Death Penalty is Right!
- Thread starter Wilcox8686
- Start date
Wilcox8686
Registered Senior Member
Originally posted by SG-N
I don't have to propose anything else ! YOU wanted to show it to the public...
You have merely voiced an opinion...now tell me...why would it be bad to publically view an execution. Don't respond like earlier by saying "thats wrong..." tell me why its wrong, then i will have a tiny bit of respect for you
Wilcox8686
Registered Senior Member
Kinda random
All you people who support the death penalty, and like country music, download this song...i think you'll like it
"Beer for my horses" by toby keith and willy nelson
All you people who support the death penalty, and like country music, download this song...i think you'll like it
"Beer for my horses" by toby keith and willy nelson
Don't worry about my education... student. I don't know every US laws (do you ?).
Cutting hands, lapidation... ? Oh... Yes... Please, again...
Now that you're talking about it, you remind me that you don't use these methods yet... hurry up !
I'm surprised ! I expected you to say something like : "What ?! These trash would stole our work too ? No, they must die thus they cost nothing to our government and let the respectfull Americans have a job".
Yay, get another refund on your educaiton. Corporal punishment does not include cutting off hands. It is merely caning you or flogging you. Now I have been there and while I didn't like it at that time, I still think it is a better punishment for a lot of crimes than jail time.
We were not talking about a law.
Why is it wrong ? I was about to say that I didn't know... I just felt it ! But I had a thought : US soldiers in Iraq !!!Originally posted by Wilcox8686
You have merely voiced an opinion...now tell me...why would it be bad to publically view an execution. Don't respond like earlier by saying "thats wrong..." tell me why its wrong, then i will have a tiny bit of respect for you
During the first part of the war, some soldiers were captured by Iraqis. Did you saw them on TV ? No ! Because following Geneva Convention, they can't be shown in humiliating positions...
US government asked the journalists not to show those pictures... OK, that's for military during war times. And military are not humans... they have more rights...
So, maybe that we should look at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights :
Nothing about public execution... :bugeye:
Where can I find a proof... ?
You know, when a bunch of Europeans come together and decide on a Universal Declaration, well, I hate to break it to you but it isn't always universal.
This does not prohibit the death penalty.
Hanging someone in public is not inhumane. It is a very humane way of executing someone. Lethal injection is even more humane. As for degrading, well, I don't consider a public execution degrading.
What are they then?
Get another refund on your education too ! You should check what is a corporal punishment because if cutting hands off and lapidation are not corporal and not punishment, you may have lots of fun in your life
.Of course we did ! You were dealing with an allowed and "current" thing, and that's not the case everywhere... it depends on laws.
Oh, as it's the basis of democracy... you're right ! It may not apply to USA... Is there something wrong in it for you ?
Just a problem of interpretation : "the right to life, liberty and security of person".
, oh stop please... you're incredible : joking with a so serious subject...Why is it forbidden to show US prisonniers ? That's more humiliating than showing someone's last minutes ?
Still taking a sentence out of its context... Jerrek !!!
Sorry this kind of sentence is a kind of irony and as I already said in a past thread, irony expect a certain intelligence from the others. I will not do this mistake anymore with you !
When you refer to corporal punishment in general, you don't include cutting off hands. I would have thought you had the intellect to know that. Yes I know, the very ultra super strict definition of corporal punishment would include that, but tat wasn't what I was talking about, was it? Why did you feel the need to jump to the absolute other end of the spectrum? Can't you think for yourself and see there is a shade of gray between? It was quite clear what I meant when I referred to corporal punishment.
Anways, as usual, you are separating flyshit from pepper. You're jumping to the extreme and taking that as an example. You're not debating the topic at hand. We brought up corporal punishment. Why don't you support your point with valid arguments? And this time I will spoon feed you, kiddo: The corporal punishment that I was talking about is simple whipping, caning, and flogging. No blood. Get it?
Get your facts straight. We were talking about partial birth abortion and how you didn't know what it is. I told you to go look it up and get a refund on your education precisely because you didn't know what partial birth abortion is. We were not discussing the validity of the laws in that case.
Exactly. A problem with interpretation. And we interpret it differently so the point is moot.
Are you talking PoWs or regular criminals? Because the latter you can go and see him being executed for yourself. I'm unsure about the former.
As eveidenced by these studies: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=167, amongst a myriad of others, the death penalty is not a deterrent. If the argument for a death penalty is that a person who kills another must be punished by death, then that is OK; but that sentence must be applied much more judiciously and evidence must be unequivocal. In reality, at least in the USA, it has not. Racial, socioeconomic, political, etc factors are such that, bias exist in the judicial system, and many people have being killed for crimes they did not commit, while others have been exonerated while on death role.
But when is evidence unequivocal? Philosophically, it never is. In reality, there can and are instances when evidence is 100% factual. Nevertheless as all arguments for the death penalty is based on philosophy, then arguments for it are wrong.(This arguments is circular and also biased but then again, whose purpose am I serving but mine?)
--If the law of the country (and we live in it so we must abide by it) supports the death penalty, then so be it. Assessing that penalty however must be done with as much care as possible, and hitherto, that has not been achieved. Also, even with many of its perks, life in prison is NOT anything a person who has known better would find in the least bit pleasant (euphemism. OH how I miss 'foul' language). I support life imprisonment without parole for those convicted of 1st degree murder--at least this way, when an injustice is commited, another 'innocent' life would not be lost.
But when is evidence unequivocal? Philosophically, it never is. In reality, there can and are instances when evidence is 100% factual. Nevertheless as all arguments for the death penalty is based on philosophy, then arguments for it are wrong.(This arguments is circular and also biased but then again, whose purpose am I serving but mine?)
--If the law of the country (and we live in it so we must abide by it) supports the death penalty, then so be it. Assessing that penalty however must be done with as much care as possible, and hitherto, that has not been achieved. Also, even with many of its perks, life in prison is NOT anything a person who has known better would find in the least bit pleasant (euphemism. OH how I miss 'foul' language). I support life imprisonment without parole for those convicted of 1st degree murder--at least this way, when an injustice is commited, another 'innocent' life would not be lost.
Once again : "You don't have exemples, you don't have valid arguments, you..." ! lol
Is it efficient ? I guess it's not ! It would not be with most of the people...
About this solution, we disagree (again) so each one could stay on its position for a long time.
I know what it is as *stRgrL* explained it... You're still on a past post ! Anyway, I don't come back on anything I wrote.
... sorry, US have a morality scale that is unbelievable for me ! To see a war prisonnier : "Oh my god !". And to see a public execution : "Welcome on Fox News ! Ready for the show ? But not before... publicity !". You're amazing !
Please show me these "myriad" of others. I can show you sources that show exactly the opposite thing. Just look at Saudi Arabia's crime rate.
NOW you bring up a valid point. Lots of people argue against the death penalty when what they are saying is actually against the current judicial system.
Question posed then is: If the judicial system is perfect, would you support a death penalty?
As you fail to see the point of my post, I shall reply: Seeing as 'perfection' in 'reality' is an 'impossibility' of course NOT!!!!!!!!!!!
Wilcox8686
Registered Senior Member
I don't remember if i have already said this, but whatever. THey need to stop pussyfooting around when they sentence someone to death, and they need to kill them within a few months. THis way, it will be a little bit more scary for someone thinking of murder.
AS someone else said earlier, India has public executions, and nobody fucks around there as they do in the USA.
Bells
Staff member
It'd be even scarier if it was discovered after the execution that the accused was actually innocent. As has been the case on many occasions. And yet the State is not punished for their having murdered an innocent individual. They justify it as a mistake made at law.
The death penalty gives the State a licence to murder its citizens. While many of you will scoff and say that the person facing such punishment may deserve it because they too committed a crime, the risk that the accused is innocent should make us all aware of how dangerous the death penalty is. For in the event of an accused being found innocent after the State has ended their lives, all that is said is that it was a grave mistake, one that must be avoided at all costs, that the judicial system does have holes in it where some do escape and are wrongly convicted. However, even with all the ummming and aahhing by the state when situations like this arise, no-one holds them accountable for their crimes. After all, if they have executed an innocent member of society, shouldn't they too be made to pay for their crimes? Do the laws which allow them to take someones life for a life not apply to them?
The death penalty only serves to show society how hypocritical the law and those who govern actually are.
Uhhhh... actually it serves as a form of retribution to the criminal.
I dont think they try and justify it at all. Not 1 single judicial system, or any system for that matter in this world is perfect, not even our death penalty.
What do you propose we do with serious killers and rapists in our society?
Ok... responses to some of the statements I've read here
This is about the death penalty, not the judicial process!
They are intimately linked, and this is therefore a moot point. As long as a chance exists for innocence, death is not the answer.
What if the judicial system was perfect?
Well this will never happen, so we are now entereing the land of make believe. Now that being said, I see no reason for the death penalty in this case either. In a perfect judicial system, the criminal always gets caught, tried, and convicted. This sounds like a damn good deterent (assuming you take away all the 'privilages' currently allowed prisoners). The only reasons left for the death penalty are revenge and cost savings, neither of which I believe is worth killng a person... even if they are a killer.
Now lets return back to reality:
The judicial system is run by people, and will always be imperfect. There is no way to be 100% sure that the correct person was caught. Every type of evidence (including DNA) can be incorrect and misused.
I do not see anyone listing good enough reasons for risking the lives of people who are possibly innocent.
This is about the death penalty, not the judicial process!
They are intimately linked, and this is therefore a moot point. As long as a chance exists for innocence, death is not the answer.
What if the judicial system was perfect?
Well this will never happen, so we are now entereing the land of make believe. Now that being said, I see no reason for the death penalty in this case either. In a perfect judicial system, the criminal always gets caught, tried, and convicted. This sounds like a damn good deterent (assuming you take away all the 'privilages' currently allowed prisoners). The only reasons left for the death penalty are revenge and cost savings, neither of which I believe is worth killng a person... even if they are a killer.
Now lets return back to reality:
The judicial system is run by people, and will always be imperfect. There is no way to be 100% sure that the correct person was caught. Every type of evidence (including DNA) can be incorrect and misused.
I do not see anyone listing good enough reasons for risking the lives of people who are possibly innocent.
coolsoldier
Registered Senior Member
Kill the killers!
We need to kill everyone who kills someone else, so all executioners should be executed !
Seriously, this is one of the most ridiculous topics for as often as it comes up.
We need to kill everyone who kills someone else, so all executioners should be executed
!Seriously, this is one of the most ridiculous topics for as often as it comes up.