Death vs. Life Imprisonment

Execution or Imprisonment

  • Execution

    Votes: 10 40.0%

  • Life in Prison

    Votes: 15 60.0%
  • Total voters
    25
If killers deserve to die, then what do you deserve?
Click to expand...


Its not like the people who support the death penalty are actually giving the injection. Its one thing to gruesomely murder someone and another to support the death penalty. It is the law right now, and if you guys want to write your senator to have it changed, then go right ahead. But until then, your going to have to accept that it is the lawful and rightful punishment. And in my opinion, the best one.


Groove on
 
Joe,

I'm all for rehabilitation. I know a number of people who were rehabilitated decades ago. There crimes were more a matter of immaturity and having poor role-models.

However, as far as this goes:

***If we took the scientific approach, this kind of behavior would be considered mental illness and sooner or later a cure would be found. Maybe it might even then be prevented. Unfortunately, when religious people see criminals, they do not see mental illness, they see EVIL. And since evil can't be cured, they figure that criminals should be locked up for life or executed.

What was wrong with John Wayne Gacy? Did he have an extra chromosome that caused his behavior? Did he have a physical defect in his brain or was his illness the result of how he was raised? Maybe it was the result of a chemical in his evironment?

We will never know what was truly wrong with him because instead of treating him as sick, we treated him as evil. And when the next John Wayne Gacy appears, we will have to start from scratch all over again.***

Why not take this matter up with the scientific community?
 
stRgrL,

***Its not like the people who support the death penalty are actually giving the injection. Its one thing to gruesomely murder someone and another to support the death penalty.***

The manner of killing, whether you consider it to be gruesome or not, does not justify the kill. Because the person is killed with your support, you own the act of killing of another human being as surely as the one who gives the injection. Accept who and what you are - a death penalty supporter... a killer.

When and where do you want your lethal injection administered?
 
Because the person is killed with your support, you own the act of killing of another human being as surely as the one who gives the injection.
Click to expand...

Puhlease! Thats like saying if the pilot flies the plane with my support, I am somehow helping fly the plane. Dude, get over it.
Okay, I have a question to all you non-supporters. Would you kill someone in self defense? To protect your child, you would pull the trigger?


I rest my case


Oh, and bullets, yes you deserve a nice cold one, Ill buy ya one when ya get back here:D


Groove on
 
*Okay, I have a question to all you non-supporters. Would you kill someone in self defense? To protect your child, you would pull the trigger?*

NO, never! I have to inform you that I do have a child. Don't have a gun. I hate every weapon to begin with! If I have to protect my child from being killed, I will! I just use my teeth, nails, feet and every other part of my body to fight with. It may perhaps not work out and if my child will be killed, so be it. Then at the least I have tried and probably get killed in the progress also.

Treatment of murderers is being done in many cases. Some of them are considered cured after some years in a mental institution and released. In some cases the 'cure' works, in other cases the 'cure' does not work and the murderer goes back to killing. Question is which person will go back to his/her killing and which person doesn't. That is hard to tell, because if they are mentally ill, they can play a roll and fool the so called system. That is a tough decision for the ones who treat such persons.

I do agree that churches with their silly power over people do have serious influence on people and their actions. As parenthood does and other influences in life from child on.

Anyway, I stay with it... Death penalty is NOT the solution. Never...

ICALOB, have your cold beer. Guess your mind is messed up through society. Hopefully you only carry your bullets and you don't have a gun to load with them. You seem a danger for others then...
 
Thanks stRgrL,
Banshee I wonder about you:
NO, never! I have to inform you that I do have a child. Don't have a gun. I hate every weapon to begin with! If I have to protect my child from being killed, I will! I just use my teeth, nails, feet and every other part of my body to fight with. It may perhaps not work out and if my child will be killed, so be it.Then at the least I have tried and probably get killed in the progress also.
Click to expand...
I am just at a loss for words
Guess your mind is messed up through society.
Click to expand...
My mind is messed up, huh? Because I disagree with you. I am really glad to know that you would throw your young to the wolves if given a chance. Maybe i've been gone to long, but at least stick up for your family.
I hate every weapon to begin with!
Click to expand...
teeth, nails, feet are considered weapons. Anything used to cause harm is a weapon. So how could you hate that.

Nine and a wake up- ICARRYALOTOFBULLETS
Click to expand...
 
teeth, nails, feet are considered weapons. Anything used to cause harm is a weapon. So how could you hate that.
Click to expand...

I agree. I would kill someone in a heartbeat to protect my child. And I dont care if anyone thinks Im a killer for saying it!


Groove on
 
I would probly kill to protect my family and i do belive that the cops should cary guns but that isn't what we are talking about. We are talking about killing someone who isn't threating you or your family because they are already in jail. You are talking about Revenge pure and simple and that makes it wrong.
 
Blond_cupid

"Why not take this matter up with the scientific community?"

Because in the US the scientific community has no power. The lawyers have all the power here. The general rule is that if your not a lawyer, don't expect to be able to climb the political latter.

These problems would not exist if we had teachers, doctors, economists, and scientists as our elected representitives instead of lawyers.

The second problem lies in the people themselves. In the US, about 10% of it's population is responsible for all the great things America is known for. The remaining 90% are idiots. And since idiots are far more likely to follow their emotions than their brains, they would vote out of office any representitive that takes an unemotional and scientific approach to solving societies problems.

What scares me even more is that the masses tend to vote for people that are even DUMBER than they are.(George W. Bush) I guess that way they don't feel intimidated.

What would have to be done is:

1. Reform the electoral system so that people get into office based on their character and intelligence, not on how much money they have or have raised.

2. Education. After all democracy is only a perfect system in an educated society.

3. People that are smarter and more intelligent have to be active. If you consider yourself one of these, you have to vote, strike, picket, and donate money to organizations that support your beliefs. You just can't complain about injustices on internet forums and take no actions. All we are doing is blowing hot air if we talk but do nothing else.

Tom
 
You are talking about revenge pure and simple
Click to expand...

No, if the person is dead, than the person cannot come back and hurt you. Also, I was trying to get the point across - to all you people calling me a killer for supporting the DP, that if you said yes you would kill in self defense - well then your a killer too:D


Groove on
 
The difference lies in self defence vs cold blood. If someone brakes into ur home and is atacking you and say he had a gun and you grabed it and fired and killed him then i am sure no-one here would have a problem with your actions. Insted the DP murders people in cold blood. I mean whats more calculated than the leagle system. Once in jail they are no longer a threat so killing them ISN'T the ONLY option where it might be in the breakin case. That people is the difference
 
Asguard,

"We are talking about killing someone who isn't threating you or your family because they are already in jail."

"The difference lies in self defence vs cold blood."

Exactly. one can hardly be clearer.

*strGrl*
"Puhlease! Thats like saying if the pilot flies the plane with my support, I am somehow helping fly the plane."
Well no, ofcourse. But you must be blind not to see the difference. Maybe you are.

here is an interesting question for you:
Mr. A says:"well I knew that the toy bunny was booby-trapped, but I did not feel it was MY responsibility to tell the child."
Is Mr.A in any way to be held responsible for the death of the child?

Now I know you are going to think:"well a murderer knows he is at risk of ending up in Death Row". But that would be missing the point completely. The point is: can you be held responsible for omitting action. You can say NAY to the DP. Until you do, you are in fact partly responsible for the deaths of many humans (criminals and an occational innocent person).
 
ICALOB...

*teeth, nails, feet are considered weapons. Anything used to cause harm is a weapon. So how could you hate that.*

You think I stand looking while someone tries to kill my child or somebody else? That is a whole different matter! If you see something like that happening before your eyes and you refuse to act, then you are useless! As a human being!

Jesus what a crap! I apologize if you took my words wrong. I shouldn't have said you are messed up through society, for I don't know you.

Guess Merlijn says it right here. He makes a good point with that statement. Guess that is what it's all about. Responsibility to other people.

Self defense is not comparible with taking someone's life in cold blood.

My goodness, I get sick of the whole issue! :confused: Don't you people see it is just wrong, that death penalty and how 'justice' is been done here...?
 
I'm confused ...

Why is the death penalty not considered to be society's 'self defense'?

Other than the fact that the person was not killed while committing the
act (ex. a Police Officer blowing them away) is there any real difference?

Take care :(
 
Merlijn

But you must be blind not to see the difference. Maybe you are.
Click to expand...

You know, I once heard that when a person puts another person down, he is usually lacking in an area of his life.... gee..... I wonder which one that is?:bugeye:


Groove on:D
 
the reason the DP cant be considered self defence if because it dosn't fit the criteria. There is no imediate danger (a requirement for a self defence case) and there are other options (another requirement)
 
oooh *stRgrl* I feel exposed. ;) hehehe.

I hope you yourself are going to give some constructive comments in this discussion again. If you have run out of arguments, don't post instead of going about like a loose canon.

In fact my "you must be blind not to see the difference. Maybe you are". Was a reaction to your "Puhlease! Thats like ...." which is in my view an axample of you being a loose canon.

Instead of pointing at the things I presumably miss in my life, react to the last part of my post. Here is the core idea again:
You are partly responsible for murdering inmates, because you ommit to say NAY to he DP.
Remember: the "Law" is made by the people, and you are part of the people.... so you cannot hide behind the law.

If it doesn't worry you, just say so.
If you think it's otherwise, show me why.
If you think that is an issue besides the point, tell me.

I am always in for a good argument. I admit sometimes I have wandered away from the path of a "good" argument myself. Let's learn from that and continue with more wisdom.

Merlijn
 
Death Penalty cost Vs life imprisonment

I just wanted to comment on the misinformation on the board. In reality the death penalty is much more expensive than life imprisonment

Here are some facts for you


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Financial Costs
It is sometimes suggested that abolishing capital punishment is unfair to the taxpayer, as though life imprisonment were obviously more expensive than executions. If one takes into account all the relevant costs, the reverse is true. "The death penalty is not now, nor has it ever been, a more economical alternative to life imprisonment."(49)
A murder trial normally takes much longer when the death penalty is at issue than when it is not. Litigation costs—including the time of judges, prosecutors, public defenders, and court reporters, and the high costs of briefs—are all borne by the taxpayer.

A 1982 study showed that were the death penalty to be reintroduced in New York, the cost of the capital trial alone would be more than double the cost of a life term in prison.(50)

In Maryland, a comparison of capital trial costs with and without the death penalty for the years 1979-1984 concluded that a death penalty case costs "approximately 42 percent more than a case resulting in a non-death sentence."(51) In 1988 and 1989 the Kansas legislature voted against reinstating the death penalty after it was informed that reintroduction would involve a first-year cost of "more than $ 11 million."(52) Florida, with one of the nation’s largest death rows, has estimated that the true cost of each execution is approximately $3.2 million, or approximately six times the cost of a life-imprisonment sentence.(53)

The only way to make the death penalty a "better buy" than imprisonment is to weaken due process and curtail appellate review, which are the defendant’s (and society’s) only protections against the grossest miscarriages of justice. The savings in dollars would be at the cost of justice: In nearly half of the death-penalty cases given review under federal habeas corpus, the conviction is overturned.(54)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top