Dad of four, shot in Brixton (South London) whilst breaking up a fight. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=johan_sm;29466389] I find furries wrong and [b]worth death penalty.[/b][/QUOTE] What the shit? But any way, this is terrible, but I wonder if the situation would have been different if the man had the means to defend himself?

[QUOTE=Sanius;29467464]Show me some kind of scientific study that proves without a doubt that somebody can somehow be "beyond" rehabilitation. Otherwise, you're talking out of your ass.[/QUOTE] Well.. if you want to get down to the individual cases, sure. Though it's pretty pointless, because for one thing that [b]we all[/b] can agree to, is that no method of punishment nor preaching, let alone rehabilitation, has stopped people from acting violent before they get into trouble for it, if they get into trouble for it at all.

[QUOTE=StormHammer;29466139]And all the bleeding heart pansies say we don't need the death penalty. What a joke.[/QUOTE] My biggest problem with the death penalty is the cost of the appeals process. And of course the risk of killing innocent people.

[QUOTE=Contag;29467569]My biggest problem with the death penalty is the cost of the appeals process. And of course the risk of killing innocent people.[/QUOTE] What about the fact that countries with a death penalty are asserting that they own your life? Does that not offend you?

Every time someone is killed, whether as we see it rightful or just a plain senseless act of evilness, we go through this debate ALL OVER AGAIN. So we could use a megathread, because other wise we'll be sitting here till the day we all die because non authorized killings aren't going anywhere for a loooooooong time. That's what people do, and have done, for as long as I can remember. Whether they die for it, or get incarcerated for the rest of their god damned lives, is just the formality where we get to have a say about it.

[QUOTE=Sanius;29467402]...No it isn't. How the hell is suffering for the rest of your life better in any concievable way than a quick death? If anything, it's more "morally wrong" than the death penalty. Prison should only be for rehabilitation.[/QUOTE] Whoa wait. You said that people should be put in prison to separate them from the general public citizenry, but now you say it should only be for rehabilitation? Are you so daft that you actually think people like this can be actually rehabilitated and released without risk to the public you said justice is supposed the protect?

[QUOTE=Mr. N;29467605]Whoa wait. You said that people should be put in prison to separate them from the general public citizenry[/QUOTE] I never said anything of the sort. You're talking to the wrong person.

[QUOTE=Sanius;29467464]Show me some kind of scientific study that proves without a doubt that somebody can somehow be "beyond" rehabilitation. Otherwise, you're talking out of your ass.[/QUOTE] [img]http://geeksofdoom.com/GoD/img/2010/11/2010-11-04-richard_kuklinski.jpg[/img] Richard Kuklinski, he would kill you if he just does not like you at the first sight, enough of the proof?

[QUOTE=Sanius;29467402]...No it isn't. How the hell is suffering for the rest of your life better in any concievable way than a quick death? If anything, it's more "morally wrong" than the death penalty. Prison should only be for rehabilitation.[/QUOTE] The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment. People in prison get fucking three meals a day, free housing, a job, an education, and does not pay taxes. [editline]27th April 2011[/editline] You're stupid.

[QUOTE=Sanius;29467497]I completely oppose an unconditional death penalty and if a life sentence is given, death should always be an option.[/QUOTE] I agree with this. The death penalty isn't really the right way to go, even if anger makes it seem so in the moment. However, crimes that would merit the death penalty should be subject to a sentence of life without possibility of parole, and then, yes, death should be a voluntary option.

[QUOTE=archangel125;29467513]I don't need to. It's common knowledge in criminology that certain people are too far gone for help. I study this shit. Think psychological disorders, compulsive sexual predators, serial killers, etc. You're talking out of your ass, knowing little to nothing about criminal psychology. On my part, I'm taking it in college.[/QUOTE] Positivist theories are only one of many theories of crime causation. I would strongly disagree that all criminal actions can be explained via psychology. That said, criminal psychology has made great strides in incorporating other theories, but still tends to focus on micro social relations, rather than any possible structural or macro sociological causes. What country do you study in?

[QUOTE=scotland1;29466518]London.[/QUOTE] brixton

[QUOTE=Sanius;29467612]I never said anything of the sort. You're talking to the wrong person.[/QUOTE] Big serious my bad on my part. Now just cut out the first half of my post.

[QUOTE=archangel125;29467652]I agree with this. The death penalty isn't really the right way to go, even if anger makes it seem so in the moment. However, crimes that would merit the death penalty should be subject to a sentence of life without possibility of parole, and then, yes, death should be a voluntary option.[/QUOTE] I absolutely agree that it should be a voluntary option. Though seem victims groups will see this as a cop-out, ultimately, what is the goal? Should we just flay them, or are we protecting society. Surely the offender has some ideas about their possibility of re-offending.

I feel that when our generation gets to power, death penalty will be allowed on 90% of cases.

[QUOTE=StormHammer;29466139]And all the bleeding heart pansies say we don't need the death penalty. What a joke.[/QUOTE] How about we keep them in a 1.5m x 1.5m x 1.5m cell with no windows and a little slot for food. They get just enough food to stay alive and pad the walls so they can't hurt themselves. It wouldn't cost much and they would suffer.

[QUOTE=Earthen;29467765]How about we keep them in a 1.5m x 1.5m x 1.5m cell with no windows and a little slot for food. They get just enough food to stay alive and pad the walls so they can't hurt themselves. It wouldn't cost much and they would suffer.[/QUOTE] Why not just pay some homeless people to flay them for a couple of months? And then drown them and burn the bodies? Cheaper, and creates jobs.

[QUOTE=Mr. N;29466941]I love how Doriol is rating everybody dumb because he is a butthurt child.[/QUOTE] yeah what crawled up his ass anyway

[QUOTE=Earthen;29467765]How about we keep them in a 1.5m x 1.5m x 1.5m cell with no windows and a little slot for food. They get just enough food to stay alive and pad the walls so they can't hurt themselves. It wouldn't cost much and they would suffer.[/QUOTE] The point of prison isn't to make people suffer.

[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;29467643]The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment.[/QUOTE] In prison, cruel is the usual punishment.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;29467760]I feel that when our generation gets to power, death penalty will be allowed on 90% of cases.[/QUOTE] Are you saying that as if it's a good thing or...?

Prison serves two purposes. To rehabilitate those who can be rehabilitated, And to keep the public safe from those that can not, by holding them for life.

[QUOTE=c0nk3r;29467822]yeah what crawled up his ass anyway[/QUOTE] He's in "Gay Pride" groups in his steam, so I guess this is the reason he's so butthurt, he got pumped too hard.

[QUOTE=archangel125;29467445]What you fail to realize is that some people are beyond rehabilitation. If not granted the mercy of a quick death, they should be kept in chains for life, to protect the public.[/QUOTE] they only should be kept imprisoned if they are deemed a threat to others even after receiving treatment. most people aren't like hannibal lecter. they can be treated if people actually give them a second chance instead of just locking them up for life and throwing away the key.

Also, an argument like "if you are in for life, you should get an option to get killed with your permission" is just stupid. so in other words, lifetime prisoners waiting to get bored enough to die before they die due to old age. it would be the same as asking for a fellow inmate to kill you, ask them to sign a paper that says "I hereby give this man a permission to shank me"

[QUOTE=JDK721;29467930]they only should be kept imprisoned if they are deemed a threat to others even after receiving treatment.[/QUOTE] That's kind of what I meant by "beyond rehabilitation".

[QUOTE=archangel125;29467923]Prison serves two purposes. To rehabilitate those who can be rehabilitated, And to keep the public safe from those that can not, by holding them for life.[/QUOTE] Would it not be more efficient to separate those deemed possible to rehabilitate, and those not? With voluntary death penalty for those without possibility of parole?

[QUOTE=JDK721;29467930]they only should be kept imprisoned if they are deemed a threat to others even after receiving treatment. most people aren't like hannibal lecter. they can be treated if people actually give them a second chance instead of just locking them up for life and throwing away the key.[/QUOTE] If you have ever met a person like this they simply see prison as a way of building respect and becoming even more dangerous when they get out. Seriously some of the fuckers in these gangs can kill with no remorse and always will.

[QUOTE=Gekkosan;29467957]Also, an argument like "if you are in for life, you should get an option to get killed with your permission" is just stupid. so in other words, lifetime prisoners waiting to get bored enough to die before they die due to old age.[/QUOTE] Is that a bad thing?

[QUOTE=archangel125;29467958]That's kind of what I meant by "beyond rehabilitation".[/QUOTE] yeah, but I think you're exaggerating the amount of how many people are actually "beyond rehabilitation."