as a society, we will see Capital punishment as nothing other than state sanctioned murder. Human life is inviolable, and premeditated killing without consent is unjustifiable.

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="Ncsoftlover"]

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

Ncsoftlover

I don't care about your legal definition, which is (let's face it) subjected to change throughout human history. There is no murder more premeditated and more planned than Capital punishment.

Don't give me that Law of the land thing again, or you'll have to defend executing gays and executing rape victims. You'll have to defend all the atrocities that our "government" has done throughout histories, you'll have to defend executing people for believing in the wrong religion, witchcraft and adultery. If you can't defend those, you can't defend "law of the land". Any government can write in the law that a certain crime is "punishable by death and justified", however that doesn't not make it any less of a murder.

I will bet you my life that hundred of years later, collectively as a society, we will see Capital punishment as nothing other than state sanctioned murder. Human life is inviolable, and premeditated killing without consent is unjustifiable.

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

[QUOTE="Ncsoftlover"]

[QUOTE="Rich3232"] no, by its very definition, it is not murder /thegerg Rich3232

I don't care about your legal definition, which is (let's face it) subjected to change throughout human history. There is no murder more premeditated and more planned than Capital punishment.

Don't give me that Law of the land thing again, or you'll have to defend executing gays and executing rape victims. You'll have to defend all the atrocities that our "government" has done throughout histories, you'll have to defend executing people for believing in the wrong religion, witchcraft and adultery. If you can't defend those, you can't defend "law of the land". Any government can write in the law that a certain crime is "punishable by death and justified", however that doesn't not make it any less of a murder.

I will bet you my life that hundred of years later, collectively as a society, we will see Capital punishment as nothing other than state sanctioned murder. Human life is inviolable, and premeditated killing without consent is unjustifiable.

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

I thought you were thegerg:?:oops:

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="Ncsoftlover"]

I don't care about your legal definition, which is (let's face it) subjected to change throughout human history. There is no murder more premeditated and more planned than Capital punishment.

Don't give me that Law of the land thing again, or you'll have to defend executing gays and executing rape victims. You'll have to defend all the atrocities that our "government" has done throughout histories, you'll have to defend executing people for believing in the wrong religion, witchcraft and adultery. If you can't defend those, you can't defend "law of the land". Any government can write in the law that a certain crime is "punishable by death and justified", however that doesn't not make it any less of a murder.

I will bet you my life that hundred of years later, collectively as a society, we will see Capital punishment as nothing other than state sanctioned murder. Human life is inviolable, and premeditated killing without consent is unjustifiable.

Capital punishment = state sanctioned first degree premedidated murder of its citizens against their will.

Ncsoftlover

I thought you were thegerg:?:oops: