• Death sentence
    413 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Cone;32376614]You're still injecting the poison into him. He would still be alive if you hadn't - so the blame falls squarely on you. Exactly, he is not an equal - but he is still human, so he shall be treated as one and given a choice, as is in any human being's rights.[/QUOTE]That's not mine fault,if the judge told me to do so. Also,if he isn't equal to us,why he should have the liberties that we have?Having options is also liberty.
[QUOTE=overpain;32376515]Not i will kill him,the poison will.[/QUOTE] "What? Certainly not, officer, I didn't kill him! This gun I was firing did!" [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=overpain;32376655]Also,if he isn't equal to us,why he should have the liberties that we have?[/QUOTE] Why shouldn't he?
[QUOTE=Kai-ryuu;32376601]"An eye for an eye makes the world blind."[/QUOTE] Surely it makes the world blind apart from 1 one-eyed person. Or the two people taking each others eyes out blind Also, for many people rotting away in prison is much worse than exectuion
[QUOTE=overpain;32376655]That's not mine fault,if the judge told me to do so. Also,if he isn't equal to us,why he should have the liberties that we have?Having options is also liberty.[/QUOTE] Then if you can accept that the judge is at fault for sentencing the killer to death, why are you still in favor of it? He isn't equal, no. But, for reasons already stated, we musn't de-humanize him, or else we are no better than him. Instead, he is still human - and shall be treated as such. Not as an animal, but as an unequal sentient being.
Can anyone actually prove that execution is more expensive than, like, 20 year prison sentence? You know, I'd rather be aware that my tax money gets paid to an old man as pension, rather than to upkeep a child rapists cell lifelong just because some people think he deserves care. Prove me that execution is more expensive, and I'd probably change my opinion.
In terms of logistics, the Death Penalty costs much more than a life-in-prison term (Varies, around 25 years.) The appeals process and the controversy over it has put up costs to the extreme. The death penalty should be reserved for violent offenders who show no remorse for their actions, and if there is reasonable belief that they would repeat the crime in the future. The goal shouldn't be to rehabilitate these specific individuals, but to remove a danger from the community. They should probably be shot. A bullet is much cheaper than the drugs used to stop the heart, and the appeals process ramps up costs. Serial murders are always good candidates for the death penalty. However, one time murderers should still go to prison instead of being killed. With the current appeal process and extreme costs, I am against the death penalty. If it were reasonably reformed, I might change my stance.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32376556]5) That doesn't matter. If you jail them up, they can still be innocent.[/QUOTE] True, but if they're jailed up and not killed you can let them out again.
The death sentence is a medieval form of punishment, it's 2011, we don't need to murder people for murdering others, it's rather hypocritical in the first place. It doesn't work as a deterrent either, those that are going to commit crimes are in positions where they either can't think about it (passion) or they're already aware of the consequences(profit/premeditated). I'm sure there are others but these are the only 2 I could think of off the top of my head.
[QUOTE=Cone;32376716]Then if you can accept that the judge is at fault for sentencing the killer to death, why are you still in favor of it? He isn't equal, no. But, for reasons already stated, we musn't de-humanize him, or else we are no better than him. Instead, he is still human - and shall be treated as such. Not as an animal, but as an unequal sentient being.[/QUOTE]Yes,he is like you say [QUOTE]unequal sentient being.[/QUOTE] ,and if he's sentient,but unequal sentient being,he's not a human.
[QUOTE=overpain;32376791]Yes,he is like you say ,and if he's sentient,but unequal sentient being,he's not a human.[/QUOTE] Just because he isn't the same as a normal person doesn't mean he isn't a person. He is different, yes, but he's a different [I]person.[/I] Thus, he deserves to be treated as such.
[QUOTE=overpain;32376791]Yes,he is like you say ,and if he's sentient,but unequal sentient being,he's not a human.[/QUOTE] I fail to see the logic behind that statement.
[QUOTE=Cone;32376838]Just because he isn't the same as a normal person doesn't mean he isn't a person. He is different, yes, but he's a different [I]person.[/I] Thus, he deserves to be treated as such.[/QUOTE]For example,dog for me is also person.
[QUOTE=overpain;32376883]For example,dog for me is also person.[/QUOTE] I think you misunderstand my usage of the term person. I intend to use it to say that this person is a human being. Besides, you would just kill your dog, would you?
[QUOTE=overpain;32376883]For example,dog for me is also person.[/QUOTE] Sorry, can you rephrase that, I [I]must[/I] be misinterpreting you.
[QUOTE=Cone;32376945]I think you misunderstand my usage of the term person. I intend to use it to say that this person is a human being. Besides, you would just kill your dog, would you?[/QUOTE]No, i wouldn't,dog is better person for me than a killer.
[QUOTE=overpain;32377064]No, i wouldn't,dog is better person for me than a killer.[/QUOTE] Oh, I wasn't misinterpreting you. So you think a dog should have more rights than a person?
[QUOTE=VistaPOWA;32375344]Capital punishment should be banned, people are sent to prison to be [b]rehabilitated[/b], not to be punished.[/QUOTE] rehabilitated with bad conditions and suffer, not to live like a king in the prison, than I agree with u
If he/she goes to prison forever (ie no parole chance) is it not almost the same or even worse as executing him?
[QUOTE=Wux;32377103]rehabilitated with bad conditions and suffer, not to live like a king in the prison, than I agree with u[/QUOTE] Many (and by many I mean me) would argue that bad conditions and suffering are detrimental to rehabilitation. (See above statistics on Norwegian prisons.)
[QUOTE=overpain;32377064]No, i wouldn't,dog is better person for me than a killer.[/QUOTE] Yes, but the killer is a human being. He deserves a choice because he has the mental capacity to make one. He is undeniably a human being, particularly from a phsyiological standpoint - so why should we not give him the choice he is allowed to make as a one? I am sure your dog would be given a choice if he knew any human languages, would he not?
[QUOTE=Hellduck;32377095]Oh, I wasn't misinterpreting you. So you think a dog should have more rights than a person?[/QUOTE]Than a killer?Yes. [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Cone;32377136]Yes, but the killer is a human being. He deserves a choice because he has the mental capacity to make one. He is undeniably a human being, particularly from a phsyiological standpoint - so why should we not give him the choice he is allowed to make as a human? I am sure your dog would be given a choice if he knew any human languages, would he not?[/QUOTE]You right,my dog would have an option.
[QUOTE=overpain;32377137]Than a killer?Yes.[/QUOTE] Yes, but this is where we differ in opinion. I believe that, as a human beng of complete sentience and knowledge of his actions and the weight they carry, he should be allowed to choose between euthenasia and imprisonment. It is fact that he is a person, as a simple glance could tell you. He has the mental cpacity to make a choice and thus deserves the chance to make one. Why not?
[QUOTE=Eltro102;32377117]If he/she goes to prison forever (ie no parole chance) is it not almost the same as executing him?[/QUOTE] No, I wouldn't say it is. If a person is executed they can't appeal for release in light of new evidence, they can't receive reparations if they are found innocent. [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] And they don't have any vital signs either. [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=overpain;32377137]Than a killer?Yes.[/QUOTE] No, than a person. Answer the following question: Do you think that a dog should have more rights than a person?
[QUOTE=overpain;32377137]Than a killer?Yes. [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] You right,my dog would have an option.[/QUOTE] And in this situation, the dog may as well be a person. So I ask you: would a person not deserve the same chance?
[QUOTE=Hellduck;32377240]No, I wouldn't say it is. If a person is executed they can't appeal for release in light of new evidence, they can't receive reparations if they are found innocent. [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] And they don't have any vital signs either. [editline]19th September 2011[/editline] No, than a person. Answer the following question: Do you think that a dog should have more rights than a person?[/QUOTE] Yes, but for many people would rather not live out the rest of their lives in prison and just that the easy way out. Also, dogs should have rights on discretion of his owner to be either as low as other animals, or to have no rights at all
[QUOTE=Eltro102;32377340]Yes, but for many people would rather not live out the rest of their lives in prison and just that the easy way out. [/QUOTE] Then the easy way out they shall have. A lot of people seem to think we want the prisoner to suffer - when the reality is, if there was any way we could just release them without the threat of them killing/stealing/commiting crimes again, I'm fairly sure we would.
[QUOTE=Eltro102;32377340]Yes, but for many people would rather not live out the rest of their lives in prison and just that the easy way out.[/QUOTE] Many people would rather not be convicted of crimes at all. What the criminal wants is irrelevant. What the criminal deserves and has a right to is key.
[QUOTE=Hellduck;32377430]Many people would rather not be convicted of crimes at all. What the criminal wants is irrelevant. What the criminal deserves and has a right to is key.[/QUOTE] Exactly, and the prisoner, as someone who must remain within his asigned boundaries, has only both the right to and deserves two things: imprisonment, or death. He has the right to chose - that is all he shall be allowed.
1. Their's nothing "sacred" about a murders, rapists, and child molesters. if you think it's lowering people to their level by killing them, well that's your opinion, but it doesn't mean you're right. 2. One bullet doesn't cost a lot, and yes you might have a hard time finding someone to kill the person, not to mention they might regret it, but overall you won't have to use expensive chemicals or waste billions keeping them in prison. 3.By killing them others will be less likely to do it because they probably don't want to die. 4. yes it sucks for their families, if I had a family member in prison I would feel sad as fuck, but they did a terrible crime and it's their fault for doing it.
I am also for the death penalty in certain situations, but I agree that it has been used to our advantage sometimes. In some cases, people really did not deserve it especially when they were innocent. Some people though, just need to be put to death.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.