Breaking: Boston Marathon Bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev sentenced to death - Polidicks

The death penalty is dumb because it's a financial and logistical vacuum that constantly drains money for no valid reason. You don't even need to dwell into the political and moral ramifications to see that there's something wrong with the way the death penalty is used in the US alone.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;47737232]People like this who clearly show they intend to kill anyone they can need to be removed from that possibility permanently. Say he were to have gotten a life sentence. Then in a few years he escapes and manages to kill a few more hundred people. The point of the death penalty in my eyes is not vengeance, but prevention. Put it this way. Let's say you got a flesh eating virus on your hand. Would you: A. Put a tourniquet on your arm, trying to separate the virus from the rest of your body while keeping it attached B. Amputate your fucking hand before it can cause you pain beyond imagining and then kill you[/QUOTE] We aren't talking about a disease festering in someones arm. We're talking about a human life. And who is to say he'll escape?

as someone who is extremely against the death sentence and extremely pro-rehab I don't see whats wrong in this it's a financial vacuum but some people need to go away, not just because of a sense of justice, it's just better

With how fucked up our prison system is, I think it's probably for the better he's just offed.

[QUOTE=Forumaster;47737232]People like this who clearly show they intend to kill anyone they can need to be removed from that possibility permanently. Say he were to have gotten a life sentence. Then in a few years he escapes and manages to kill a few more hundred people. The point of the death penalty in my eyes is not vengeance, but prevention. Put it this way. Let's say you got a flesh eating virus on your hand. Would you: A. Put a tourniquet on your arm, trying to separate the virus from the rest of your body while keeping it attached B. Amputate your fucking hand before it can cause you pain beyond imagining and then kill you[/QUOTE] i can make extreme, completely unrealistic cases too: say we were sentencing more people to death, then all of those people that are killed are innocent. congratulations, you just killed a bunch of innocent people while the real murderer is still out there your example doesnt make any sense. why would he escape from prison? [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] also you cant equate a virus to a human life [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=J!NX;47737298]as someone who is extremely against the death sentence and extremely pro-rehab I don't see whats wrong in this it's a financial vacuum but some people need to go away, not just because of a sense of justice, it's just better[/QUOTE] there shouldn't be any cases where people are sentenced to death, it just sets a precedent making it more and more OK in the future

[QUOTE=Forumaster;47737232]People like this who clearly show they intend to kill anyone they can need to be removed from that possibility permanently. Say he were to have gotten a life sentence. Then in a few years he escapes and manages to kill a few more hundred people. The point of the death penalty in my eyes is not vengeance, but prevention. Put it this way. Let's say you got a flesh eating virus on your hand. Would you: A. Put a tourniquet on your arm, trying to separate the virus from the rest of your body while keeping it attached B. Amputate your fucking hand before it can cause you pain beyond imagining and then kill you[/QUOTE] this isn't a batman villain we're talking about here. i've never done it personally, but breaking out of prison and escaping recapture long enough to plan and execute the murders of hundreds (!) of people sounds like it would be really, really hard to do. there's only even been something like eleven prison breaks across [I]the whole world[/I] in the last fifteen years, usually only of groups of two to three guys out of the whole prison. it's ain't exactly a likely occurrence.

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737298]as someone who is extremely against the death sentence and extremely pro-rehab I don't see whats wrong in this it's a financial vacuum but some people need to go away, not just because of a sense of justice, it's just better[/QUOTE] You're not really "extremely against death sentence" if you don't see anything wrong with... death sentence. I fail to see how a dead dude is better than a dude put behind bars for the rest of his life. The outcome is the same, the dude is out of society's sight forever. Like, really, I don't understand that, honest. Can you explain why you think that?

[QUOTE=gudman;47737501]You're not really "extremely against death sentence" if you don't see anything wrong with... death sentence. I fail to see how a dead dude is better than a dude put behind bars for the rest of his life. The outcome is the same, the dude is out of society's sight forever. Like, really, I don't understand that, honest. Can you explain why you think that?[/QUOTE] I really feel it's not ok to execute unless they did something that is a very serious threat to a huge number of people and 100% confirmed guilty (he absolutely was wasn't he, yes?) I'm not 100% against the death sentence but if it's used in a case where someone tried to murder a huge crowd of people he's too much of a threat to really let live there's being a pedo, there's being a rapist, there's even being a murderer, and then there's bombing crowds of people. It's far more extreme than what "usual" criminals do. What if he escapes? Wouldn't prisoners who find out absolutely destroy this guy in prison? Even if he's in the best prison with 0 chance of escape and even if the death sentence is unreasonably expensive he's not your usual criminal.

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737688]I really feel it's not ok to execute unless they did something that is a very serious threat to a huge number of people and 100% confirmed guilty I'm not 100% against the death sentence but if it's used in a case where someone tried to murder a huge crowd of people he's too much of a threat to really let live there's being a pedo, there's being a rapist, there's even being a murderer, and then there's bombing crowds of people. It's far more extreme than what "usual" criminals do. What if he escapes? Wouldn't prisoners who find out absolutely destroy this guy in prison? Even if he's in the best prison with 0 chance of escape and even if the death sentence is unreasonably expensive he's not your usual criminal.[/QUOTE] where do you draw the line? what's ok to be killed for, and what's not?

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737708]where do you draw the line? what's ok to be killed for, and what's not?[/QUOTE] bombing an entire crowd of people is just too far to let go of course it's not like I'd vote yes on his execution. Life in solitary is just the same. but executing someone like that is entirely acceptable. he's never going to be able to return to society and there is no rehabilitating a mass murderer like this. You can fix a rapist and even a killer, but a bomber? Fuck no.

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737713]bombing an entire crowd of people is just too far to let go of course it's not like I'd vote yes on his execution. Life in solitary is just the same. but executing someone like that is entirely acceptable.[/QUOTE] you didn't answer my question what do we decide is ok to kill someone for? what is not ok? what's the breaking point between ok and not ok?

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737731]you didn't answer my question what do we decide is ok to kill someone for? what is not ok? what's the breaking point between ok and not ok?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE][B]bombing an entire crowd of people[/B] is just too far to let go[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]there's being a pedo, there's being a rapist, there's even being a murderer, [B]and then there's bombing crowds of people.[/B] It's far more extreme than what "usual" criminals do.[/QUOTE] death sentence is absolutely not ok, but in the case of bombing an entire crowd of people I think it wouldn't be unreasonable. That's why I said I'm against the death sentence. but anyone who makes an ultimatum on a political stance and is outright against or for something is just being silly. when someone is so far out there that they're trying to kill huge amounts of people at once they're far beyond what typical murders are.

not really being specific here what about someone that murdered 20 people over a course of 30 years? what if they committed a terrorist attack that injured people, and didn't murder anyone?

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737764]not really being specific here what about someone that murdered 20 people over a course of 30 years? what if they committed a terrorist attack that injured people, and didn't murder anyone?[/QUOTE] Are you expecting a long detailed list of every sin that I think should be excusable? I think it's ok because he [URL="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Boston_Marathon_explosions_(8652877581).jpg"]bombed a group of innocent people in the street[/URL] I don't know why I have to give an explanation, because you seem to be so radically against the death sentance that you're questioning people who state even simple exceptions. Trying to kill someone doesn't make it any less murder just because you failed. And if you're going to try and murder a crowd of people, either within one bombing or over a long period of time, and you're 100% confirmed guilty, it isn't that wild of an idea. any other case it's absolutely unacceptable, even for people who have murdered a family. It's when you become a threat to society or a huge number of people that I feel it's acceptable not because of a sense of revenge or justice but because of the safety of everyone

and there is always a chance of innocence, and people who were killed on death row have been proved innocent before with the death sentence in place, you would risk the chance of having innocent people being killed? even if it's reserved for the "most extreme" crimes

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737819]and there is always a chance of innocence, and people who were killed on death row have been proved innocent before with the death sentence in place, you would risk the chance of having innocent people being killed? even if it's reserved for the "most extreme" crimes[/QUOTE] no doubt, which is why I think they should absolutely be confirmed guilty people have died after being accused of something they didn't do, through execution, and that's extremely fucking awful it'd be better if it didn't exist at all, but still, some people are far too dangerous to let loose the sad thing is, even if they're confirmed innocent, solitary confinement would have ruined their life beyond redemption. So either way you lose I guess. I feel the bigger issue is the conviction of innocent people more than anything.

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737818]Are you expecting a long detailed list of every sin that I think should be excusable? I think it's ok because he [URL="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Boston_Marathon_explosions_(8652877581).jpg"]bombed a group of innocent people in the street[/URL] I don't know why I have to give an explanation, because you seem to be so radically against the death sentance that you're questioning people who state even simple exceptions. Trying to kill someone doesn't make it any less murder just because you failed. And if you're going to try and murder a crowd of people, either within one bombing or over a long period of time, and you're 100% confirmed guilty, it isn't that wild of an idea. any other case it's absolutely unacceptable, even for people who have murdered a family. It's when you become a threat to society or a huge number of people that I feel it's acceptable not because of a sense of revenge or justice but because of the safety of everyone[/QUOTE] again this doesn't really make sense, it's OK if they bombed people on the street but not OK if they killed their family? they are both psychopaths, just one decided to murder multiple innocent people in a more localized fashion

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737850]again this doesn't really make sense, it's OK if they bombed people on the street but not OK if they killed their family? they are both psychopaths, just one decided to murder multiple innocent people in a more localized fashion[/QUOTE] what I meant is, even people who killed an entire family aren't as bad as people who systematically kill people all at once or across many years I should have mentioned I'm talking a family being a mother/father, kids, vs a crowd (15+ people) which is honestly far worse. Killing crowds/mass amounts of people in the interest purely of killing as many people as physically possible is a lot more dangerous than killing specific people. I think we/you are thinking too hard about this though, does this really matter that much?

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737829]no doubt, which is why I think they should absolutely be confirmed guilty people have died after being accused of something they didn't do, through execution, and that's extremely fucking awful it'd be better if it didn't exist at all, but still, some people are far too dangerous to let loose the sad thing is, even if they're confirmed innocent, solitary confinement would have ruined their life beyond redemption. So either way you lose I guess. I feel the bigger issue is the conviction of innocent people more than anything.[/QUOTE] mass murderers aren't simply "let loose", it's not like they either set on death row or set free prisons exist, they are meant for people that need to be kept away from society until they are safe to be let back in

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737868]mass murderers aren't simply "let loose", it's not like they either set on death row or set free prisons exist, they are meant for people that need to be kept away from society until they are safe to be let back in[/QUOTE] No shit, but they're still a threat to even prisoners, and there is still a chance they can kill, even if it's just guards and prisoners. why would anyone think that people simply are killed or let go, this isn't Dredd. and if they're in solitary confinement for life vs death row, either way their lives are ruined beyond any redemption. they will never recover and likely never live a normal life. Not that's to say we should just kill them anyways "Because it's ruined anyways oh well".

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737864]what I meant is, even people who killed an entire family aren't as bad as people who systematically kill people all at once or across many years I should have mentioned I'm talking a family being a mother/father, kids, vs a crowd (15+ people) which is honestly far worse. Killing crowds/mass amounts of people in the interest purely of killing as many people as physically possible is a lot more dangerous than killing specific people. I think we/you are thinking too hard about this though, does this really matter that much?[/QUOTE] yeah it kind of matter because i think that having death as a penalty for crime is barbaric. it doesnt matter what someone did, they shouldn't be stripped of their life (through the justice system) because of their actions. nobody should decide if a person can live or not besides themselves

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737892]yeah it kind of matter because i think that having death as a penalty for crime is barbaric. it doesnt matter what someone did, they shouldn't be stripped of their life (through the justice system) because of their actions. nobody should decide if a person can live or not besides themselves[/QUOTE] yes that's nice but, do you know what else is barbaric? Bombing a crowd of people if anything execution by that is far from barbaric, it's cowardice and fear of course people are going to be so afraid of these people that they'd rather see them dead than live at all. I don't frankly care what happens, I'd rather the threat is gone.

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737875]No shit, but they're still a threat to even prisoners, and there is still a chance they can kill, even if it's just guards and prisoners. why would anyone think that people simply are killed or let go, this isn't Dredd. and if they're in solitary confinement for life vs death row, either way their lives are ruined beyond any redemption. they will never recover and likely never live a normal life. Not that's to say we should just kill them anyways "Because it's ruined anyways oh well".[/QUOTE] well i mean the whole point of a prison is to keep them from being a threat, so... [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=J!NX;47737897]yes that's nice but, do you know what else is barbaric? Bombing a crowd of people if anything execution by that is far from barbaric, it's cowardice and fear[/QUOTE] so you believe we should make the criminal suffer the same crime that they committed? raping women is barbaric, so we should make the criminal be raped

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737900]well i mean the whole point of a prison is to keep them from being a threat, so... [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] so you believe we should make the criminal suffer the same crime that they committed? raping women is barbaric, so we should make the criminal be raped[/QUOTE] what the fuck are you doing? I don't even want to reply to this, you're just completely misreading what I said there I think you're just asking questions to play a game of bait. That isn't even slightly close to anything I believe or said, ever. Don't compare me to people who believe in "eye for an eye", that's just being oblivious and inflammatory. You're so up your own ass against the death sentence that even people who would make 1 exception look pro-execution to you.

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737900]well i mean the whole point of a prison is to keep them from being a threat, so... [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] so you believe we should make the criminal suffer the same crime that they committed? raping women is barbaric, so we should make the criminal be raped[/QUOTE] Literally nowhere did he say that we should punish them with the crime they committed You're the reason so many people think that anti-death penalty people are pretentious dicks, you put words in other people's mouths and act like they're somehow less human for wanting horrible criminals to be totally and permanently removed as a threat Jesus fucking christ

not really, your post was just really weirdly worded and im still trying to figure out exactly what you said [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Starlight 456;47737937]Literally nowhere did he say that we should punish them with the crime they committed You're the reason so many people think that anti-death penalty people are pretentious dicks, you put words in other people's mouths and act like they're somehow less human for wanting horrible criminals to be totally and permanently removed as a threat Jesus fucking christ[/QUOTE] nice ad hom

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737948]not really, your post was just really weirdly worded and im still trying to figure out exactly what you said[/QUOTE] I know I word stuff weird and I'm sorry for that but now you're just getting ridiculous. I don't feel like I need to answer to anybody. It should be effortless for you to understand why someone might feel threatened by someone like Dzhokhar. The fact that there are people out there willing to kill a huge number of people for the fuck of it is frankly, terrifying.

[QUOTE=Bumrang;47737948]not really, your post was just really weirdly worded and im still trying to figure out exactly what you said [editline]16th May 2015[/editline] nice ad hom[/QUOTE] I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm saying you made a enormous assumption Like going from thinking he wants mass murderers dead thinking he wants serial rapists raped or something is ridiculous

i made the wrong conclusion from your post, you could reword it or something?? else attacking me for a misunderstanding is just childish

[QUOTE=J!NX;47737688]I really feel it's not ok to execute unless they did something that is a very serious threat to a huge number of people and 100% confirmed guilty (he absolutely was wasn't he, yes?) I'm not 100% against the death sentence but if it's used in a case where someone tried to murder a huge crowd of people he's too much of a threat to really let live there's being a pedo, there's being a rapist, there's even being a murderer, and then there's bombing crowds of people. It's far more extreme than what "usual" criminals do. What if he escapes? Wouldn't prisoners who find out absolutely destroy this guy in prison? Even if he's in the best prison with 0 chance of escape and even if the death sentence is unreasonably expensive he's not your usual criminal.[/QUOTE] I get it now. I, myself, don't agree with your position, but you have a pretty firm ground to stand on. I don't really have anything to argue with here, except the part about "what if he gets killed in a prison" - yeah that might happen, but what's the big deal about it? The guy who kills him then will be tried on that. My position is not that it's important to ensure that the criminal in question lives (like I said earlier, I couldn't care less), but rather that he isn't killed by the justice system. Because I don't believe in justice like that, to me it's just revenge and blood-lust. And the probability of some loner escaping from max and supermax penal facilities is pretty slim, to the point of not even worrying about it.