Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Dude

Pro/against Death Penalty?

Recommended Posts

by your (webster's) deffenition, it's perfectly fine to kill someone as long as it's not against the law. i just feel killing someone, regardless of reason, is wrong.

 

not to mention the costs, possibilities of innocence in a non-perfect system, etc...

Yeah, I've always hated quoting dictionary definitions, because in the end we all come up with our own tweaked definitions of a given idea. I understand how you feel, but if we had a justice system that was 100% accurate in murder convictions, I'd have no problem with the worst among them being exterminated. They're just wild, mindless animals at that point and should be treated as vicious, violent, killer animals get treated. As I've said in other posts, I think that since the system isn't perfect, that death penalty sentences should be reserved for those who are so obviously guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

by your (webster's) deffenition, it's perfectly fine to kill someone as long as it's not against the law.  i just feel killing someone, regardless of reason, is wrong.

 

not to mention the costs, possibilities of innocence in a non-perfect system, etc...

Yeah, I've always hated quoting dictionary definitions, because in the end we all come up with our own tweaked definitions of a given idea. I understand how you feel, but if we had a justice system that was 100% accurate in murder convictions, I'd have no problem with the worst among them being exterminated. They're just wild, mindless animals at that point and should be treated as vicious, violent, killer animals get treated. As I've said in other posts, I think that since the system isn't perfect, that death penalty sentences should be reserved for those who are so obviously guilty.
well stated and acknowledged.

 

i've changed my opinion on the death penalty just within the last two years. i used to feel that if there was cold, hard proof, then i had no qualms about it. with the advent of dna tests, more video cameras, and better forensic techniques and technology, it's deffenitely possible prove without any doubt that one committed the crime. the only problem i come accross here, is that there are always those who will take advantage of those (ex: planting dna such as saliva, hair, etc.) the point is, the system will never be perfect, and we should always strive to protect the innocent.

 

the death penalty isn't a deterrent, it costs more, and it's imperfect. but then again, there are die-hard windows fans out there, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, it's actually much more expensive to put someone to death, than to give them life in prison. if someone with some fiscal responsibility were running the show, then they would surely fight to have the death penalty abolished.

 

but alas, congress hasn't shown true fiscal responsibility in a hundred years.

thats only true because the appeal 14 times and sit in prison for 7-10 years......you should get one appeal then you should die within a year if they did this it would be much cheaper then letting someone rot on my tax money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

the death penalty isn't a deterrent

ya prove it.....let me make it easy for you, you cant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is not a fair against something one2gamble.

That's like saying prove that you're not a crook

Prove to me that you're not a terrorist

 

Surely you would not be advocating rhetoric would you?

I'm sure it was merely a mistake. :)

 

Please see my signature for further explanation!

Edited by lucubration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is not a fair against something one2gamble.

That's like saying prove that you're not a crook

Prove to me that you're not a terrorist

 

Surely you would not be advocating rhetoric would you?

I'm sure it was merely a mistake. :)

 

Please see my signature for further explanation!

its not rhetoric, he made a statement I countered it now its up to him to prove his statement which he cant and everyone knows he cant.

 

It should be reworded "I dont believe the death penalty is a deterent" that I would accept as a valid opinion, stating that as a fact is just untrue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

 

the death penalty isn't a deterrent

ya prove it.....let me make it easy for you, you cant.

obviously cannot be proven, in fact it's completely silly to even ask for proof of that. just as it cannot be proven that it is a deterrent.....but, you don't seriously think that somebody thinks in their mind: 'wait a minute, i shouldn't do this, i may get the death penalty'. the fact is, those that commit premeditated murder believe they will never be caught, making the punishment void as a deterrent.

 

you don't think murder rates would climb if the death penalty is abolished, do you? there are quite a few states without a death penalty, and they haven't seen a huge rise in murder.

 

no, it can't be proven that it's not a deterrent, but if you analytically look at the facts, you see that it's silly to think it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

the death penalty isn't a deterrent

ya prove it.....let me make it easy for you, you cant.

obviously cannot be proven, in fact it's completely silly to even ask for proof of that. just as it cannot be proven that it is a deterrent.....but, you don't seriously think that somebody thinks in their mind: 'wait a minute, i shouldn't do this, i may get the death penalty'. the fact is, those that commit premeditated murder believe they will never be caught, making the punishment void as a deterrent.

 

you don't think murder rates would climb if the death penalty is abolished, do you? there are quite a few states without a death penalty, and they haven't seen a huge rise in murder.

 

no, it can't be proven that it's not a deterrent, but if you analytically look at the facts, you see that it's silly to think it is.

you added variable that were not originally there "premeditation" is entirely different and a seperate issue when it comes to the death penalty as a deterrent. Its a matter of random killings.

 

I asked for proof because its a silly statement to make that it isnt one.

 

you say there are states that do not have the death penalty and do not show a lower murder rate, well how do u know they wouldnt go down if the death penalty was used effictively. There is not enough recorded history of a state that once had the death penalty and then abolished it vs a state that didnt have the death penalty and then began to use it. The simple fact is you can not determine its effectiveness but if one person does not murder another because of it, the penalty is worth having around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

houmamiss fairly requested some evidence to support a statement I made recently. I'm on it but, in the meantime, I'd like to provide the following tale.

 

Sometime in the late-seventies, a young, innocent suburban adventurer from the Province of Quebec set out by van to discover America. At some place in Utah he picked up some hitch-hikers. Those hitch-hikers turned out to be very bad men. They robbed their benefactor, seized possession of the van, bound and gagged the young man and left him freezing in the snow away from the road.

 

An hour or two later, one of the culprits realized that they had committed what was considered to be kidnapping in that state. In Utah, kidnapping is a capital crime, indistinguishible from murder and punishible by death.

 

The reprobates then circled back, rediscovered the hostge they'd left behind and executed him. Their idea was that they were already in deep and they couldn't afford any witnesses.

 

So much for the power of capital prosecution to preserve life.

 

I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

houmamiss fairly requested some evidence to support a statement I made recently. I'm on it but, in the meantime, I'd like to provide the following tale.

 

Sometime in the late-seventies, a young, innocent suburban adventurer from the Province of Quebec set out by van to discover America. At some place in Utah he picked up some hitch-hikers. Those hitch-hikers turned out to be very bad men. They robbed their benefactor, seized possession of the van, bound and gagged the young man and left him freezing in the snow away from the road.

 

An hour or two later, one of the culprits realized that they had committed what was considered to be kidnapping in that state. In Utah, kidnapping is a capital crime, indistinguishible from murder and punishible by death.

 

The reprobates then circled back, rediscovered the hostge they'd left behind and executed him. Their idea was that they were already in deep and they couldn't afford any witnesses.

 

So much for the power of capital prosecution to preserve life.

 

I

do you want me to make up a story too? WTH is that... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's another story.

 

little child molestors know that if a concerned citizen ever catches them that citizen will in turn do unspeakable horrors to them hopefully prolonging their life vis-a-vis large doses of antibiotics.

 

That if someone kills your friend or family you will do the same

 

That if they get two years for killing said relation you will be waiting for them when they get out.

 

How's that for deterence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...