# Capital Punishment



## Raiser (Sep 8, 2010)

It was, is, and always will be an ongoing debate amongst everyone: should capital punishment be a more major part of each of our societies.
My socials class last year debated about this several times over, but it seemed that the majority was that it should not.

My view is different, however.
Many conflicts are instigated and finished by one party, as seen here:
http://gbatemp.net/index.php?showtopic=252...t=0&start=0

You have some morons drinking, doing drugs, or just doing plain stupid things and it costs the lives of one, two, maybe even three or four lives.

"Everyone has the right to life."
"No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed."
- as written in Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

I mean, it's just absurd.
I know the whole "eye for an eye" thing is a little cynical, but I think it's fully justified.
People may think "well, capital punishment will just result in a bunch of cycles where he (1) dies for kill her (1), and she (2) dies for killing him (1)."
I figure it would just be a one-for-one thing, although considering how messed up many humans are, they'd keep on wanting some sort of vengeance.

And speaking of vengeance, that's not why I favor capital punishment. It's just that, you take away a life (or lives) with either a stupid or inhumane act; the accused may get lifetime, maybe 50 years, maybe less.
The point is that they've taken away a life and they still get to be taken care of, fed, and kept alive while the families of the deceased mourn? Sickens me.

What do you all think?

EDIT: For those that don't know, capital punishment is another term for death penalty.


----------



## Elritha (Sep 8, 2010)

No, I wouldn't support state sponsored killing. Taking a life away like that makes you no better in my opinion. To me it's just absurd to respond in kind with the same sort of punishment the person in question committed. It's not going to bring the murdered individual back and it's hardly going to help the family much after the deed is over with. 
Thankfully it's banned in just about all western countries except the USA. Besides for serious crimes, death would be the easy option.

What I would support is longer prison terms for certain crimes. Some sentences are just a joke, a few years for murder.


----------



## Blood Fetish (Sep 8, 2010)

Capital punishment has been shown to be an ineffective deterrent. It does not keep society safer.
Capital punishment (inclusive of "death row" and the repeals process) generally costs more money than detaining a prisoner for life. It does not save money.
Capital punishment can be done quicker and more importantly, painlessly using methods such as nitrogen asphyxiation. It fulfills a barbaric sense of "vengeance", ignoring justice and humanity.
Capital punishment has quite a few false positives over the years. You can release someone from prison, but you can't bring them back to life.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 8, 2010)

Absolutely not. Since the death penalty was reinstated in the US in 1976, about 175 people on death row have been exonerated of their crimes and set free. 1224 have been executed since then, so extrapolating, a low estimate would mean about 14% of all executions are those of innocents. Unacceptable.


----------



## Raika (Sep 8, 2010)

I'm kinda in the middle. Half of me thinks that people who take away lives from others are cruel, as they have no right to do so and would deeply hurt someone, and that they deserve to die for it. The other half of me thinks that we ourselves have no right to take away human lives, or we would just be murderers, lives are irreplaceable after all, what's done is done, human live are precious, we have no right to judge...

Argh I don't know what to think anymore, I'm confused. D:


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 8, 2010)

Raiki, just ignore whether or not you find it moral to kill an actual murderer, and realize how obviously outrageous it is that we execute innocents, and you can come to only one conclusion. Death penalty is not worth it.


----------



## Magmorph (Sep 8, 2010)

If it was possible to get 100% accurate results about who committed the crime then maybe it wouldn't be so bad. The truth is that our legal system is nowhere near 100% accurate and many innocent people have been put to death. If you kill someone there is no way to appeal or undo what has been done.


----------



## Jamstruth (Sep 8, 2010)

I don't believe in killing people for whatever reason. It doesn't matter who you are or what you did you should be given a slight chance at least i.e. Rehabilitation. Dometimes that doesn't work, I'll admit, and people just end up back in prison. Even then I don't think any Government should be killing people willingly. There's just something wrong about sentencing someone to their death that I don't like. Its like deeming their life worthless to the world.


----------



## Issac (Sep 8, 2010)

I'm against Capital Punishment. Main reason: WHAT IF he/she was innocent?
then I also think: It's not okay for this man or woman to kill a person, so therefore some other persons will kill him/her. what gives any person the right to kill another person? I don't think it's justifiable. No, life time of butt raping in jail and shame and loong looooooong days in a cell... that's a punishment that will be hard on the villain...


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 9, 2010)

Few reasons why not:

For the amount of time some people stay on death row, it's way too damn expensive.

Uh...since when did any human obtain the right to know when to murder someone? Who cares if it's a crime?

It's against my morals as a person. Not religious morals.


----------



## Raiser (Sep 9, 2010)

I understand what you all mean. It just incredibly irritates me at how people take the lives of others and are given the chance to be rehabilitated and live on. Sometimes, the convicted will be released when being declared "rehabilitated" only to strike again and flee. Other times, yeah, they'll end up living a peaceful, normal life.

I was considering it ONLY on those that are proven guilty. Obviously our legal system is nowhere near perfect, but in many cases, determining if the suspect is guilty or not isn't that hard to determine.



			
				Jamstruth said:
			
		

> Its like deeming their life worthless to the world.
> Well, someone who has intentionally killed someone (presumably an innocent bystander) can't be of any good to the world. Not saying they're worthless, just that they're doing much more harm to the world than good.
> 
> It's a thorn to me too: killing someone who killed someone. Is it right? No. Is it a seemingly "better" alternative? To some.
> ...


This is what I want to see *at least*. Criminals have it far too easy this day and time.


----------



## Rayder (Sep 9, 2010)

I'm all for capitol punishment.  Violent criminals won't be robbing/killing/raping anyone if they're dead.


----------



## Wombo Combo (Sep 9, 2010)

All I know if a guy killed my family and didn't get the death penalty I would take justice in my own hands that day.


----------



## Giga_Gaia (Sep 9, 2010)

Wombo Combo said:
			
		

> All I know if a guy killed my family and didn't get the death penalty I would take justice in my own hands that day.



Then his family would do the same and the cycle of hatred would just never end.

As for me, I agree and disagree. No, it shouldn't be allowed because you can't be 100% sure the person is guilty. You could condemn an innocent man to death.

However, for example, in a country where a tyrant killed hundreds or thousands of people, I do agree that those kind of persons should be executed. Also, a person who is undoubtedly guilty shouldn't be allowed to live. He didn't allow his victims to live, why should he be able to live if they didn't? The victims probably begged to be spared, but the killer did it, so why should he still remain alive?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 9, 2010)

Wombo Combo said:
			
		

> All I know if a guy killed my family and didn't get the death penalty I would take justice in my own hands that day.


"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." - Mohandas Gandhi


----------



## Paka (Sep 9, 2010)

Definitely opposed, and many of the courses I took while in college (many forensic classes, and I minored in Criminal Justice) combined with independent research and reading have backed up and made my feelings on this issue even stronger.

My issues with it and arguments against it consist of many of the common ones-- question of possible innocence, racial and economic biases, cost vs. life imprisonment, the fact that it is not a deterrent, cruel and unusual punishment, evolving standards of ethics that my country is rapidly falling behind in. An irreversible punishment, and arbitrarily assigned one, in a system which is so prone to error (uneducated juries, corrupt prosecutors, inadequate defense, ect.) is unethical in the extreme, and there is no evidence that these issues can ever be resolved. Even in cases where guilt is definite, there can never be a definite determination of the state of mind or motive... the # of those who are intellectually impared, suffer from mental illness or have had their personalities altered by years of abuse, ect., on death rows is quite large; impossible to really determine culpability in such cases. Also, execution creates a whole new group of victims in the loved ones of the executed. And even in the case of unrepentant and admitted murders committed in the name of a cause, executions only produce martyrs and further killings. Society is well served and completely protected by giving the worst offenders life without the possibility of parole... indeed, the conditions in U.S. "supermax" prisons are very harsh (possibly inhumane, really) and life spent in one is certainly an ultimate punishment in itself.


----------



## Blaze163 (Sep 9, 2010)

I've never been able to make up my mind on this issue. On the one hand, I don't believe that it's morally sound, we'd become the evil we're trying to fight. But on the other hand, sometimes it takes a harsh hand to enforce discipline. I guess I would agree with this in exceptionally bad cases, where rehabilitation is simply not possible. Mass murderers, serial rapists, paedophiles, etc. The real pond scum of the human race. I see no reason why the tax payers (now including me) should pay to keep these people in relative comfort. 

In truly dire circumstances or people who have no will to change, while it's still morally questionable it would at least be understandable.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 10, 2010)

Blaze163 said:
			
		

> I've never been able to make up my mind on this issue. On the one hand, I don't believe that it's morally sound, we'd become the evil we're trying to fight. But on the other hand, sometimes it takes a harsh hand to enforce discipline. I guess I would agree with this in exceptionally bad cases, where rehabilitation is simply not possible. Mass murderers, serial rapists, paedophiles, etc. The real pond scum of the human race. I see no reason why the tax payers (now including me) should pay to keep these people in relative comfort.
> 
> In truly dire circumstances or people who have no will to change, while it's still morally questionable it would at least be understandable.


So you'd rather pay for their death?


----------



## Wombo Combo (Sep 10, 2010)

Giga_Gaia said:
			
		

> Wombo Combo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Honestly I very well doubt if some guy stormed in your house and killed your family that you would not end his life and just call the cops and IF they will catch him he will just sit in prison living while you have to visit your family at the cemetery. You say no I would not kill him now but being in that situation is a lot different then just saying you wouldn't on the internet.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 10, 2010)

Wombo Combo said:
			
		

> Giga_Gaia said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And how would you feel if the state executed a family member convicted of a crime you know they didn't commit, like for example they were with you when it occurred?


----------



## KingdomBlade (Sep 10, 2010)

I don't really believe in death penalty, since it does not lessen the crime rate much, it's a waste of money and time, it doesn't do anything to help in the growth of economy. I believe in second chances, and in being able to come back.

In the laws of human life, every person deserves to live. If they have killed someone else, I don't believe that it is still justifiable. What does it do? Does it make a bad situation better? Does it fix anything that has already happened? The person's family may want him to die, but it's not really that based on justice, it's based on hate and grief. Nothing happens, except that one more life is lost. Nothing is fixed, nothing is made better, nothing changes, and it's completely useless overall.

A prison sentence would be better. A person has a chance to come back. A person has a chance to fix everything that she/he has done. They can think, they can move, they can still breathe, and they can help.


----------



## Wombo Combo (Sep 10, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> And how would you feel if the state executed a family member convicted of a crime you know they didn't commit, like for example they were with you when it occurred?



I would take justice in my own hands. Sometimes that is the only way unless you can easily sleep at night knowing that you did nothing to the people who killed your family for no reason which I could not.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 10, 2010)

Wombo Combo said:
			
		

> 0ddity said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How? Kill the judge? Prosecutor? Jurors? Detectives? Prison warden?


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 10, 2010)

Wombo Combo said:
			
		

> Honestly I very well doubt if some guy stormed in your house and killed your family that you would not end his life and just call the cops and IF they will catch him he will just sit in prison living while you have to visit your family at the cemetery. You say no I would not kill him now but being in that situation is a lot different then just saying you wouldn't on the internet.


I hate it when people argue this, because I wouldn't. Killing someone is a thought that has never crossed my mind in rage, depression, or any other hurtful emotion. I don't have it in me to kill. 

Now, putting them in the hospital is a different story...
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 But joking aside, I can never critically hurt someone.

Honestly, is it really that hard to believe that a human actually values another human life, no matter what?


----------



## eltrut (Sep 10, 2010)

I would like the penal colony idea brought back, that shit worked. Van Diemen's Land (i.e. Tasmania, Australia) worked on a system where the criminals worked off their time owed to society while simultaneously growing their own produce and building their own housing thus minimising cost (and maximising profit, the buildings they made are still here and totally awesome 200 odd years later) then were released and given every opportunity to start a successful non-criminal life. This was done by giving them land for farming which probably wouldn't work so well now, but you get the picture.

That or the prison system from Prison Break,


Spoiler



The one in season 2 or 3 where it is only the prisoners to fend for themselves while the army keeps a perimeter.


That would be cool.

To the people saying it is right to wrong those who have wronged you, it is in the degrees of variance that it changes. Someone may have killed your family, but they did not kill you. So go kill theirs 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 /joke.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

I support the death penalty with open arms. I just wish that we knew the people who are on death row are 100% guilty. Rehab for drug abuse will work, and if they are a drug dealer then odds are they will not be back on the street if they went to jail. The only thing wrong with rehab is that you cannot rehabilitate someone with an existing mental disorder. Something like Schizophrenia or Bi-Polar. These are out of reach for treatment with the individual, and even then you cannot make them take their meds unless they go to the loonybin. Then that's where the men in white coats say nighty night. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 If rehab worked 100% then the death penalty could be abolished, but until then people still need capital punishment.

I still think to cut down costs they should go back to a noose around the gizzard. It is so much more humane than the lethal injections now, and a lot cheaper. When set up properly, the noose tightens around the neck and sharply breaks the spine at a certain point. They drift into unconsciousness immediately and suffocate. Without knowing what is going on. It may looks painful, but when done the right way it is very humane. The things that hurt were the hangings in the old west. There they just suffocate to death, and a gunshot was even a better way to go.

In my mind, if a person is convicted of murder then they should not rot in jail. The life in jail is very cushy, maybe the people aren't friendly but they have shelter, food, water, tv, entertainment, pay, and basic necessities. This is better than someone who premeditated an act against humanity with an intent to kill deserves. The exceptions are the people  who drink and drive. These people should be given a second chance. Not only do they not know what they are doing most of the time but they can be rehabilitated.

EDIT: Missed a word.

My $1.50 worth.


----------



## Inori (Sep 10, 2010)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> If rehab worked 100% then the death penalty could be abolished, but until then people still need capital punishment.



If I`m not mistaken, it sounds like your opinion is that people who are not "cured" should be executed? So that would mean that drug dealers are free to live, as they _can_ be rehabilitated (despite the potential harm that they can still cause to people), but people with a mental disabilities should be executed, since there`s no hope for them?

I also think that you`ve misunderstood the word "need". We don`t _need_ capital punishment. The very foundations of our world aren`t falling apart at the tectonic plates? seams because we don`t have capital punishment. 

I`m rather interested as to why you think it`s something we need.


----------



## fgghjjkll (Sep 10, 2010)

If you manage to escape death from execution, they can't execute you again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



/me learns how to escape death


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> I support the death penalty with open arms. I just wish that we knew the people who are on death row are 100% guilty. Rehab for drug abuse will work, and if they are a drug dealer then odds are they will not be back on the street if they went to jail. The only thing wrong with rehab is that you cannot rehabilitate someone with an existing mental disorder. Something like Schizophrenia or Bi-Polar. These are out of reach for treatment with the individual, and even then you cannot make them take their meds unless they go to the loonybin. Then that's where the men in white coats say nighty night.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It is becoming clear to me that you don't know the true value of a human life. When dealing with capital punishment, remember that a person is being _killed under the name of law_, it isn't some nighty-night nap and they go to Heaven/hell or whatever it is they go. That person, regardless of his/her choices, is being murdered.

If you murdered someone, would you want to be put to death, or would you like to live? Regardless of your decision, would you even think it fair that someone gets to be the judge of whether you _live, or die?_ In my opinion, dealing justice does not include dealing death to those who break the law.


----------



## Sir-Fritz (Sep 10, 2010)

Anyone that agrees to capital punishment is sick and needs help.


----------



## Wabsta (Sep 10, 2010)

I'm against it for 2 reasons.
It's sick, there seriously are innocent people who die.

And 2, for real criminals, like, child rapers/murderes, I think it's too soft. They get away with it too easy, I'd rather have them tortured every week.


----------



## Raiser (Sep 10, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> It is becoming clear to me that you don't know the true value of a human life. When dealing with capital punishment, remember that a person is being _killed under the name of law_, it isn't some nighty-night nap and they go to Heaven/hell or whatever it is they go. That person, regardless of his/her choices, is being murdered.
> 
> If you murdered someone, would you want to be put to death, or would you like to live? Regardless of your decision, would you even think it fair that someone gets to be the judge of whether you _live, or die?_ In my opinion, dealing justice does not include dealing death to those who break the law.
> If you murdered someone, I believe, you do not have the right to determine what happens to you. You may have a say in the matter whether it be a plead or other, but what happens to you in the end should be determined by the law.
> ...


Great contribution to the discussion.


----------



## Phoenix Goddess (Sep 10, 2010)

Sir-Fritz said:
			
		

> Anyone that agrees to capital punishment is sick and needs help.



Most of the time, it's someone who isn't looking death in the eye.

Quite often the justice stops the injustice, on the other hand, the justice becomes the injustice.
They aren't sure what to do with these criminals, but I believe it should be based on how heinous the crime.
I believe they should go through what they put their victims through, but if that were the case, a few innocent people would get the punishment they don't deserve.
Was a child tortured before they were killed? Crimes this heinous should be dealt with most definitely, but _how_ to deal with them is the question.

I don't completely agree with Capital Punishment, because it doesn't make the law any better than the accused.
Prisons are getting so crowded, they'll have to find a solution to it all soon before things get more out of hand than they are now.

But anyone who thinks rehabs will prevent crime from happening, needs to check into the nearest mental institution.
Rehabs do nothing if the person in it isn't willing. I'm glad the law doesn't rely heavily on rehab or medication to "solve" heinous crimes.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

Inori said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I guess that I am sick in need help then.


----------



## Phoenix Goddess (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> We need Capital Punishment for people who just don't get it.* People who would leave the world a better place if they were dead.* Killer that are still out there, people who roam free and take pleasure in the screams of the people that they kill. This is the very reason why we NEED the death penalty.



The bold text is an absolutely foolish thing to say.
Someone could say the same thing about you, me or anyone else they despise.
All it takes is a perfectly good set up and then you're on Death Row.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

phoenixgoddess27 said:
			
		

> Sterl500 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are actually people that fits the bolded words. I'm not proud to say this, and I know no one that fits it in my life or on the internet, but they are out there. It may be foolish to say, but it's true. There is nothing that fits the description of a perfect set up. Each one has it's flaws, and a little common sense can go a long way in preventing that sort of stuff.


----------



## Phoenix Goddess (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> There are actually people that fits the bolded words. I'm not proud to say this, and I know no one that fits it in my life or on the internet, but they are out there. It may be foolish to say, but it's true. There is nothing that fits the description of a perfect set up. Each one has it's flaws, and a little common sense can go a long way in preventing that sort of stuff.



So basically, there are no innocent people on Death Row?
Huh... didn't know they were all guilty and deserve to be wiped from the face of the Earth, because there are no innocent people in prison
paying for someone else's crime because of a set up or lie.
Good call.


----------



## Inori (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> No, you misunderstood me. What I am saying when using a drug dealer as an example (In this case he is addicted to the drugs he sells) that the odds are he will stay off the streets selling drugs because of what he went through in rehab. Also you misunderstand me about the people with pre-existing mental disorders. I myself am Bi-Polar, and have had several bouts of manic episodes, and very nearly killed someone. I was lucky there was someone to prevent me from grabbing the knife. What I said and meant was that you cannot force someone to take their medicine. The only way to do that would be to throw someone in a Mental Institution. This place is worse than jail, not only can the overseers be abusive, but people are actually crazy there. I did not say to kill these unfortunates, because that is a type of thinking similar to Hitler.
> 
> We need Capital Punishment for people who just don't get it. People who would leave the world a better place if they were dead. Killer that are still out there, people who roam free and take pleasure in the screams of the people that they kill. This is the very reason why we NEED the death penalty.



Ok, I am glad I misunderstood what you were trying to get at, and I`m sorry for misunderstanding.

However, I disagree with your reasoning regarding the _need_ for capital punishment. Your argument assumes that everyone who has killed before, did it out of sheer pleasure, which is not always true. Yes, there are truly sick people out there, but what about those people that have killed someone accidentally, say, because of wreckless driving? And how do you prove that someone took joy in the fact that they were taking another life? And if capital punishment is enforced, what makes the person executing the punishment any better than the people they are exeuting in the first place? 

And part of your argument is due to hindsight, saying that the world is a "better place without them". Some people aren't born killers, and do it due to the circumstance they`re placed in. So if you knew that a man was going to kill someone in 20 years time, but otherwise live peacefully and as a law-abiding citizen until then, would you kill him at that very moment, 20 years before he commits his crime? And if you kill him, what gives you the right to do so?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

Inori said:
			
		

> Ok, I am glad I misunderstood what you were trying to get at, and I`m sorry for misunderstanding.
> 
> However, I disagree with your reasoning regarding the _need_ for capital punishment. Your argument assumes that everyone who has killed before, did it out of sheer pleasure, which is not always true. Yes, there are truly sick people out there, but what about those people that have killed someone accidentally, say, because of wreckless driving? And how do you prove that someone took joy in the fact that they were taking another life? And if capital punishment is enforced, what makes the person executing the punishment any better than the people they are exeuting in the first place?
> 
> And part of your argument is due to hindsight, saying that the world is a "better place without them". Some people aren't born killers, and do it due to the circumstance they`re placed in. So if you knew that a man was going to kill someone in 20 years time, but otherwise live peacefully and as a law-abiding citizen until then, would you kill him at that very moment, 20 years before he commits his crime? And if you kill him, what gives you the right to do so?


Hmm, I didn't say that everyone who has killed before needs to be killed. In fact, I mentioned that I believe reckless drivers need to be left out of this. Sure they need to receive jail time, but not the death penalty. They have to live the rest of their lives knowing that a reckless decision on their part cause a premature loss of life. People deserve to live out their lives, and sometimes people who are thrown into circumstances need to defend themselves. I understand that. It's when people take revenge, or kill another because the things they are transporting are worth more (purely according to their view) than the individual next to him that constitutes that justice be brought down by the proper channels. When you take revenge, you then lower yourself to the perp's level and makes you just as bad. The people that carry out the grisly deed of taking another's life in the process of the death penalty don't do it because they like to, they do it because they believe it to be right, and the only comfort they have is that there is one less person roaming the streets for the next victim. The people that do this even have nightmares about it. Because every time they carry out the sentence, they destroy a fellow human being. Which even though the criminals would probably kill the captor to escape, the executioners are still human and have emotions.


----------



## Inori (Sep 10, 2010)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> When you take revenge, you then lower yourself to the perp's level and makes you just as bad.
> 
> I would argue that capital punishment is the same thing, but manifested in a different way, using the power of the "law" to justify it.
> 
> ...



So if the effects of capital punishment don`t only extend to the criminal, then why do you think it`s a good idea to employ such a thing in the first place? Couldn`t you say that keeping the criminal in jail is an effective means for keeping "one less person roaming the streets for the next victim"? 

You also assume that such people can`t be rehabilitated. Why is it that drug dealers and users can be rehabilitated, but not killers? Why can child abusers or sex offeneders be rehabilitated, and not killers?


----------



## fgghjjkll (Sep 10, 2010)

The "real truth" may never be known to the judge and so when you die, you can't really re-trial when new evidence surfaces, can you? Life sentence = yay, Death penalty = nay.


----------



## ZAFDeltaForce (Sep 10, 2010)

I am in full support of Capital Punishment. 

"You can't change a leopard's spots"

Indeed, a murderer will always be a murderer and a drug abuser will always be a drug abuser. I may be cynical about this, but there's no sure way of knowing whether one will truly turn over a new leaf. If we give them all a second chance, a large proportion of them just might go back to their old roots and be detrimental to society.

They say they use capital punishment to make society safer. I don't have any statistics to support this or otherwise, but it's perfectly logical; kill all the murderers and there will be no murderers. If there are any new murderers, catch them and kill them.

Damn, I just realised how bloodthirsty and cold hearted this post is. But hey, who cares


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 10, 2010)

Raiser said:
			
		

> If you murdered someone, I believe, you do not have the right to determine what happens to you. You may have a say in the matter whether it be a plead or other, but what happens to you in the end should be determined by the law.
> You've intentionally taken the life of someone (or in many cases, multiple people) and are proven guilty. No matter what you say in attempts to keep yourself alive should even be on record.That's where we differ, sir. I don't think the right to live is disrupted by anything. To clarify: If we were to have caught Hitler, I don't think he should have been executed.
> 
> 
> ...


Using a cliche is a poor way to argue. Not to mention people change all the time. I disagree with the fact that you people think that murderers were born evil and will always kill. That person wasn't born a murderer, correct? So how could they always be one, without _changing themselves_?

Do you...have any idea how ridiculous you sound? "I'm basically pulling this out of my ass but: capital punishment makes society safer. If a person kills, kill him. It makes perfect sense." Where do the murderers of murderers fit in? Oh, they don't because they're "police officers"? That's retarded.


----------



## ZPE (Sep 10, 2010)

wabsta said:
			
		

> I'm against it for 2 reasons.
> It's sick, there seriously are innocent people who die.
> 
> And 2, for real criminals, like, child rapers/murderes, I think it's too soft. They get away with it too easy, I'd rather have them tortured every week.



Contradictory statements here. How do you know who are really innocent? Should the innocent get tortured as well? It's happening around the whole as we speak regardless. :/


----------



## Raiser (Sep 10, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Raiser said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Aye, I suppose this is where we see our differences.
I think he should have been. Intentionally slaughtering millions of Jews on false pretenses (and him knowing it as well) is no different than nuking a city.

I may not have a German / Nazi point of view on any deep reasons why Hitler went on such a rampage, but I do know that what he did do during the war was take millions of lives and throw them aside.
In my eyes, there would be no other way out for this man except capital punishment.


----------



## The Viztard (Sep 10, 2010)

We kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong. Ironic huh?

Yea, right. I would think that a life sentence in some sort of solitary confinement would be worse than any other sort of punishment. Just for someone to think that they would be spending the rest of their life in some cell would be hell on earth. And maybe if you added some occasional "torture" it would definitely teach them. But no one has the right to end some other persons life. You are not a higher entity.


----------



## Pliskron (Sep 10, 2010)

Someone hurts child or murders kill em. Plant big axe in their skull just like in Castlevania. Seems like the video games are the only place dirt~bags get justice.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

The Viztard said:
			
		

> We kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong. Ironic huh?
> 
> Yea, right. I would think that a life sentence in some sort of solitary confinement would be worse than any other sort of punishment. Just for someone to think that they would be spending the rest of their life in some cell would be hell on earth. And maybe if you added some occasional "torture" it would definitely teach them. But no one has the right to end some other persons life. You are not a higher entity.
> According to the Constitution's 5th amendment:
> ...



With due procees of law, you may be deprived of life, it's as simple as that.

Prison in the US is actually comfy living, and at most uncomfortable because of the people around you. Even in solitary the whole place is cushy. xD I would be all for torture, but that just makes people crazy and when the sentance is carried out, they kill themselves and/or other people. So if you tortue someone, you can just indirectly influence another murder.

If there is no God, and no place to rot if you are unable to ascend, then we can know atleast while we are here that particular person will no longer be apart of humanity.

@ Inori: When a person who has nothing to do with the person who murdered someone, then it is not revenge. The only case where this is true is when the person doing the execution has some sort of connection with the victim. Then it could be called revenge.

The way I see it, if the executioner has nightmares and would wish to stop their job, then they would. However most do not. They feel it is their Civil duty, and take comfort in knowing there is one less potential killer that could be on the streets.

@ Uncle FEFL: I feel totally different from you. In my mind if someone murders knowingly for gain or personal vendetta, then even if they feel regret, they cannot bring the person back to life. There is no way to provide recompence for a loss of life... Period. Life in jail here in the US is cushy and at worst uncomfotable. They survive in relative comfort, and ease of life. Why should this be so?

Not all killers are pshycopaths, but everyone who is a psychopath tend to have a certain mindset that is open to killing. Seriously, I don't get why guys like don't get this. Human life means nothing to these people, and once the deed is done even if they are filled with regret there is no way to take it back. If you kill for personal gain, because you just snap, because you want revenge, you not only deserve to die you also deserve to burn in hell. I don't care if your my best friend, you murder someone I am through with you. I have to admit, accidents do happen especially with teens who do stupid shit to impress friends. People who have accidents under the influence, are responsible but these people are usually the ones who live with true guilt. Knowing they make a bad descision which cost someone their life. They deserve to live with the guilt, however the people that kill for above said reasons have no guilt, can be greedy, etc don't deserve a second chance. These people are not, and should not be a part of society. War is hell, and sure there are trigger happy teens who played Modern Warfare avidly and decided to join because of it. There are also the people that join because of a sense of duty, and some also hate fighting. While I don't agree with the death of innocent's in war, shit just happens, and it's a simple as that.

All this assumes the person is guilty. I know that innocents do get killed on death row, and that is apalling. I understand that, but the Death Penalty is a necessity according to me, and you and others like you have a mind set that cannot and will not be changed. This is fact, and we may debate on it as much as we like, but we will never come to an agreement. This just like Religion, Politics, and other such topics that should never be mentioned in conversations.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 10, 2010)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> ...but the Death Penalty is a necessity according to me...



Why? It's not a deterrent to future crimes, it's more expensive then LIP, and we kill *innocent *people. I guess if you were on death row, convicted of a crime you didn't commit, you'd say "it's OK, even though I didn't commit the crime, go ahead and kill me, because the death penalty is worth the life of some innocents." I don't think that way, I think any innocent's life is worth more than the revenge factor that is capital punishment (because thats all it really is about, societal revenge.) Also, why don't you quote that part of the constitution about "cruel and unusual punishment," I would call being executed for a crime you didn't commit, "unusual punishment" and a fundamental violation of one's constitutional rights.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Sep 10, 2010)

I DO NOT approve of capital punishment in it's current state. However, I do think that the death penalty should be put in place for serial or repeat murderers.

If it has been proven within reasonable doubt that you will continue to take lives, then it is only reasonable to extinguish your life to prevent the meaningless deaths of others.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 10, 2010)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> If it has been proven within reasonable doubt that you will continue to take lives, then it is only reasonable to extinguish your life to prevent the meaningless deaths of others.



Wouldn't life in prison do the same thing, at a cheaper price for the taxpayers?


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Sep 10, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No. The murderer in question would still have the opportunity to kill in the prison system. And, please, don't tell me that's what Solitary is for. People have an can be killed, even by someone in Solitary confinement.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This was a response to Uncle FEFL's rebuttal one of my comments. I think that war is never perfect. Innocents die, sometimes by the hand of the military. Because it is hell, and hell isn't a pleasant place to be. If you don't accept this fact, and realize that shit happens then you will never fully appreciate what you have here. My dad's friend's cousin was killed by where I go to school. He was driving and a person threw a rock at his windshield and broke it. He stopped and got out of the car. Where he was jumped by a at least five people of a specific ethnic group. They held him down and told another that this was his chance to get in, and they told him to shoot him in the head. A perfectly innocent person is dead, and people like those are still on the street. (God Damnit I can't hardly see my screen!) People such as these do not deserve to live, the shouldn't get a second chance. It's wrong for people like this to live in relative comfort and be able to get out on good behavior. It sickens me.

To the comment that the Death Penalty is cruel and unusual. The stuff these people do to these victims is sick. You wanna see cruel and unusual, stick a pillar of wood in their anus and let them be impaled by gravity. This would put the executioners on the same level as these shit heads, and is intolerable. If they stopped the lethal injection and followed my suggestion, then they wouldn't feel a single thing, and would cut cost by at least %75. Build a platform, and use rope. Simple as applying force to knock out, and strangle.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 10, 2010)

You didn't quite follow me, I said the death penalty is cruel and unusual and violates the constitutional rights of_* innocent people*_.  Your first paragraph is really irrelevant to the argument. My argument is that until convictions are 100% accurate (will they ever be?) we cannot continue to execute innocent people. You seem to think I give a shit about murderers who are executed, but I don't. My argument against capital punishment is entirely based on the fact that innocent people are executed, and we just can't do that, deprive someone of their liberty, assume they're a monster, stack the courts against them and remove all their hope, and then take their life. Innocent people. To me, this is a far greater crime then letting murderers spend the rest of their life in prison instead of being executed.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> You didn't quite follow me, I said the death penalty is cruel and unusual and violates the constitutional rights of_* innocent people*_.  Your first paragraph is really irrelevant to the argument. My argument is that until convictions are 100% accurate (will they ever be?) we cannot continue to execute innocent people. You seem to think I give a shit about murderers who are executed, but I don't. My argument against capital punishment is entirely based on the fact that innocent people are executed, and we just can't do that, deprive someone of their liberty, assume they're a monster, stack the courts against them and remove all their hope, and then take their life. Innocent people. To me, this is a far greater crime then letting murderers spend the rest of their life in prison instead of being executed.


I guess I did misunderstand. I thought you were referring to my quote. Sorry about that. The argument here is there are innocents that get executed. Though through current advances in technology and forensics more and more cases are being proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused are guilty. Not saying that these cases are 100% accurate, but they are slowly becoming that way. The situations people find themselves in probably could have been adverted by some simple common sense. Set ups are a way for revenge, and if the innocent party is executed, only to be found innocent after the fact, then an investigation should be opened on the case again. It's not justice if the shoe isn't on the right foot. Which is why there are so many appeals to get people off death row. People get a lot more chances to get off, and if the line is really that thin to not see innocence after [say] 5 appeals then I would think that maybe they are guilty. Sometimes prejudice gets in the way too, that's bad also. Honestly I do wish our law system was better, big room for improvement there.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> @ Uncle FEFL: I feel totally different from you. In my mind if someone murders knowingly for gain or personal vendetta, then even if they feel regret, they cannot bring the person back to life. There is no way to provide recompence for a loss of life... Period. Life in jail here in the US is cushy and at worst uncomfotable. They survive in relative comfort, and ease of life. Why should this be so?Haha, if you think our system is comfortable, take a look at countries in Europe.
> 
> Our system is not comfortable. Have you ever been to jail? Prison? It's definitely not a place in which to live.
> 
> ...


Contrarily, I use to think like you. An ignorant bigot floating around in his stream of narrow-mindedness. It's not a fact, it's _de facto_. Society will always choose the easiest route and join the bandwagon. It's up to you the person to decide when you wanna get off the wagon. 

You can't change an opinion that takes no thought. You can't change a person that doesn't listen.


----------



## Magmorph (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> When you take revenge, you then lower yourself to the perp's level and makes you just as bad. The people that carry out the grisly deed of taking another's life in the process of the death penalty don't do it because they like to, they do it because they believe it to be right, and the only comfort they have is that there is one less person roaming the streets for the next victim.


I would say you almost fit the definition of the people you are wanting to kill. You are advocating the death of a human for revenge. You can come up with as many arguments as you want about how murderers don't deserve to live but in the end killing them is unnecessary. Murders are not the reason the prison system is too full. You are also over generalizing murders. Not every murderer is a sadistic sociopath that has no regard for human life. There are many murderers who believe what they are doing is right, which by your logic justifies the action.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 10, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> I guess I did misunderstand. I thought you were referring to my quote. Sorry about that. The argument here is there are innocents that get executed. Though through current advances in technology and forensics more and more cases are being proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused are guilty.
> I don't think there's any evidence to support that idea. Not all cases rely on DNA, and even ones that do, there is huge room for human error. Labs make mistakes, and police labs are biased in favor of police, which can lead to intentional or unintentional false positives.
> 
> 
> ...


Blaming the victim of a false conviction for that conviction, really? In some cases, their lack of common sense equates to being a certain skin color, or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. And as for intentional set-ups, I would think that accounts for a very low percentage of wrongful convictions. Most can be attributed to eyewitness misidentification, faulty forensics and inadequate defense representation.


----------



## TrolleyDave (Sep 10, 2010)

I'm all for capital punishment in certain circumstances.  The only problems with it are the ones previously mentioned.  It's far too easy to stitch someone up, innocent parties being sentenced etc.  It's also too easy to use on government dissidents.  Man is too easily corruptable and vengeful to be responsible enough for capital punishment.  If it wasn't the case I would fully support cit for various things.  And in some politicians cases I'd volunteer to be the executioner.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 10, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Our system is not comfortable. Have you ever been to jell? Prison? It's definitely not a place in which to live.
> 
> *First of all it's spelled 'Jail', and no I have not. My friend has, and he learned to sleep with his eyes open.  I said at most it's uncomfortable because of the others there with you. Generally if you are there in the first place, you have already learned something about being protective of yourself.*
> *snip
> ...



Replies are in formatted text.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 11, 2010)

"First of all it's spelled 'Jail', and no I have not. My friend has, and he learned to sleep with his eyes open.  I said at most it's uncomfortable because of the others there with you. Generally if you are there in the first place, you have already learned something about being protective of yourself." Right my bad.

Not sure where the rest of the reply fits in the argument, however.



			
				QUOTE said:
			
		

> Have you even fully read all my comments? I have a mental disorder, of course I am mentally challenged (to a certain degree). It doesn't make me any better, in fact sometimes I am almost sub human. Reduced to an animal like state. Have you ever been so enraged that when you next wake up, you have no idea where you are, and what you did. It's fucking scary. I don't know where you get off by saying anyone's comments are childish. I type properly, have sentence structure, and fully complete thoughts. If anything I am far from childish.Right, so that gives you the right to end a person's life "in the name of justice," then?
> 
> By childish, I meant opinion. Not in intelligence.
> 
> ...



Just analyze this for a second.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> "First of all it's spelled 'Jail', and no I have not. My friend has, and he learned to sleep with his eyes open.  I said at most it's uncomfortable because of the others there with you. Generally if you are there in the first place, you have already learned something about being protective of yourself." Right my bad.
> 
> Not sure where the rest of the reply fits in the argument, however.
> 
> ...



EDIT: Minor spelling errors.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 11, 2010)

Not to be a prick or anything, but Sterl, are you going to bother responding to my last post, or am I just wasting my time arguing with you?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> Not to be a prick or anything, but Sterl, are you going to bother responding to my last post, or am I just wasting my time arguing with you?
> XD I had to save the post I was going to reply to you because the quote tags were acting up. I'll have the post edited in a sec. No offense take BTW.
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## monkat (Sep 11, 2010)

Ok, so, imagine I killed someone, justifiably. Would you really want to take this from the world?



Spoiler


----------



## gameguy95 (Sep 11, 2010)

i think that capital punishment should replace life in prison because why should we keep them in prison until they die when we can end their suffering right now and save our cash and prison room


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 11, 2010)

gameguy95 said:
			
		

> i think that capital punishment should replace life in prison because why should we keep them in prison until they die when we can end their suffering right now and save our cash and prison room



This has been answered. It costs more money to execute someone than it does to imprison them for life. And you can get LIP for crimes other than murder, are you suggested that crimes like, drug trafficking should be punishable by death?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

monkat said:
			
		

> Ok, so, imagine I killed someone, justifiably. Would you really want to take this from the world?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


All I have to say to this is: DO NOT WANT!!!

Completely irrelevant and a hazard to the well being of my eyes.

I think Ima take a picture of me without my shirt and teach you the meaning of "Scarred for Lyfe."


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 11, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> Who said it gave me the right?...? You did. You said that a person who murders deserves to be put to death. You assume the right to know when someone lives or dies.
> 
> "I knew what you meant, just throwing it out there for you to correct yourself." This doesn't make any sense. Honesty helps, you know. Why would you want me to clarify (not correct myself, because my thought wasn't corrected, for I had no need to) myself on something you already understood?
> 
> ...


I don't want you to join my bandwagon. I want you to think for yourself (which you have shown me you do). Changing your opinion to one that says "capital punishment is wrong" isn't joining my bandwagon, because there a whole bunch more opinions that ride with it.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 11, 2010)

So, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying in your post. You're agreeing that human error occurs, that innocent people are executed, but that it's worth it to get the bad guys? If that is the case, I would argue that the innocents constitutional rights being violated in the most egregious way outweighs the need for revenge by society. 

And I agree, when applied correctly, forensics can be accurate. But fingerprinting, for example is a forensic tool that is often overstated in court. Watch Penn & Teller's Bullshit criminal justice episode for a better explanation. And yes, 12 Angry Men is one of my favorite movies (the original, not the remake) and is one of the reasons I believe the death penalty is wrong.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Sterl500 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> So, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying in your post. You're agreeing that human error occurs, that innocent people are executed, but that it's worth it to get the bad guys? If that is the case, I would argue that the innocents constitutional rights being violated in the most egregious way outweighs the need for revenge by society.
> 
> *My point was in war things like that happen, and I think I am starting to see the whole picture of the Death Penalty anyways. The Constitution's protections unfortunately do not apply to other contries, so people don't get the same protections in a country that's at war with us.*
> 
> ...



EDIT: Also A double post was necessary for this. If a mod wants to merge it they can.


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 11, 2010)

We aren't talking about war here though, we're talking about law & order in the USA. We're talking about US citizens being executed in the US by their own government in violation of their constitutional rights.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Sep 11, 2010)

I used to be pro-capital punishment, but I'm sick of millions of unborn humans being murdered every year, so in an effort to remain consistent I'm going to say that nobody has the right to take the life of another human unless it is self defense.


----------



## Advi (Sep 11, 2010)

The death penalty is simply a necessary evil. There are people out there that out of choice, not by nature, that choose to do things that pose a threat to the well-being of others, and some of these things can be extreme to say the least.

I believe that some crimes are simply inexcusable, like...

Cannibalism, bugchasing and other crimes against humanity. Murder linked to crimes against nature as well.
High treason (for example, selling nuclear weapons or intelligence to other governments at war with their own country, actions that could pose an extreme threat to the country)
Intentional acts of torture to another person. (Think of the "Saw" films but without the Hollywood.)

And so on. Some people do not deserve to live.


----------



## Inori (Sep 11, 2010)

I really do feel for *Sterl500*, since it seems like he has to argue with everyone, but I still have some questions left unanswered in regards to your response to me. Let me clarify that I am not doing this to attack you personally, it`s your view (i.e that Capital Punishment is a need) that I have a problem with. 




			
				QUOTE said:
			
		

> When a person who has nothing to do with the person who murdered someone, then it is not revenge. The only case where this is true is when the person doing the execution has some sort of connection with the victim. Then it could be called revenge.
> 
> *0ddity* brought expressed the point I was trying to make, in a much better way. Capital Punishment in itself is the most extreme form of revenge for the wrongdoings done to society. Why do you think that a majority of Capital Punishment was performed in public, previously? It was so that people could be satisfied. Yes, I do know that part of the satisfication is perhaps because "there is one less of _those_ on the streets", but even so, if that were the _entire_ reason people felt satisfied, then they would have kept those things in jail, rather than in the public. I don`t think revenge is so black and white to the point where it = you kill the person that killed the person you cared for.
> 
> ...



No one has the right to say that. We are human, just as they are. To say that we are above them is laughable, because we are all equal.
And who knows, what if to those aforementioned people, _we_ law abiding citizens are the ones that don`t deserve to live? Would that justify their killing, the same way people try to justify Capital Punishment?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

0ddity said:
			
		

> We aren't talking about war here though, we're talking about law & order in the USA. We're talking about US citizens being executed in the US by their own government in violation of their constitutional rights.
> But that was the point you were referring back to. In any case if you are proven guilty and you know you aren't guilty then you fight for it. However some people who are guilty play on this, and it is not only wrong but misleading. In my mind if you have been proven guilty in the court of law then you are guilty unless something else comes into light that throw the decision into questionable light..
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## 0ddity (Sep 11, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> 0ddity said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I brought up war? When? 

The point is, innocent people are convicted, innocent people are executed.

I don't think there is any excuse to continue executing innocent people. Like I said earlier, once convicted, it's very hard to get a conviction reversed, especially because of "actual innocence" in which case you have to prove you didn't commit the crime, all the while prosecutors are arguing against your requests to retest evidence and judges are agreeing with them, more often then not. Death is just too final, some people are in prison for decades before they manage to prove their case and be released.


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 11, 2010)

@Sterl: Points answered respectively.

That's asserting your _perceived_ right to judgement of another's life. Just because it's 1/12 of a complete voting, doesn't mean it doesn't matter.

OK.

It was someone from Serenesforest.net

When I say "Yeah, because...," I'm being sarcastic. And no. If people weren't so stupid there wouldn't be war.

Uh...I totally was not thinking of that. However, you have now made me lol.

EDIT: Added a needed word to my first point.


----------



## ZAFDeltaForce (Sep 11, 2010)

Blood Fetish said:
			
		

> Capital punishment has been shown to be an ineffective deterrent. It does not keep society safer.
> Capital punishment (inclusive of "death row" and the repeals process) generally costs more money than detaining a prisoner for life. It does not save money.
> Capital punishment can be done quicker and more importantly, painlessly using methods such as nitrogen asphyxiation. It fulfills a barbaric sense of "vengeance", ignoring justice and humanity.
> Capital punishment has quite a few false positives over the years. You can release someone from prison, but you can't bring them back to life.


I think this man summarized the entire topic


----------



## Advi (Sep 11, 2010)

Inori said:
			
		

> QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To say we are all equal in that way, is the same as saying that _nobody_ should be punished for _anything_ and that we don't need government to mediate when there is a disturbance in our society.
Everybody is born with the right to live but if they choose to throw away that right by committing an extreme act against his or her brethren, then that is completely, and utterly, his or her decision. Are we forced to drive over the speed limit? No, we choose to drive faster than we are legally allowed and agree to pay a speeding ticket. Crimes are all different, but the core principles of punishment remain the same.
Of course, that's not to say that capital punishment should be strict. If committing a crime against humanity could be debated as either involuntary (i.e. sociopathy or insanity) or necessary in a very extreme scenario to survive, like in a famine or isolated in a desolate environment, then it could be debated.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

ZAFDeltaForce said:
			
		

> Blood Fetish said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yea, just one side of the coin. Though I do agree with the second point. Hanging is way more humane, and they don't feel a thing.


----------



## Magmorph (Sep 11, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> ZAFDeltaForce said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why do you think hanging is the best option?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

Magmorph said:
			
		

> Sterl500 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quick, painless, and cheap. When set up right, the force of the initial drop disconnects a certain part of the spinal column, and then strangles them without them feeling anything. Back when it was the choice of execution, they made tables of the ideal drop distances and length of rope to weight ratios. Not a sound, and none ever feel anything.

EDIT: Should mention when the spinal column is broken, they are knocked out.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Sep 11, 2010)

Here's a question for everyone. Would you be willing to stop capital punishment if it meant the unborn human holocaust would end?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Here's a question for everyone. Would you be willing to stop capital punishment if it meant the unborn human holocaust would end?


Totally different subject, and I can nae comment on it.


----------



## monkat (Sep 11, 2010)

We. Should reinstate manngelt


----------



## Advi (Sep 11, 2010)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Here's a question for everyone. Would you be willing to stop capital punishment if it meant the unborn human holocaust would end?


Killing a man and preemptively ending the life of an unborn child are two _entirely_ different things.


----------



## Logan 5 (Sep 11, 2010)

down with foxes I vote death penalty on them


----------



## Inori (Sep 11, 2010)

QUOTE said:
			
		

> Yes, but there remains an underlying reason. The people who kill others also kill others in jail. This could be for gang initiation, or some other for of group acceptance. When these people also get out of jail (If they ever do), they most likely have another chance to kill someone. It makes sense that if someone takes a life they should be punished. When they are allowed to live, they don't feel punished, and are still ready to kill on moments notice.
> 
> *I`m going to assume, for the sake of the argument, that you mean only the truly distrubed people out there will continue killing. And I dispute that fact. People can change, and I think that long term imprisonment (with limited freedom) can change a person. I think it was you, who mentioned that your buddy had spent time in jail, and basically had to sleep with one eye open, and no doubt, it was a life changing experience. I maintain that being trapped in a small cell with limited freedom, and possible grouped with other people who have the capability to do what you have done, or perhaps worse, is enough punishment to make you think twice about what you have done.*
> 
> ...



I don`t see how you made that connection. I am not saying that people shouldn`t be punished. I`m saying that as fellow humans, we don`t have the right to deprive someone of their life. You would say the killer had no right either, and I would agree. But I would be the moral person, and not stoop to their level. Killing them, because they have killed is not a reasonable way to justify the use of Capital Punishment. In the end, it makes you no better than they are.


----------



## JonthanD (Sep 11, 2010)

My opinion and thats all it is... is that the death penalty is good for grieving families, no it will not bring loved ones back but in the same breath they do at least get to know that the slime ball (99.9% of the time the right one.....) is not sitting enjoying a vacation in Tijuana or something.

I know that if some one killed my family I would feel better knowing that the person was going to get some form of punishment, no its probably not what they deserve.... Since most of the time people who kill some one else and get the death penalty usually have killed people in some obscene way.

A case that I am very familiar with..... 

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/07/24/Pasco/Ap...ng_could_.shtml

The one guy was in a couple of my classes and had spoke to me just days before about breaking and entering and how best to break into peoples houses.... I had no idea that he apparently was planning something so horrid... I would have called him a friend at one point and seemingly a nice guy... 
I think he deserves the death penalty what he and his friend did to that poor old woman even before she died was beyond sick.... This case just makes me more ill every time I read about it, after looking at the article I linked I didn't know it was the poor womans 71st birthday wow....


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Sep 11, 2010)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Here's a question for everyone. Would you be willing to stop capital punishment if it meant the unborn human holocaust would end?



Would you be willing to end world hunger if you had the power to Vacuum a room of carpet in 60 seconds?

Seriously, one has nothing to do with the other, besides the fact of lost lives...

Now, there are many people that brought up many fairly good ones.

YES, the Death Penalty does, in the long run cost much more money than a life sentence, but this is mainly due to appeals. 

YES, hanging does make it a lot more painless and quick, but if it isn't, then it is a very ugly sight. Meaning that when a hanging fails, people don't like to keep watching.

NO, another human or humans should not have the right to make the decision on whether or not another human should live or die, unless there are extreme circumstances. Those being a serial murderer, or a repeat murderer, or a war criminal responsible for the loss of human life.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Sep 11, 2010)

Advice Fox said:
			
		

> cruddybuddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They are different, but not entirely different. Both are killing human life against their will.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Sep 11, 2010)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> Advice Fox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And there the similarities end.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Sep 11, 2010)

dudeonline said:
			
		

> cruddybuddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You would give unborn humans the same respect and right to live as a one-time murderer, correct? Then you agree with me.


----------



## Midna (Sep 11, 2010)

This is not an abortion topic. I agree with capital punishment in some cases, and abortion in some cases. Drop the abortion thing.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Sep 11, 2010)

Midna said:
			
		

> This is not an abortion topic. I agree with capital punishment in some cases, and abortion in some cases. Drop the abortion thing.



Yes, right away. Please don't suspend me for talking about right-to-life in a capital punishment thread. I'll be good from now on.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Sep 11, 2010)

cruddybuddy said:
			
		

> *You would give unborn humans the same respect and right to live as a one-time murderer, correct? Then you agree with me.*




To a point, yes. I don't agree with abortion, again, unless in extreme circumstances such as *Forced unconsentual sex*. That is a retarded word filter by the way.

Anyway this is off topic.


----------



## cruddybuddy (Sep 11, 2010)

dudeonline said:
			
		

> cruddybuddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm glad we agree, to a point.  I have to ask though, is the child of forced sex a serial killer? If not, then you have to add another person to your list: serial killers, war criminals, and children with evil fathers.

EDIT: Filter is lame. Agreed.


----------



## Vulpes Abnocto (Sep 11, 2010)

Logan 5 said:
			
		

> down with foxes I vote death penalty on them



OI!..... You've gotta catch me first! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







_______________________________________________________



*sighs and a somber frown furrows his brow* 

As for the topic at hand,
I'm put in a very difficult position at this moment.

You see, I lost a friend just this week so a senseless act of violence.
A young lady with a quick smile and boundless charm,
at the hands of a man who vowed to love, honor, and cherish her. 

Somehow in his twisted mind he convinced himself that it was right and just for him to accuse her of marital infidelity,
then strangle, molest, and beat her until she was comatose,
in front of their two young sons. 

Machines now do her breathing for her, because her body can no longer do so on it's own.
Doctors give her zero chance of ever waking up.
Her boys are traumatized; scarred for all their lives.
Her friends (also my friends, who grew up with her....unfortunately I only got to meet her a few times) 
are absolutely torn apart in their grief.

In many cases, perhaps even _most_ cases, I would be against capital punishment.
....against vengeance....

But there are a few cases,
with special circumstances
that makes one's blood boil,
and one's soul howl for justice.

Violent, blood-streaked, scream-echoing justice.   


And if this makes me a "sick" person,
then so be it.
I'm oddly comfortable with that.


----------



## zeromac (Sep 11, 2010)

Why should you take away someone's life when they have taken someone's(s) life away?
Wouldn't that make you just as bad?


----------



## Sterling (Sep 11, 2010)

zeromac said:
			
		

> Why should you take away someone's life when they have taken someone's(s) life away?
> Wouldn't that make you just as bad?


For vigilante revenge, yes that makes you just as bad... Due process of law, no. They are two different things, but while that my be how I percieve it, many others do not see it on the same level as me.

@Dudeonline: Yea a hanging gone wrong is a horrible sight to see. I have see quite a few of those in Red Dead Redemption. Those aren't even fun to watch. When a hanging is done properly, there isn't even an error factor. When hanging was the preferred form of execution, they had specific things to follow, and charts to consult. Here is a procedural list of all the current death penalty punishments. I will say that it was hard for me to read all of that. Just thinking about some of the stuff people have done makes my blood boil, but when I think: What if that were me. I put myself in their shoes, and it really does scare me. It may not bother the murderers too much, but it is just overwhelming to think about being strapped to a chair and being zapped until you are dead.


----------



## cobleman (Sep 11, 2010)

In clear cut cases (witnessed murders by 2 or more people) the death penalty should be swift and not dragged out for years on death row. Forensic prooven guilt is not conclusive enough and people should be jailed for life.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 11, 2010)

Right. And this thread would have nothing to do with my 'Temp Debates', no? 

VVVV
*http://gbatemp.net/t253198-temp-debates-9*
^^^^


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 11, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> ZAFDeltaForce said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


After the invention of hanging a man or woman, a new idea was introduced in 1792 by the French, and it's called the guillotine. If you want to resort back to older barbaric ways, you might as well go back to the guillotine.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 12, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Sterl500 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you read up on it a bit, there have been several eyewitness accounts that the heads could still be alive. No one has ever debunked these accounts, even though a lot of experiments have been done to do so. So, these heads could possibly still feel pain, and react to the environment... even though the brain wouldn't function properly. Hanging can knock people unconscious immediately.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Sep 12, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, hanging CAN knock people unconscious, but again, it's not even close to fool proof, and even with set instructions, and diagrams, and shit like that, I imagine it would still have a high failure rate. (anything greater than 5% IMO is a HIGH failure rate)


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Sep 12, 2010)

Sterl500 said:
			
		

> Uncle FEFL said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good point. However, I agree with dudeonline's point.

Also, what I'm trying to hint as is, although I wholeheartedly disagree with it, our newer methods of killing people are much more efficient. As technology improves, so do our methods of murder. There's a reason the noose is no longer in practice, several actually.


----------



## Sterling (Sep 12, 2010)

Uncle FEFL said:
			
		

> Sterl500 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I guess you're right. I just think efficiency of hanging could improved now... with modern materials and such. Would still be cheaper and probably could be achieved with less pain.


----------

