Printable View
[QUOTE=travelingman]Yep.[/QUOTE]
so you want to send the message to potential offenders that .. if you decide to commit a heinous, violent crime such as terrorizing a child by kidnapping them, raping them and then snuffing their life out that you can expect as punishment .. a nice, cozy prison setting with 3 meals a day and 'good treatment' ?
if you want to act like an animal, you should be treated like one(the mentally competent ones)
It sends mixed signals (don't kill or else the state will kill you), and these things are rarely beyond reasonable doubt.
What if an innocent man is killed?
A japanese man whose wife and 11 month daughter was killed then their corpses raped puts it well.
"capital punishment is not a mean of revenge, but rather a mean for the offender to acknowledge truthfully what he has done."
link here:(its in chinese)
[url]http://gps.wolflord.com/viewtopic.php?t=19077[/url]
my take after reading many of your posts:
1. to those that are afraid of killing the innocent, what about those clear cut cases where there is no doubt? for instance, say the man was recorded on tape killing people, and there was no room for doubt.
2. and to those who think its barbaric, do you have any idea how painful it is to be a relative of those killed/brutally raped? since capital punishment is usually applied only to the most extreme cases, the victims are usually put into horrific pain or death. and as previously mentioned, many families of victims do not see the death penalty as revenge, but rather as a medium to move on. they see the death of the killer as a closing and a comfort, and to regain a new balance and holding in their life. in my opinion its just not right to protect the offenders whilst overlooking what the victims want.
[QUOTE=GimmeThat]because granting someone their wish and prevent any further massecre is now the wrong thing to do.
because the publics job is in the competition of showing who's more inhumane, regardless of its impact and effect to the society.
because if whipping him bring "sick cruel" justice to the mind of the victims, then it is safe to say such event would happen again.
because countering negativity with negativity is what a great government do.[/QUOTE]
because the offenders may not be afraid of death but are afraid of pain?
the offender of the tram massacre case that i was talking about openly said that he wanted to kill, but after he was kept asking for morphine because he was pummeled at the station after his knifes were took away. pain CAN act as a deterrence. and lets be real here, how many people that are put away for life are really put away for life? for monster like this, who doesnt give any ****s and just want to kill, whats stopping them from doing so if they are released on parole for good behavior or shit like that?
[QUOTE=JtotheIzzo]I am. It costs way more money than incarcerating someone for life, and since DNA testing has been introduced it has proven a lot of people to be innocent who were previously on death row.
Two HUGE inexcusable flaws in the current system, and anyone who supports it so they can spout off some right wing bullshit or act like some eye for an eye tough guy is a first rate rube.
Until they have a more cost effective way and accurate way to condemn people to death the judges should be held personally accountable for the well being of anyone they wrongfully condemn to death (ie charged with murder) that would make far fewer death sentences and much more accurate ones.
Plain and simp the systems a pimp, and I refuse to be a ho.[/QUOTE]
maybe that's because the law bestows too much right on the offender:confusedshrug: a freaking law case usually takes years. and answer me this, what if there was no doubt at all? what if in some specific cases some goddamn murderer decided to kill in broad daylight? what then.
To me more than the death penalty, I'd rather see current criminals in jail have to work for their meals while they are in there. Find something for them to do so they aren't given meals while sitting on their ass at least. Maybe that could bring down the cost of jails. I don't get free meals, criminals shouldn't either.
As for the death penalty I'm not against it in situations likes repeat offenders of serious crimes (rape, murder, etc.) I can see how being cautious with the death penalty on someone's first offense is warranted, mistakes do happen. But to me if you are convicted twice of a serious crime I don't think it's worth trying rehabilitate that person or paying for their time in jail they are a lost cause.
And as for the death penalty costing more than the life in prison, I'd like to see numbers on that. And assuming it's an undeniable fact, then if should be made to cost less, it shouldn't cost much to kill someone if you are cautious with who you sentence to death I wouldn't really care if it was painless for that person or not.
I don't like the idea of the state assuming the power to murder its own citizens BUT it's not so cut-and-dried for me as "I'm against the death penalty." Situationally, I see why it exists.
[QUOTE=Dresta]No, because:
1. Mistakes cannot be rectified, and there will always be mistakes.
2. I do not think the state should have the right and power to kill its citizens, no matter what they do, and i do not trust the state with such a power.
Though i deplore the current focus on rehabilitation with people who have committed acts so heinous that one should have no interest in their rehabilitation, and only in their permanent separation and isolation from the rest of society.
The best reason i can think of to justify the death penalty is that it provides a kind of cathartic release for society in that it has revenged itself on someone who so thoroughly cheated it. Human beings have always revelled in this kind of collective revenge.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'm generally pretty trusting of the government (at least compared to most) but even I agree with #2. Sorry but the history of government is way too dark (even here in the US) for me to sign off on giving the government permission to kill citizens. It's bad enough that politicians can kill people overseas without public repercussions. I'm honestly surprised that point isn't brought up more in this debate because a lot of people who support capital punishment are also very suspicious of other government activities.
[QUOTE=dude77]so you want to send the message to potential offenders that .. if you decide to commit a heinous, violent crime such as terrorizing a child by kidnapping them, raping them and then snuffing their life out that you can expect as punishment .. a nice, cozy prison setting with 3 meals a day and 'good treatment' ?
if you want to act like an animal, you should be treated like one(the mentally competent ones)[/QUOTE]
That's not really sending a message any more than implementing the death penalty is sending a message (which studies have shown, even if the intent was to dissuade certain activities, that this message falls on deaf ears). If they committed anything like the vile thing you mentioned then they should be locked up for the rest of their life. That alone should be the punishment (and it's one helluva punishment). Otherwise, treat them like humans, not animals in the sense that you were using it.
[QUOTE=Random_Guy]A japanese man whose wife and 11 month daughter was killed then their corpses raped puts it well.
"capital punishment is not a mean of revenge, but rather a mean for the offender to acknowledge truthfully what he has done."
link here:(its in chinese)
[url]http://gps.wolflord.com/viewtopic.php?t=19077[/url]
my take after reading many of your posts:
1. to those that are afraid of killing the innocent, what about those clear cut cases where there is no doubt? for instance, say the man was recorded on tape killing people, and there was no room for doubt.
2. and to those who think its barbaric, do you have any idea how painful it is to be a relative of those killed/brutally raped? since capital punishment is usually applied only to the most extreme cases, the victims are usually put into horrific pain or death. and as previously mentioned, many families of victims do not see the death penalty as revenge, but rather as a medium to move on. they see the death of the killer as a closing and a comfort, and to regain a new balance and holding in their life. in my opinion its just not right to protect the offenders whilst overlooking what the victims want.[/QUOTE]
Great post. I think in clear-cut cases the Chinese method is great. If you agree to live within a society you agree to abide by the rules. If you can't respect the rights of others, then you should not be a part of that society.
I really think that so many countries have it wrong right now. We have a worldwide population crisis and most countries have huge financial problems.
We should be working on a 10 points death system as follows:
10 - murder
9 - rape
8 - attempted murder
7 - business corruption related offences
6 - Making class A drugs
5 - Dealing class A drugs
4 - fraud
3 - theft
2 - common assault
1 - Drink driving
So let's see here. If you were 100% guilty of rape with out any doubt, you are awarded 9 points. 1 more point and you get the death penalty. That person would either have to fit in or f[COLOR="Black"]u[/COLOR]ck off. If they drove drunk just once, they would be given the death penalty.
How about that drunk guy that keeps getting behind the wheel no matter how many times they attend AA, or what other interventions take place. 10 times doing that and we kill him.
It seems very fair to me, but ONLY if we have all the required evidence.
Look at countries like Canada and New Zealand. They believe in reforming all criminals, shit you can kill and rape someone in either country and potentially do less than 20 years in prison. That's a terrible system, and it's basically the only point of contention for me with liberal/democratic parties.
2 things.
1. Who are we to take another life.
2. Death is an easy way out.
[QUOTE=Draz]2 things.
1. Who are we to take another life.
2. Death is an easy way out.[/QUOTE]
1. Judge, jury, executioner, and contributing members of society
2. Death is a means to an end. If you have nothing but evil to contribute, GTFO.
Your grandkids are the one's that will suffer when the population is soaring and resources are all used up.
The governments and large companies that run this world are as ****ed up as it's inhabitants.
[QUOTE=Random_Guy]because the offenders may not be afraid of death but are afraid of pain?
the offender of the tram massacre case that i was talking about openly said that he wanted to kill, but after he was kept asking for morphine because he was pummeled at the station after his knifes were took away. pain CAN act as a deterrence. and lets be real here, how many people that are put away for life are really put away for life? for monster like this, who doesnt give any ****s and just want to kill, whats stopping them from doing so if they are released on parole for good behavior or shit like that?[/QUOTE]
Right, so with all the furore over the US torturing foreign people tied up quasi-military activity against the United States and its people, you think the US should now start torturing its own citizens? That'll go down well.
[QUOTE=Random_Guy]A japanese man whose wife and 11 month daughter was killed then their corpses raped puts it well.
"capital punishment is not a mean of revenge, but rather a mean for the offender to acknowledge truthfully what he has done."
link here:(its in chinese)
[url]http://gps.wolflord.com/viewtopic.php?t=19077[/url]
my take after reading many of your posts:
1. to those that are afraid of killing the innocent, what about those clear cut cases where there is no doubt? for instance, say the man was recorded on tape killing people, and there was no room for doubt.
2. and to those who think its barbaric[B], do you have any idea how painful it is to be a relative of those killed/brutally raped?[/B] since capital punishment is usually applied only to the most extreme cases, the victims are usually put into horrific pain or death. and as previously mentioned, many families of victims do not see the death penalty as revenge, but rather as a medium to move on. they see the death of the killer as a closing and a comfort, and to regain a new balance and holding in their life. in my opinion its just not right to protect the offenders whilst overlooking what the victims want.[/QUOTE]
I can guess. I would think if anyone did that to somebody in my family i would want personally to torture and kill them, but that does not make it any more than revenge, and i'm pretty sure the state is not a very good instrument for exacting revenge. You have to appreciate that even if the evidence isn't 100% conclusive, the family are going to be baying for the blood of the killer, and in high-profile cases this would undoubtedly still result in innocent people being executed. There is no justice in cases such as this: if something similar happened to someone i loved, i'm not sure i would want to continue living with that knowledge, regardless of whether the perpetrator was living or not.
[QUOTE=D-FENS]Great post. I think in clear-cut cases the Chinese method is great. If you agree to live within a society you agree to abide by the rules. If you can't respect the rights of others, then you should not be a part of that society.
I really think that so many countries have it wrong right now. We have a worldwide population crisis and most countries have huge financial problems.
We should be working on a 10 points death system as follows:
10 - murder
9 - rape
8 - attempted murder
7 - business corruption related offences
6 - Making class A drugs
5 - Dealing class A drugs
4 - fraud
3 - theft
2 - common assault
1 - Drink driving
So let's see here. If you were 100% guilty of rape with out any doubt, you are awarded 9 points. 1 more point and you get the death penalty. That person would either have to fit in or f[COLOR="Black"]u[/COLOR]ck off. If they drove drunk just once, they would be given the death penalty.
How about that drunk guy that keeps getting behind the wheel no matter how many times they attend AA, or what other interventions take place. 10 times doing that and we kill him.
It seems very fair to me, but ONLY if we have all the required evidence.
.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, sounds very fair executing people for committing non-violent crimes. This would be almost a return to the Middle Ages :facepalm .
[QUOTE=Dresta]
Yeah, sounds very fair executing people for committing non-violent crimes. This would be almost a return to the Middle Ages :facepalm .[/QUOTE]
What gives someone the right to make the same bad mistake time and time again putting our children at risk?
I don;t know why you think we should be affording criminals so many rights and using up more of the Earth's resources to keep them living comfortably.
If you want violent criminals and repeat criminals alive living the high life, you need to re-evaluate your belief system. At least suggest forced labor camps or something. Shit, maybe we can get these guys making more railroads or sell them to Cambodia to use them as landmine bait so kids stop getting their legs blown off
[QUOTE=D-FENS]What gives someone the right to make the same bad mistake time and time again putting our children at risk?
I don;t know why you think we should be affording criminals so many rights and using up more of the Earth's resources to keep them living comfortably.
If you want violent criminals and repeat criminals alive living the high life, you need to re-evaluate your belief system. At least suggest forced labor camps or something. Shit, maybe we can get these guys making more railroads or sell them to Cambodia to use them as landmine bait so kids stop getting their legs blown off[/QUOTE]
Except a lot of those crimes on your points system don't even put anyone's children at risk. You could be execute for one case of fraud and two cases of theft.
Making drugs is also not a violent activity, really shouldn't be illegal at all, and you want to kill people for doing it twice. Maniacs like you are the reason i will always be opposed to the death penalty on principle - you'd like to wipe out half the population if you could.