BigWhite69
Male
Okay, so if someone murders your family then you want them to have a second chance?
Death Penalty: For or Against
- Thread starter douglas sperry
- Start date
Okay, so if someone murders your family then you want them to have a second chance?
God forbid the two prison escapees from New York ******* anybody while they are on the lam. One of them is doing life without parole for killing a sheriff's deputy, and the other is doing 25 to life for kidnapping, murdering, and dismembering his former boss.
easyuk, of course its not ok. But my point was, there is a margin of error in everything we do that has meaning to us, and as a society we have to weigh the value of an individual against the value of a much larger number ... remember Spock in the Star Trek Wrath Of Khan "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or one".
That is why I specifically pointed out, above, that IF the evidence was 100%, would you agree with a death penalty? If your answer is still an empathic NO, then there is no use even discussing the issue with believers of the death sentence, as you present no opportunity for "middle ground" solutions. However, I will stick with my bet that if-when the situation personally impacts you or a member of your family, your opinion will change. Too many courts and judges have proven the majority here right to chance any other solution with the "worst of the worse" predators.
Last edited:
I am absolutely for the death penalty. I do think it should be for the most horrific crimes; I think Timothy McVeigh is a good example . The death penalty has been applied to often by local D.A. trying to make a political career.
sheila wilson
Female
I've been reading these posts and what really gets me with the Anti Death Penalty people is they can't get the facts stated to them. Its like they are not listening. Macnfries keeps saying "If it is 100% certain" and gets a reply "Mistakes are made." Kenneth McDuff was on Death Row before it was abolished the first time then years later they let him out and he kills 7 or 8 more women, and the reply is "If he is in prison for life then he won't commit the murders". IT HAD ALREADY HAPPENED. Someone on here said the anti death penalty people are just like the religious fanatics. They have an answer for everything and don't care about the facts.
sheila wilson
Female
Oh, i'm for the Death Penalty.
easyuk
Male
Is the margin of error acceptable. If a member of your family was convicted and executed and them found to be guilty what would your opinion be?
The purpose of the state, and particularly the justice system isn't to do what I want.
I want to pay no taxes but have great roads, education, law enforcement etc. etc.
The justice system is not supposed to be a vehicle for revenge. Quite the contrary. It's supposed to be entirely dispassionate.
If someone did ******* my family and I'm 100% sure then why not let me ******* them to death over a matter of months? Is that somehow uncivilized compared to just killing them?
Is the mob right when it's 100% certain and hangs someone or stones them to death?
Is there really a middle ground when it comes to state execution? It's either alright to ******* people or it isn't. What exists is a situation where the state says that it is not OK to ******* and as a punishment...kills.
What's the purpose? Revenge, deterrence, prevention?
Is the US safer than countries which do not have the death sentence?
easyuk, you're playing politician on me, here. You're refusing to answer the question direct, but instead, responding with more questions and ridiculous statements. I started to break your last post down into segments to give you precise answers, then I just realize (with your 7 new questions) that you're only playing dodge ball with this topic anyway. So, there's no getting a straight answer from you. I won't badger you for a response as I only frustrate myself.
In general, the majority of the public wants capital punishment; not as a deterrent to these criminals, but as a method of prevention from potential victims. Its a simple moral argument in which you choose to feel taking a criminal's life doesn't accomplish anything that a long incarceration wouldn't do. And many, like yourself, feel that invoking a death sentence is more expensive than a life of incarceration (which has been proven true), but we can thank our current judicial system for the generous, unlimited rights to appeals granted these losers.
I have a concern, as you, with accidently putting an innocent person to death, which is why the death sentence should only be used sparingly and in situations where there is a high level of evidence, like the Boston Marathon bomber, Tsarnaev, who currently sits in his cell under observation, as an unrepentive killer, throwing middle fingers at the camera while smiling. Society needs to be permanently rid of such unrehabilitatable criminals, otherwise, they inspire more to follow him with his books, comments, interviews, and acts of martyrdom. No appeals, no second trials, no nothing ... caught on camera, he's 100% guilty, and should be lead to a public guillotine, beheaded ... swiftly, inexpensively, and without the margin of error of a needle, and his corpse disposed of privately in an unmarked grave.
Now, no more "dodge ball" with you ...
In general, the majority of the public wants capital punishment; not as a deterrent to these criminals, but as a method of prevention from potential victims. Its a simple moral argument in which you choose to feel taking a criminal's life doesn't accomplish anything that a long incarceration wouldn't do. And many, like yourself, feel that invoking a death sentence is more expensive than a life of incarceration (which has been proven true), but we can thank our current judicial system for the generous, unlimited rights to appeals granted these losers.
I have a concern, as you, with accidently putting an innocent person to death, which is why the death sentence should only be used sparingly and in situations where there is a high level of evidence, like the Boston Marathon bomber, Tsarnaev, who currently sits in his cell under observation, as an unrepentive killer, throwing middle fingers at the camera while smiling. Society needs to be permanently rid of such unrehabilitatable criminals, otherwise, they inspire more to follow him with his books, comments, interviews, and acts of martyrdom. No appeals, no second trials, no nothing ... caught on camera, he's 100% guilty, and should be lead to a public guillotine, beheaded ... swiftly, inexpensively, and without the margin of error of a needle, and his corpse disposed of privately in an unmarked grave.
Now, no more "dodge ball" with you ...
Last edited:
Patricia Henderson
Female
I'm for the Death Penalty
easyuk
Male
I don't know how I would feel if someone killed my family and were 100% guilty. My background and upbringing are clearly different so I don't seem to find it as easy an answer or at all "obvious".
Does the US have lower violent crime and ******* rates than countries without the death penalty? It seems not, so I'm back to my question which is what purpose does it serve?
It just sounds like a mixture of habit (that's what happens there) and revenge. That's fine, but don't dress it up as anything else. Being "martyred" in today's messed up ideologies probably more inspirational than being alive and in prison so again I'm not sure where the benefit lies. Looking tough but not seeing any benefit seems rather unnecessary too.
I'm not planning to commit any crimes when I'm in the US so I'm hoping the discussion is academic anyway!
easyuk, I wish I could speak and structure my sentences better to help you understand my points better, but I can't seem to reach your wave length. I'll just end my discussion with you by saying my points are not of vindictiveness, but to protect those who wish to live, enjoy, and contribute positively to life. Sometimes, the only way to guarantee that is total and permanent removal of the problem.
Last edited:
States' Rights.
Quilla
Female
this is an interesting site National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty
ok I know...it's not neutral...
ok I know...it's not neutral...
Quilla
Female
I am for it. If a person does something so horrible they can never regain the right to join society again why should we house feed educate and supply healthcare to them. We have good honest law abiding citizens that need that help and dont get it. I believe jail/prison should be to educate and rehabilitate those that will be rejoining society.
Then again I am also an eye for an eye type and a hard ass. I believe in second chances but not third.
easyuk
Male
You don't have to explain yourself to anyone.
It's interesting to know why people have different views on such big matters though isn't it?
I think escape proof incarceration is feasible. The message we should be giving is that killing isn't OK. I haven't seen any evidence that it has any deterrent effect, it seems that the states that have capital punishment also have the highest ******* rates. I have a concealed carry permit and I have no problem shooting someone that threatens my life. I don't have the right to go ******* anyone that poses no immediate threat. I don't think society should either. People that need to be removed from society should be removed and put safely away. Other than minimal life support there is no need to educate or amuse them because they aren't returning to society.
Interesting.
The recent events show us that incarceration isn't always escape proof or feasible. In order for it to work you have to take out almost ALL human interaction between offender and guards and have it completely automated. That would be tantamount to ******* in some ways and also impossible.
