society should adopt the practices that best deters the type of crime in question without adversely affecting society itself, whatever that practice may be.
The death penalty is actually
not a deterrent.
But don't let that stop you.
Considering the rate that the US executes people, murder should be a rare crime in your country. But it is not.
And the death penalty does adversely affect society. It costs more to execute someone than it does to incarcerate them for life.
my definition is the art of fair play.
in my opinion you cannot define justice.
Fair play for whom?
Justice does not involve murdering people because they are criminals. But that's my version of justice. Yours is obviously different.
i never said, or suggested, that at all.
Oh I'm sorry, you think driving them insane is a better option. Your compassion knows no bounds.
Interesting..
So you think the justice system should commit crimes but this would depend solely and wholly on the crime committed by the criminal. And this is supposed to establish fairness how?
yes, justice is a tough nut to crack isn't it?
I don't think so. But it seems you do.
Syzygys said:
So? Those are just meaningless big words, "better" and such. You could apply the same logic to war. If your country attacked, are you fighting back or not? Of course you are, you don't say: hey, we are not fighting back, we are better than them!
You fail at logic.
I understand the concept of being better than criminals may be foreign to you, and there is nothing that can actually be done about that on this forum.
If you attack someone, you are the aggressor.
No, I don't remember, Where was it written? I think we are supposed to be SMARTER than criminals and STRONGER. If criminals can do ANYTHING and prosecution's hands are in handcuffs, that is fucked up and not an even field. When we have an even field, we can have equality.
Where is it written?
How can society prosecute a criminal for a crime if the prosecution itself is criminal? How can the justice system seek justice if it is itself committing criminal acts? How can it judge one for wrong doing if it is doing wrong itself?
Once you learn how to answer those questions, you might come to understand why your preferred system is one of yahoo's and cave dwellers with no concept of justice or society.
They should adopt practices that brings RESULTS.
Killing doesn't bring results. It does not deter criminal acts.
It has nothing to do with murders, generally speaking. I don't want to see a criminal to go free, just because some silly law doesn't let evidence to be introduced at the trial...
You would rather see innocent people be jailed because the law and system you favour would allow tampered material to be presented at trial?
To establish guilt. As surprising as it is, I don't want innocents to be shot or prosecuted.
But you think laws that protect the chain of evidence should not exist, which would result in innocents being shot and prosecuted because it would allow people to tamper with the evidence to get results they may desire.
You are being stupid. Just an observation, not an argument.
Says he who thinks laws designed to ensure the safety of the system as being "silly".
The punishment should be equal to the crime. Not every crime worthy of the DP, duh...
Oh how good of you.
But again, why would you bother with such rules?
Loaded and stupid question.
Much like the premise of this thread of yours.
But in general, planned murder gets a bigger punishment.
Do you think a spouse who helps his/her sick and dying spouse by injecting them with an overdose to end their pain after planning that moment for months with said dying spouse and with the person's consent deserves a bigger punishment?
I know. It is hard for someone such as yourself to understand that people have morals.
Who is to say we have to have a higher ground?
Say that to the guy who doesn't like you and decides to just kill you. You wouldn't have a higher ground and people could simply sit by and watch you be killed because 'we don't have to have a higher ground'. Hell, we can sit back and watch rapists rape women, men and children and do nothing at all, because we don't have to have a higher ground.
Persons don't start wars, countries do (well, most of the time).
And countries are comprised of and made up of? What populates countries and who makes those decisions? Goats? Chickens? Cows?
So in that regard, countries are already in a lower level than the average person, so if that doesn't bother you, neither should the justice system...
What bothers me is that there are psychotic and sociopathic twats running around who think that murdering people is legitimate.