[QUOTE=Hidole555;34419446]If you're looking for punishment, then you could debate life sentence is still a more preferable option. Executions are "humane" in that they invoke little to no pain on the criminal. With a life sentence they go the rest of their life with nothing to reflect on but their horrible, stupid decision.[/QUOTE]
Komisarjevsky attempted to avoid the death penalty, so apparently he thought a life sentence was preferable.
[editline]27th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;34419520]Not what I'm saying in the slightest, and I'm not justifying or excusing what he did, but a death sentence is excessive in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
Excessive in what way?
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34419446]If you're looking for punishment, then you could debate life sentence is still a more preferable option. Executions are "humane" in that they invoke little to no pain on the criminal. With a life sentence they go the rest of their life with nothing to reflect on but their horrible, stupid decision.[/QUOTE]
um so you're saying that i should be choosing to send them to prison so they suffer more?
that sounds a lot more sadistic than execution, at least the way you're putting it.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;34419532]
Excessive in what way?[/QUOTE]
Excessive in that you're killing another human being. Killing a person for killing a person is pretty ass backwards.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;34419692]Excessive in that you're killing another human being. Killing a person for killing a person is pretty ass backwards.[/QUOTE]
Killing a person who has killed and raped several innocent people is not the same thing.
And is not locking someone up for the rest of their life just as excessive?
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34419276]An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Killing people to show that killing people is wrong is a hypocritical argument.[/QUOTE]
The stupid thing about that argument is that it relies solely on people being incapable of learning. If people were to get harsher punishments I do think that it would start making people think twice.
can the people arguing for the death penalty admit they like it because they think it's badass, and more like the video games and movies they enjoy.
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;34419769]Killing a person who has killed and raped several innocent people is not the same thing.
And is not locking someone up for the rest of their life just as excessive?[/QUOTE]
You are contradicting yourself. You already said he would prefer the life sentence.
Despite any of this, killing a person is always killing a person. It would be wrong against anyone, but in this case the man is clearly mentally ill too.
He should get help. He should not be killed.
Even if we removed all other arguments, do you really want to give your government the power to convict people to death?
[QUOTE=Croix;34419881]You are contradicting yourself. You already said he would prefer the life sentence.
Despite any of this, killing a person is always killing a person. It would be wrong against anyone, but in this case the man is clearly mentally ill too.
He should get help. He should not be killed.
Even if we removed all other arguments, do you really want to give your government the power to convict people to death?[/QUOTE]
I never contradicted myself. I stated that I really do not believe their is that great of a moral difference between locking someone up for the rest of their life and killing them. I wouldn't doubt Komisarjevsky prefers life over death, but that preference it shouldn't effect the morality of it.
[QUOTE=Last or First;34418640]"Be lenient on me, judge! Sure, I raped and choked a woman to death, raped another, and killed to girls by tying them to their beds, setting fire to their house, and letting them suffocate and burn, but my dad hit me as a child!"
His own abuse and depression doesn't excuse what he did. At all.[/QUOTE]
I admit his crimes are monstrous, But the death penalty is a fucking joke. The idea that the US condones that type of violence and action toward him because because of his actions is ludicrous, If you're against murder then why do you [I]murder criminals?[/I] An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. It's fucking mentally defunct that, in retribution for murder, the murderer is killed. So what do you do to the murderer of the murderer, eh?
And before you spam me with dumbs going "YOU CONDONE RAPE YOU EVIL PERSON". no i don't. I am against all violence, Whether state-funded or fuelled by one man, It is wrong and an injustice towards mankind as a whole.
Who gives a man the right to decide who lives and who dies?
Though I have doubts that a person like this can be rehabilitated, the attempt really should be made, no matter how long it takes.
Killing this man serves absolutely no purpose other than to enact vengeance. Before anyone even thinks about saying trying to rehabilitate this man would be a waste of time and money, sentencing him to death is an even bigger waste of time and money considering how long and costly the death row process is.
Even if he fails to be rehabilitated keeping him alive will cost less than killing him.
And before someone who has no argument with any weight except "you are a murderer/rapist defending monster" decides to respond to my post, I do no defend this man's actions. I defend the right to have access to rehabilitation that he should have.
[QUOTE=Jetblack357;34419840]If people were to get harsher punishments I do think that it would start making people think twice.[/QUOTE]
which is why the murder rate per capita is higher in states with capital punishment than states without capital punishment?
[QUOTE=Valdor;34419022]Why am I not surprised to see that there's somebody on facepunch willing to defend a man
[/QUOTE]
that's not what he was saying at all.
why am i not surprised to see that no-one on facepunch can actually read?
[editline]27th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420074]He gave up the right to live when he murdered and raped a woman and burned her children to death.
This is a seriously fucked up crime, there's no way to rehabilitate him, and shoving him in jail for life will do nothing because he feels no remorse.[/QUOTE]
the law doesn't work per basis, either it's okay to kill people for crimes or it isn't.
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;34419983]So what do you do to the murderer of the murderer, eh?[/QUOTE]
This argument is fucking stupid. You leave out all of the details surrounding the situation and act as though it's a valid point.
It's like asking "Hey, you shouldn't lock people up for false imprisonment, that's hypocritical. What do you do to the person who imprisoned the person who imprisoned people?" It blatantly ignores critical details.
That said, I do agree that the death penalty is wrong. Life in prison will do fine. The death penalty should be used extremely rarely, for the most extreme cases, if at all.
Trying to excuse him on some level by saying "Oh, he was depressed and hit as a child, so this isn't entirely his fault" is just fucking stupid. Unless if his insanity messes with his morality or perspective of reality, then mental disorders don't excuse him in the slightest.
The man deserves punishment, and probably deserves to die. However, just because he deserves to die doesn't mean that the state should kill him. It just means that he's a horrible, horrible person.
This was justified I think, the man forked over the cash as the person said he wanted and still he took their lives.
I just want to say this:
NOBODY who thinks something is worth more than a human life is sane. Nobody.
I really wished we could fix this people but we cant, since we cant things like Death Penalty take over as a "solution". I just can hope someday we will be available to help this kind of people.
He deserves death penalty, but... most death penalties take years to go through with.
[QUOTE=Jetblack357;34419840]The stupid thing about that argument is that it relies solely on people being incapable of learning. If people were to get harsher punishments I do think that it would start making people think twice.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that's why states like Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas, have much higher violent crime rates than other states.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420327]Yeah let's just ignore the fact that almost all of those states have significantly more people than the other states.
I mean Texas and California contain like 40%+ of the entire US population, both of them have multiple huge cities.[/QUOTE]
I didn't ignore that fact.
The crime rate was based on population.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420074]He gave up the right to live when he murdered and raped a woman and burned her children to death.[/QUOTE]
Umm, rights are irrevocable due to them being a right, not a privilege. You can't have them removed, stripped or given up, as that would stop them from being rights.
As monstrous as his crimes are, and as much as I hate him for them, the death penalty is wrong in all cases, as it is the violation of a human right, and is vengeance based as opposed to justice based.
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34419446]If you're looking for punishment, then you could debate life sentence is still a more preferable option. Executions are "humane" in that they invoke little to no pain on the criminal. With a life sentence they go the rest of their life with nothing to reflect on but their horrible, stupid decision.[/QUOTE]
No, they are not "humane" and they most certainly do not invoke little to no pain. If a single part of a lethal injection is botched, it can cause intense and excruciating pain, it's just that the other drugs render the victim unable to move. They are easy to watch, which is why it's often used. The most humane, painless way to execute someone would probably be nitrogen asphyxiation, and even then, I am against it.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420327]Yeah let's just ignore the fact that almost all of those states have significantly more people than the other states.
I mean Texas and California contain like 40%+ of the entire US population, both of them have multiple huge cities.[/QUOTE]
do you realize what per capita means at all?
[editline]27th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420327]Yeah let's just ignore the fact that almost all of those states have significantly more people than the other states.
I mean Texas and California contain like 40%+ of the entire US population, both of them have multiple huge cities.[/QUOTE]
do you realize what per capita means at all?
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420074]He gave up the right to live when he murdered and raped a woman and burned her children to death.
This is a seriously fucked up crime, there's no way to rehabilitate him, and shoving him in jail for life will do nothing because he feels no remorse.[/QUOTE]
Lock him in a cell on his own for the rest of his life. Simple.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420504]Let me ask you something, if he ignored the rights of three people, why does he deserve those rights himself? Because he's alive and they're not anymore?[/QUOTE]
It's not a case of deserving, it's a case of he has them as long as he is a human. If you can justify the removal of a right from one person (which stops it from being a right) then you start a slippery slope towards right removal being more commonplace. The law is supposed to be boolean, not an emotion fuelled trainwreck. If he is human (and he is) then he is covered by international human rights.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420504]Let me ask you something, if he ignored the rights of three people, why does he deserve those rights himself? Because he's alive and they're not anymore?[/QUOTE]
Because he's still a human being.
[editline]27th January 2012[/editline]
You don't EARN or LOSE your human rights. They are not a PRIVELLIGE, They are a RIGHT.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;34420504]Let me ask you something, if he ignored the rights of three people, why does he deserve those rights himself? Because he's alive and they're not anymore?[/QUOTE]
Wow are you serious? You can't just ignore someone's right to life regardless of what they've done. That's the biggest problem with the death penalty.
Tell me. Why would it be illegal for me to decide to willingly give up my right to life by committing suicide but it is totally legal to relinquish someone else's right to life if they committed what one would consider a "bad enough crime"?
[QUOTE=Hidole555;34418616]Hooray. Now we can waste thousands of dollars on a bloated appeals process instead of just a life sentence without parole.[/QUOTE]
yeah i'd much rather waste a few hundred thousand dollars feeding and clothing this guy for the next 40 years.
By killing him they're just giving him a comparatively quick escape from serving his punishment which, in my opinion, should be life behind bars... either way I have no sympathy for this scumbag, whatever happens to him.
[QUOTE=stupid10er;34420637]yeah i'd much rather waste a few hundred thousand dollars feeding and clothing this guy for the next 40 years.[/QUOTE]
I'm so tired of people like you.
Please educate yourself on how much it costs to carry out the death penalty.
I can assure you it costs much, MUCH more than just keeping them in prison for life.
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;34420546]Because he's still a human being.
[editline]27th January 2012[/editline]
You don't EARN or LOSE your human rights. They are not a PRIVELLIGE, They are a RIGHT.[/QUOTE]
except in the grand scheme of things, no living creature has any divine rights. humans are given the rights of the commonwealth they are born in. your society says that one can lose the right to live. our society says that it is possible. that's like saying i should be punished for breaking a british-exclusive law in the united states. sorry that countries' customs or views aren't universal.
[QUOTE=stupid10er;34420700]except in the grand scheme of things, no living creature has any divine rights. humans are given the rights of the commonwealth they are born in. your society says that one can lose the right to live. our society says that it is possible. that's like saying i should be punished for breaking a british-exclusive law in the united states. sorry that countries' customs or views aren't universal.[/QUOTE]Any society that says that you can lose your right to life has no right to call themselves civilized.
[QUOTE=stupid10er;34420700]except in the grand scheme of things, no living creature has any divine rights. humans are given the rights of the commonwealth they are born in. your society says that one can lose the right to live. our society says that it is possible. that's like saying i should be punished for breaking a british-exclusive law in the united states. sorry that countries' customs or views aren't universal.[/QUOTE]
And who gives the president of the US the right to decide who lives and who dies? Why should they have the right? Why should others be treated better or worse than their kin?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
