PDA

View Full Version : the death penalty


britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 09:24 AM
do you think the death penalty should be given? and what for? personally im unsure wether to be pro or against the death penalty but im not gonna lie, I wish it would be awarded to some people, like those who murdered that soilder in london however generally I think there will be a problem with evidence

LunarScorpio
July 22nd, 2013, 09:50 AM
Human life is precious, I am totally against the killing somebody just because they did that to someone else.

Jess
July 22nd, 2013, 10:04 AM
No. We are no better than murderers if we execute them. We don't teach others killing is bad by killing killers. And the death penalty is too quick of a way out; the criminal should suffer.

Kameraden
July 22nd, 2013, 11:23 AM
Why the hell would we waste $30,000 per prisoner per year when we could spend $15 dollars on a short drop and sudden stop?

Stronk Serb
July 22nd, 2013, 11:57 AM
I am for a slow death.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 12:02 PM
I am for a slow death.

why? if someones being executed it should be quick and painless, firing squad or leathel injection

No. We are no better than murderers if we execute them. We don't teach others killing is bad by killing killers. And the death penalty is too quick of a way out; the criminal should suffer.

have you seen British prisons? they get weekly allowances, tvs and 5 options for dinner, theyre nut suffering, im for putting them to work

Human
July 22nd, 2013, 12:27 PM
I don't think there is much point to the death penalty, to do it legally costs thousands for the injections etc. and it just kills more people. What about the prisoners family? They lose someone too. It's also an easy way out.
We should stop giving the worst prisoners tvs and luxuries and that would be fine. However Norway has very high prison qualities and the lowest rate of re-offending. I think we need to treat prisoners with humanity because by alienating them further, and putting them in a closed society they just learn more ways to be a criminal.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 12:29 PM
I don't think there is much point to the death penalty, to do it legally costs thousands for the injections etc. and it just kills more people. What about the prisoners family? They lose someone too. It's also an easy way out.
We should stop giving the worst prisoners tvs and luxuries and that would be fine. However Norway has very high prison qualities and the lowest rate of re-offending. I think we need to treat prisoners with humanity because by alienating them further, and putting them in a closed society they just learn more ways to be a criminal.

I think they need to be disciplined, maybe put them to work, what do you think of that?

thatcountrykid
July 22nd, 2013, 12:57 PM
I say spend 50 cents on a bullet and drop our death row population.

Jess
July 22nd, 2013, 01:00 PM
have you seen British prisons? they get weekly allowances, tvs and 5 options for dinner, theyre nut suffering, im for putting them to work

They shouldn't have those, then.

RoseyCadaver
July 22nd, 2013, 01:30 PM
I'm quoting someone, I can't remember who, from a former "should the death penalty be legal" thread.

"We kill people, who kill people, to show killing is bad." Doesn't make much sense.

Sugaree
July 22nd, 2013, 01:31 PM
why? if someones being executed it should be quick and painless, firing squad or leathel injection

Unless you're shot right through your skull, a firing squad isn't "quick and painless". Also, we're not sure if the lethal injection commonly administered causes no pain simply because no one is dumb enough to sacrifice themselves to find out. It could be something on the level of arthritic pain, or maybe even the pain you feel when something pierces your skin. Hell, it could even be more advanced pain, but we simply don't know.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 02:03 PM
Unless you're shot right through your skull, a firing squad isn't "quick and painless". Also, we're not sure if the lethal injection commonly administered causes no pain simply because no one is dumb enough to sacrifice themselves to find out. It could be something on the level of arthritic pain, or maybe even the pain you feel when something pierces your skin. Hell, it could even be more advanced pain, but we simply don't know.

a good marksman should be used but personally, I think its too gory and with lethal injections your put to sleep first or its a drug that puts you to sleep but you dont wake up

They shouldn't have those, then.

thats my opinion:)

Kameraden
July 22nd, 2013, 02:12 PM
Why should it be painless?

Steven1
July 22nd, 2013, 02:16 PM
I think it should be. Think about it, they took someone's life away, so in my opinion they have no right to life themself. I know the people who administer the death penalty are killing them, but their sentence is justified. However, it also raises the issue of the wrongly convicted, in that someone who was wrongly convicted could die for someone else's crime. Death is a penalty, prison is a luxury. I mean, look at the conditions. They get 3 hot meals a day, a TV, a bed, they live in better conditions than most people on benefits. However, its also not really letting them experience pain as they'd be dead, where they can't feel anything. Keeping them alive and locked up for the rest of their lives will put them in more anguish than death will, so then they can experience loss just as the victims family did.

Moondust
July 22nd, 2013, 02:26 PM
In my opinion, murder is murder. As a Christian, I believe all sin is equally wrong and even those in great authority don't have the right to end a person's life.
A life sentence in jail is enough, being behind bars and barely ever being able to see any of your loved ones. It's an act of anger, not justice. We only have the right to protect the public from the person, not take the life of the person. If it was for self defense I can understand, but not when the person is in no way a threat to anyone.

Korashk
July 22nd, 2013, 02:34 PM
Why do people for the death penalty have to be such idiots about it a lot of the time? I mean, if you're going to have a view on this kinda important issue you should at least know basic facts about it, like how much it costs.

"HURR DURR BULLETS ARE CHEAP! I'M AN IGNORANT IDIOT THAT DOESN'T RESEARCH MY VIEWS!"

The death penalty costs millions more than life imprisonment.

Another thing I don't like is the whole "We kill people who kill people, to show killing is bad."

You're just as bad as the Bullets cost $0.50 people. Using incorrect rhetoric to promote your view. Since when is killing bad? The death penalty doesn't punish killers, it punished MURDERERS. If you change the saying people will probably have less of a problem with it.

"We kill people who murder people, to show murder is bad."

Stronk Serb
July 22nd, 2013, 02:57 PM
why? if someones being executed it should be quick and painless, firing squad or leathel injection

So that they suffer like the person they murdered, if not worse.

Its Pretty
July 22nd, 2013, 03:01 PM
Why do people for the death penalty have to be such idiots about it a lot of the time? I mean, if you're going to have a view on this kinda important issue you should at least know basic facts about it, like how much it costs.

"HURR DURR BULLETS ARE CHEAP! I'M AN IGNORANT IDIOT THAT DOESN'T RESEARCH MY VIEWS!"

The death penalty costs millions more than life imprisonment.

Another thing I don't like is the whole "We kill people who kill people, to show killing is bad."

You're just as bad as the Bullets cost $0.50 people. Using incorrect rhetoric to promote your view. Since when is killing bad? The death penalty doesn't punish killers, it punished MURDERERS. If you change the saying people will probably have less of a problem with it.

"We kill people who murder people, to show murder is bad." You and steven26 have won my respect.

Walter Powers
July 22nd, 2013, 03:02 PM
I say spend 50 cents on a bullet and drop our death row population.

100% agree. Murderers are the last people who should be receiving free food from the government.

Gigablue
July 22nd, 2013, 03:21 PM
Firstly, I think we need to remember that everyone has basic human rights. Mo matter what crimes you commit, you are still entitled to them.

Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The death penalty is definitely cruel. Historically, execution was supposed to be as painful as possible. Presently, developed countries that still use the death penalty have found less painful means, but they aren't painless. Furthermore, they only stop the physical pain. The psychological distress alone is enough to deem the death penalty cruel.

However, my main problem with the death penalty is that is goes against the very purpose of the judicial system. The juducial system is supposed to rehabilitate what possible, and if that's impossible, they have to isolate the criminal from society. Life in prison is equally effective at achieving isolation from society. Also, should the accused later be exonerated, it can be reversed.

The justice system isn't designed to punish. No one ever deserves more suffering than necessary. We shouldn't try to make them feel the pain that the victim felt. Penalties should always be as mild as possible, as long as they achieve the desired result.

In summary, the death penalty is cruel. Less severe penalties can achieve the same result, without violating basic human rights.

thatcountrykid
July 22nd, 2013, 03:22 PM
Why do people for the death penalty have to be such idiots about it a lot of the time? I mean, if you're going to have a view on this kinda important issue you should at least know basic facts about it, like how much it costs.

"HURR DURR BULLETS ARE CHEAP! I'M AN IGNORANT IDIOT THAT DOESN'T RESEARCH MY VIEWS!"

The death penalty costs millions more than life imprisonment.

Another thing I don't like is the whole "We kill people who kill people, to show killing is bad."

You're just as bad as the Bullets cost $0.50 people. Using incorrect rhetoric to promote your view. Since when is killing bad? The death penalty doesn't punish killers, it punished MURDERERS. If you change the saying people will probably have less of a problem with it.

"We kill people who murder people, to show murder is bad."

At this point the only reason the death penalty cost so much is because we keep them alive for 15 years on government money. I say that the week after sentencing they are to be executed. The had the chance to fight the sentence during the initial trial. During that week they can say bye to family and what not but thats it.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 03:42 PM
Firstly, I think we need to remember that everyone has basic human rights. Mo matter what crimes you commit, you are still entitled to them.

Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights


The death penalty is definitely cruel. Historically, execution was supposed to be as painful as possible. Presently, developed countries that still use the death penalty have found less painful means, but they aren't painless. Furthermore, they only stop the physical pain. The psychological distress alone is enough to deem the death penalty cruel.

However, my main problem with the death penalty is that is goes against the very purpose of the judicial system. The juducial system is supposed to rehabilitate what possible, and if that's impossible, they have to isolate the criminal from society. Life in prison is equally effective at achieving isolation from society. Also, should the accused later be exonerated, it can be reversed.

The justice system isn't designed to punish. No one ever deserves more suffering than necessary. We shouldn't try to make them feel the pain that the victim felt. Penalties should always be as mild as possible, as long as they achieve the desired result.

In summary, the death penalty is cruel. Less severe penalties can achieve the same result, without violating basic human rights.

1) it does not break that human right
2) lethal injection? humain, no pain
3) what about the murder of that soilder in London? they filmed themselves doing it, invited an audience and admitted it, hes guilty
4) it was designed actually originally to deter future potential ofenders, thats why everyone was hung, this is irrelevant to today

KieranRules
July 22nd, 2013, 04:04 PM
100% agree. Murderers are the last people who should be receiving free food from the government.

From this, I can see that you have not looked at any background on the murderer's life. if they are getting free food from your government then they don't work, I presume. if this is the case then imagine having nothing but food rations, it would drive the average person crazy and they will turn to getting money so they can live normal lives. They will turn to robbery, mugging and yes, sometimes murder. but tell me, is it right to kill someone because they are so desperate that human instinct drives them to get a normal life.

Your government needs not to kill these people but prevent it, but how? That's where you come in, as the public it is your job to make the world a better place. I would suggest you do some charity work so you can prove you are against people getting away with this, because by doing that you are preventing it (obvs it needs to be something in that area).

One more thing, I am all for the death penalty against: Paedophiles, Rapists, Terrorism and murder (in special cases e.g. self entertainment). However, saying this I would like to see a UN council that would over see international operations that would have special lessons and classes for those who feel they would commit these crimes. It is always best to prevent these things rather then letting it happen and then just killing the criminal.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 04:25 PM
is it right to kill someone because they are so desperate that human instinct drives them to get a normal life.

wtf? its not our nature to kill?! and if there is a good enough reason, they will be pardoned... what about mass murderers that torture and kill children? I see no problem with putting a bullet through there skull.

jayyy-lmao
July 22nd, 2013, 04:27 PM
No. Never. No death penalty. Some people deserve to have their life taken. But no one deserves to die. You can take their life by locking them up, alone, forever. But don't kill them. It's worse punishment to take the life they still have from them than to end it.

KieranRules
July 22nd, 2013, 04:34 PM
wtf? its not our nature to kill?! and if there is a good enough reason, they will be pardoned... what about mass murderers that torture and kill children? I see no problem with putting a bullet through there skull.

It is human nature to kill. It is nature to kill. If someone needs something desperately then they will kill, example number one: Falklands War

I said that murder under the influence of desperation is the only thing I would pardon.

Human
July 22nd, 2013, 04:34 PM
I think they need to be disciplined, maybe put them to work, what do you think of that?

Putting them to hard labour would fall under being inhumane, and the prisoners would just re-offend in many cases. If it was paid, useful work for them, which builds their 'character' or something like that then it would be good for them. A big part of re-offending after prison is because they can't find real jobs due to the stigma.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 04:40 PM
Putting them to hard labour would fall under being inhumane, and the prisoners would just re-offend in many cases. If it was paid, useful work for them, which builds their 'character' or something like that then it would be good for them. A big part of re-offending after prison is because they can't find real jobs due to the stigma.

I think it should be paid and voluntary, it being voluntary would show future employers that theyre good and want to work. I think everyone in prison should be discipled, making it much more unlikely they will reoffend, the kind of discipline you receive in the military

It is human nature to kill. It is nature to kill. If someone needs something desperately then they will kill, example number one: Falklands War

I said that murder under the influence of desperation is the only thing I would pardon.

1) the army is trained to kill and Argentina never actually wanted to kill anyone, just to steal our islands
2) NO NO JUST NO

KieranRules
July 22nd, 2013, 04:49 PM
1) the army is trained to kill and Argentina never actually wanted to kill anyone, just to steal our islands
2) NO NO JUST NO

1) We are all brought up to hate, that's the harsh truth, that's why people can kill because we all kill, as nature intends. Just to add, name an animal which doesn't kill...
2) Why? what's your opinion? also, do you think the army are just full of murderer's in this case?

Walter Powers
July 22nd, 2013, 04:55 PM
I'm going to tell this story, because I think it illustrates what a murderer can do to someone and why they don't deserve much mercy beyond a fair trial.

One of my Dad's closest friends worked for the US Department of Defense in the Pentagon. One day, when he was going to work, he got a call from his wife.

"It looks like a plane flew into the World Trade Center! I'm watching the news. It's chaos in New York. We're under attack. You need to come back home." she said.

Responding to his wife, my Dad's friend said, "relax, I work in the safest place on Earth." He truly thought he did. And many people would agree. So he continued on his commute.

At 10am, a jetliner crashed into the corner of the Pentagon where his office was. I realize this is a bit gruesome, but it's important to the point I'm trying to make. The plane's engine made contact and essentially sucked his body up through the turbine, chopping it into little pieces and then incinerating them.

He was 1 of 2 people who's body was never recovered on the attack on the Pentagon. He had kids, and this was devastating for them and his wife. And she felt as though he'd still be alive if she'd persuaded him not to go to work. Can you imagine?

I was only 3 years old, but that's one of the only times I remember my dad crying, other then when my Grandma died of cancer.

My point is that this is what murderers do. This was one of the most terrible deaths imaginable. The people responsible for it deserve at least that much.


Firstly, I think we need to remember that everyone has basic human rights. Mo matter what crimes you commit, you are still entitled to them.

Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights


The death penalty is definitely cruel. Historically, execution was supposed to be as painful as possible. Presently, developed countries that still use the death penalty have found less painful means, but they aren't painless. Furthermore, they only stop the physical pain. The psychological distress alone is enough to deem the death penalty cruel.

However, my main problem with the death penalty is that is goes against the very purpose of the judicial system. The juducial system is supposed to rehabilitate what possible, and if that's impossible, they have to isolate the criminal from society. Life in prison is equally effective at achieving isolation from society. Also, should the accused later be exonerated, it can be reversed.

The justice system isn't designed to punish. No one ever deserves more suffering than necessary. We shouldn't try to make them feel the pain that the victim felt. Penalties should always be as mild as possible, as long as they achieve the desired result.

In summary, the death penalty is cruel. Less severe penalties can achieve the same result, without violating basic human rights.


Human life is precious, I am totally against the killing somebody just because they did that to someone else.

I personally don't value the lives of terrorists very highly.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 05:10 PM
1) We are all brought up to hate, that's the harsh truth, that's why people can kill because we all kill, as nature intends. Just to add, name an animal which doesn't kill...
2) Why? what's your opinion? also, do you think the army are just full of murderer's in this case?

1) a giraffe doesn't kill:D and we kill food etc etc not our fellow species
2) I think thats unfair, theyre trained individuals who yes do kill, many have problems with killing

KieranRules
July 22nd, 2013, 05:22 PM
1) They do... surprising isn't it? but yep they do for dominance.
2) Dominance is the key of survival, for example as humans we hate losing and we love winning thus a person would never back down so they would turn on each other to win and survive. Did you know people stated eating each other during the plague in the middle ages because of food shortages?

Camazotz
July 22nd, 2013, 06:06 PM
My point is that this is what murderers do.

They were more than just murderers; the average murderer in America is not an Islamic extremist. That's a horrible analogy to use.

The people responsible for it deserve at least that much.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Walter Powers
July 22nd, 2013, 06:15 PM
They were more than just murderers; the average murderer in America is not an Islamic extremist. That's a horrible analogy to use.



An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Your acting as if murderers have productive value to society. They have none whatsoever.

So do you think Islamic Extremists desearve the death penalty, then?

hihowisitgoin
July 22nd, 2013, 06:17 PM
I agree with it in rare cases.

Harry Smith
July 22nd, 2013, 06:37 PM
wtf? its not our nature to kill?! and if there is a good enough reason, they will be pardoned... what about mass murderers that torture and kill children? I see no problem with putting a bullet through there skull.

This sums up why we shouldn't have it, it's cruel and as mentioned before against your human rights, the justice system doesn't give a shit what you want Jack.

You can't kill someone for killing, it's just plain hypocritical, how are you any better than the criminal if you then put him through I humane pain and suffering

hihowisitgoin
July 22nd, 2013, 06:38 PM
I agree with it in just a few cases

Gigablue
July 22nd, 2013, 07:09 PM
1) it does not break that human right

See articles 3 and 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/). Capital punishment violates the right to life without a valid reason. Life in prison is an equally effective alternative that does not violate this right. Furthermore, it is cruel since it causes unnecessary mental and physical suffering.

2) lethal injection? humain, no pain

The amount of sodium thiopental used isn't sufficient in many cases. Especially since the prisoner likely has a large amount of adrenalin in their system, which counteracts the anaesthetic effect of the drug. If anaesthesia is insufficient, the prisoner will be suffocated by the next drug, pancuronium bromide, which paralyses the diaphragm as well as the other muscles in the body. Finally, the potassium chloride solution, which stops the heart, would cause severe pain when injected. The lethal injection is far from painless.

3) what about the murder of that soilder in London? they filmed themselves doing it, invited an audience and admitted it, hes guilty

So. They're still human, and they have the same basic human rights as you or me.

My point is that this is what murderers do. This was one of the most terrible deaths imaginable. The people responsible for it deserve at least that much.

No. People should get the least suffering possible. If life in prison will stop them from killing, then execution is unnecessary. Intentionally causing people suffering is torture.

I personally don't value the lives of terrorists very highly.

They still have human rights.

Your acting as if murderers have productive value to society. They have none whatsoever.

Some can be rehabilitated. Others need to be isolated. However, isolation is as effective as killing them, and far less cruel.

So do you think Islamic Extremists desearve the death penalty, then?

No.

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 09:17 PM
This sums up why we shouldn't have it, it's cruel and as mentioned before against your human rights, the justice system doesn't give a shit what you want Jack.

You can't kill someone for killing, it's just plain hypocritical, how are you any better than the criminal if you then put him through I humane pain and suffering

1) I know lol:'( were talking about what we want too happen, I dont want a career in politics
2) some people are so evil I honestly dont care about them and lethal injection is painless
3) as I said in the OP, my made in not made up wether I'm for or against however some people certainly deserve it

britishboy
July 22nd, 2013, 09:22 PM
See articles 3 and 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/). Capital punishment violates the right to life without a valid reason. Life in prison is an equally effective alternative that does not violate this right. Furthermore, it is cruel since it causes unnecessary mental and physical suffering.



The amount of sodium thiopental used isn't sufficient in many cases. Especially since the prisoner likely has a large amount of adrenalin in their system, which counteracts the anaesthetic effect of the drug. If anaesthesia is insufficient, the prisoner will be suffocated by the next drug, pancuronium bromide, which paralyses the diaphragm as well as the other muscles in the body. Finally, the potassium chloride solution, which stops the heart, would cause severe pain when injected. The lethal injection is far from painless.



So. They're still human, and they have the same basic human rights as you or me.



No. People should get the least suffering possible. If life in prison will stop them from killing, then execution is unnecessary. Intentionally causing people suffering is torture.


1) the valid reason is that theyre evil
2) ok? use stronger drugs? really not a problem, killing them isnt the problem, its wether they should or should not be killed
3) yes, so did their victims
4) they dont suffer

Walter Powers
July 22nd, 2013, 11:37 PM
See articles 3 and 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/). Capital punishment violates the right to life without a valid reason. Life in prison is an equally effective alternative that does not violate this right. Furthermore, it is cruel since it causes unnecessary mental and physical suffering.



The amount of sodium thiopental used isn't sufficient in many cases. Especially since the prisoner likely has a large amount of adrenalin in their system, which counteracts the anaesthetic effect of the drug. If anaesthesia is insufficient, the prisoner will be suffocated by the next drug, pancuronium bromide, which paralyses the diaphragm as well as the other muscles in the body. Finally, the potassium chloride solution, which stops the heart, would cause severe pain when injected. The lethal injection is far from painless.



So. They're still human, and they have the same basic human rights as you or me.



No. People should get the least suffering possible. If life in prison will stop them from killing, then execution is unnecessary. Intentionally causing people suffering is torture.



They still have human rights.



Some can be rehabilitated. Others need to be isolated. However, isolation is as effective as killing them, and far less cruel.



No.

So your opposed to giving the men who essentially stuffed my dads friend though a jet engine at 400 miles an hour, chopped him into little pieces, and incinerated his body, completely devastating and depressing his wife and children for years, doesn't even deserve a quick dose of poison that will end their lives quickly? And that's just one story of the many people they killed. I think they'd be getting off way easy with a lethal injection, considering what they did!

We give lethal injections oftentimes when pets have to many medical problems to make life worth living any longer! I've seen it be done, it's certainly a sad momment but the pet doesn't appear to be in much pain. We wouldn't do it to our pets if it was so inhumane or painful.

They still have human rights.

They give up all their rights after being proven beyond all reasonable doubt of committing mass murder, in my book.

Some can be rehabilitated. Others need to be isolated. However, isolation is as effective as killing them, and far less cruel.

Regardless, they're never going to become productive members of society. Unless you plan on releasing them from prison after they've been "rehabilitated", which would be absurd. You can't make the argument mass murders should ever be released, unless they are in a coffin.

LouBerry
July 22nd, 2013, 11:44 PM
Well, I'm going to put my two cents in.

I've always been pretty much against the death penalty, because I think that most of those people need help, not being killed. But my dad made a pretty valid point to me once. "There are people that do things like killing sprees that are put in prison, and then they kill someone is prison. What do you do with those people, stick them in a hole for the rest of their lives? What seems more inhumane now?" And that really made me think. I guess that I can see where the death penalty could be better then leaving someone to rot in prison for the rest of their lives.

hyperkid99
July 22nd, 2013, 11:49 PM
I think the death penalty should be enforced on people who murder

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 02:14 AM
ok what about people who dont deserve second chances?
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9978/fajf.jpg (http://img7.imageshack.us/i/fajf.jpg/)
how would you punish him without a deathpenalty?

Harry Smith
July 23rd, 2013, 02:33 AM
1) the valid reason is that theyre evil
2) ok? use stronger drugs? really not a problem, killing them isnt the problem, its wether they should or should not be killed
3) yes, so did their victims
4) they dont suffer

No, evil is not illegal one bit, it's not a crime to be evil. How old are you? 2

Use stronger drugs? Wow, it's not a case of the strength, it's the fact that it cases suffering and pain for someone which violates the article 5 of the universal declaration of human rights. How do you know they don't suffer? How do you know what it feels like to be killed by injection or as you suggest firing squad


ok what about people who dont deserve second chances?
image (http://img7.imageshack.us/i/fajf.jpg/)
how would you punish him without a deathpenalty?

You really don't understand the law do you, it doesn't matter if it Hitler, Shipman, Blair or Mugabe. Everyone is faceless within the law. How would it make us any better than the Nazis if we killed their head of state under a made up law

Stronk Serb
July 23rd, 2013, 03:34 AM
So your opposed to giving the men who essentially stuffed my dads friend though a jet engine at 400 miles an hour, chopped him into little pieces, and incinerated his body, completely devastating and depressing his wife and children for years, doesn't even deserve a quick dose of poison that will end his life quickly? And that's just one story of the many people they killed. I think they'd be getting off way easy lethal injection, considering what they did!

We give lethal injections oftentimes when have to many medical problems to make life worth living any longer! I've seen it be done, it's certainly a sad momment but the pet doesn't appear to be in much pain. We wouldn't do it to our pets if it was so inhumane or painful.



They give up all their rights after being proven beyond all reasonable doubt of committing mass murder, in my book.



Regardless, they're never going to become productive members of society. Unless you plan on releasing them from prison after they've been "rehabilitated", which would be absurd. You can't make the argument mass murders should ever be released, unless they are in a coffin.

We disagree on many things, but yeah, the death penalty should exist for the worst. Not quick and painless, but slow. I can imagine thar getting sucked in a jet engine hurts as getting cut to bits with a katana, just faster. People who do that kind of thing to other people deserve to suffer. Some people disagree with my views, but serial killers and people who murdered for pleasure or personal gain or for terror stopped being human when they did it.

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 03:53 AM
No, evil is not illegal one bit, it's not a crime to be evil. How old are you? 2

Use stronger drugs? Wow, it's not a case of the strength, it's the fact that it cases suffering and pain for someone which violates the article 5 of the universal declaration of human rights. How do you know they don't suffer? How do you know what it feels like to be killed by injection or as you suggest firing squad




You really don't understand the law do you, it doesn't matter if it Hitler, Shipman, Blair or Mugabe. Everyone is faceless within the law. How would it make us any better than the Nazis if we killed their head of state under a made up law

1) what im saying is is that there is EVIL people, who rape and kill babies who get a life sentence with a minimum of 25 years
2) your put to sleep before they kill you
3) Hitler killed over 1million Jews, blacks and gays, if you was gay or Jewish especially, newborn babies were killed without mercy, our American friends execute people all the time but we cant even kill Hitler?

We disagree on many things, but yeah, the death penalty should exist for the worst. Not quick and painless, but slow. I can imagine thar getting sucked in a jet engine hurts as getting cut to bits with a katana, just faster. People who do that kind of thing to other people deserve to suffer. Some people disagree with my views, but serial killers and people who murdered for pleasure or personal gain or for terror stopped being human when they did it.

maybe hang them? its barbaric to torture them however and to be honest I am not even sure about the firing squad or lethal injection

They give up all their rights after being proven beyond all reasonable doubt of committing mass murder, in my book.


agreed

Stronk Serb
July 23rd, 2013, 03:58 AM
1) what im saying is is that there is EVIL people, who rape and kill babies who get a life sentence with a minimum of 25 years
2) your put to sleep before they kill you
3) Hitler killed over 1million Jews, blacks and gays, if you was gay or Jewish especially, newborn babies were killed without mercy, our American friends execute people all the time but we cant even kill Hitler?

Well, you can't because he killed himself. But yeah, the worst deserve death. Instead of wastnig their money on Serbian extremists who are guilty of genocide, they should execute them, slowly.

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 04:01 AM
Well, you can't because he killed himself. But yeah, the worst deserve death. Instead of wastnig their money on Serbian extremists who are guilty of genocide, they should execute them, slowly.

Hitlers senior SS was executed and im not sure about that but I agree they do deserve it

Nomad_X
July 23rd, 2013, 09:13 AM
What if someone was wrongly convicted?

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 09:35 AM
What if someone was wrongly convicted?

there would have to be overwhelming evidence like those who filmed themselves butchering that off duty soilder in London and invited a audience

Stronk Serb
July 23rd, 2013, 12:14 PM
1) what im saying is is that there is EVIL people, who rape and kill babies who get a life sentence with a minimum of 25 years
2) your put to sleep before they kill you
3) Hitler killed over 1million Jews, blacks and gays, if you was gay or Jewish especially, newborn babies were killed without mercy, our American friends execute people all the time but we cant even kill Hitler?



maybe hang them? its barbaric to torture them however and to be honest I am not even sure about the firing squad or lethal injection



agreed

Why a slow death? Because if you shoot someone in the skull, it takes less then tenth of a second to die. The brain might not fully register the pain how fast it happened. A slow death means that they truly suffer. It does not have to be painful. They will feel that they are dying. If it's painful, who cares. Nobody forced them to do mass murder and whatnot.

Hitlers senior SS was executed and im not sure about that but I agree they do deserve it


Trials to German military personnel after WWII were unfair. Some got drafted into the SS/Wermacht the day Hitler killed himself, spent the following months in a flak tower, and after Germany surrendered, got executed. They didn't kill anyone, but got hanged..

Kameraden
July 23rd, 2013, 12:23 PM
Trials to German military personnel after WWII were unfair. Some got drafted into the SS/Wermacht the day Hitler killed himself, spent the following months in a flak tower, and after Germany surrendered, got executed. They didn't kill anyone, but got hanged..

Soldiers were not drafted into the S.S.

The "allies" are quite famous for creating new laws with which to try German officers, such as "waging a war of aggression," because, you know, America, Britian, France, or Russia has neverwaged a war of aggression.

Stronk Serb
July 23rd, 2013, 12:48 PM
Soldiers were not drafted into the S.S.

The "allies" are quite famous for creating new laws with which to try German officers, such as "waging a war of aggression," because, you know, America, Britian, France, or Russia has never waged a war of aggression.

Still, it was unfair to hang officers who knew nothing about the death camps or participating in killing Jews or even killing anyone. I can list some wars of aggression waged by the USSR. Invasion of Finland and Poland. British, well, the whole time. America, wars with Mexico and Spain and the British, and are were waging them after the war. France, Napoleonic wars etc. Please, if I have not listed some, add them to the list.

Kameraden
July 23rd, 2013, 01:03 PM
France, Napoleonic wars etc. Please, if I have not listed some, add them to the list.

The Napoleonic Wars were not Wars of Aggression.

Stronk Serb
July 23rd, 2013, 01:07 PM
The Napoleonic Wars were not Wars of Aggression.

Well, add some which were, since I obviously don't know of any.

Stronk Serb
July 23rd, 2013, 01:15 PM
The Napoleonic Wars were not Wars of Aggression.

What about the slaughter of the Spanish during their rebellions? Lots were slaughtered.

Harry Smith
July 23rd, 2013, 02:03 PM
we cant even kill Hitler?

Do you know that Hitler is dead?

Also I ask you what right did Britian have to kill him, yes his government broke international law but it's a matter for the german courts, there was no way to charge someone with genocide.

If you killed Hitler back in '45 (assuming he was captured) how would you be any better than him? What law would you charge him under?

Anyway I don't know why the fuck you brough Hitler up, because we never had a change to shoot him anyway, the death Penalty is about the 21st Century. I'm glad we don't have it, it does fuck all to help the country and it kills innocent people, are you happy to have an innocent persons blood on your hands?

Please don't backseat mod

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 02:03 PM
this is going off topic, wars 500 years ago is nothing to do with the death penalty

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 02:05 PM
Do you know that Hitler is dead?

Also I ask you what right did Britian have to kill him, yes his government broke international law but it's a matter for the german courts, there was no way to charge someone with genocide.

If you killed Hitler back in '45 (assuming he was captured) how would you be any better than him? What law would you charge him under?

Anyway I don't know why the fuck you brough Hitler up, because we never had a change to shoot him anyway, the death Penalty is about the 21st Century. I'm glad we don't have it, it does fuck all to help the country and it kills innocent people, are you happy to have an innocent persons blood on your hands?

im not pro or against currently, however I think we all agree overwhelming evidence will be needed.

Harry Smith
July 23rd, 2013, 02:08 PM
im not pro or against currently, however I think we all agree overwhelming evidence will be needed.

I don't think overwhelming evidence matters one bit, you have no right to kill someone, the courts have no right to sent someone to their death. How does it make us any better than the murderer if we then kill them in cold blood?

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 02:10 PM
I don't think overwhelming evidence matters one bit, you have no right to kill someone, the courts have no right to sent someone to their death. How does it make us any better than the murderer if we then kill them in cold blood?

thats what makes me undecided the thing is maybe it could be put across that they chose to be killed themselves when they chosen to kill someone

Kameraden
July 23rd, 2013, 02:13 PM
What about the slaughter of the Spanish during their rebellions? Lots were slaughtered.
Rebels are rebels.

this is going off topic, wars 500 years ago is nothing to do with the death penalty

Holy shit, 500 years? Go back to highschool bru.

Harry Smith
July 23rd, 2013, 02:15 PM
thats what makes me undecided the thing is maybe it could be put across that they chose to be killed themselves when they chosen to kill someone

What? That makes no sense. By that theory the government could introduce the death penalty for littering, and then if I litter the government would claim I chose to be killed. The Death Penalty benefits no-one, it's out of date and it deprives a person of life

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 02:22 PM
Rebels are rebels.



Holy shit, 500 years? Go back to highschool bru.

I dont even know or care what your talking about

Walter Powers
July 23rd, 2013, 02:57 PM
I don't think overwhelming evidence matters one bit, you have no right to kill someone, the courts have no right to sent someone to their death. How does it make us any better than the murderer if we then kill them in cold blood?

Maybe that 1) we kill much more humanly then they murdered, and 2) they are a bad person, the person they killed wasn't.

Harry Smith
July 23rd, 2013, 03:07 PM
Maybe that 1) we kill much more humanly then they murdered, and 2) they are a bad person, the person they killed wasn't.

We Kill, that sounds nice doesn't it. I know there a bad person, I'm not supporting letting prisoners free, I'm saying that it's immoral and cruel to kill someone for killing, it doesn't act as a deterrent, it kills innocent people. I support being tough on crime, I don't support killing

Luminous
July 23rd, 2013, 03:15 PM
Before, I had no opinion.. this is putting thoughts in my head. "Is it right? Is it wrong?" Hmm..

Walter Powers
July 23rd, 2013, 03:17 PM
We Kill, that sounds nice doesn't it. I know there a bad person, I'm not supporting letting prisoners free, I'm saying that it's immoral and cruel to kill someone for killing, it doesn't act as a deterrent, it kills innocent people. I support being tough on crime, I don't support killing

I have to address this before we move forward:

it doesn't act as a deterrent, it kills innocent people


Convicted murderers are not innocent! Are you kidding me?

Harry Smith
July 23rd, 2013, 03:18 PM
I have to address this before we move forward:




Convicted murderers are not innocent! Are you kidding me?

No, I'm saying that innocent people have been killed in the past as a result of the death penalty, and it's a very big risk

DerBear
July 23rd, 2013, 03:19 PM
We kill someone who killed someone to show that killing someone is wrong?

Make's prefect sense.

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 03:54 PM
We kill someone who killed someone to show that killing someone is wrong?

Make's prefect sense.

its not to show no one nothing, its the ultimate humain punishment for evil people

DerBear
July 23rd, 2013, 04:00 PM
its not to show no one nothing, its the ultimate humain punishment for evil people

So if someone kills someone, which is wrong, we kill someone else.....

Two wrongs don't make a right.

I'm glad we don't have it in the UK.

britishboy
July 23rd, 2013, 04:10 PM
So if someone kills someone, which is wrong, we kill someone else.....

Two wrongs don't make a right.

I'm glad we don't have it in the UK.

the problem in my head is that on one side, some people are evil are they deserve it and on the other its hypocritical and innocents could be killed, so im unsure

Jess
July 23rd, 2013, 04:26 PM
So if someone kills someone, which is wrong, we kill someone else.....

EXACTLY

Also I'm pretty sure in countries where there's no death penalty, crime rates are lower than ones that do....so just saying that the death penalty doesn't stop people from committing crimes

irishguy123
July 23rd, 2013, 04:46 PM
I disagree with the death penalty 110%

Avatia
July 23rd, 2013, 08:28 PM
Human life is precious, I am totally against the killing somebody just because they did that to someone else.

Why is human life precious?

Cygnus
July 23rd, 2013, 11:24 PM
I agree 100% with death penalty, population control is needed and instead of feeding a criminal you can feed little Emmanuel in Somalia.

Sentimental people who oppose to death penalty are a burden. Why should you regret killing the evil ones? If you do not get rid of evil many more people will die. Even if killing is a crime, we should get rid of all evil and then embrace the punishment with pride.

LunarScorpio
July 24th, 2013, 01:49 AM
Why is human life precious?

Think about it.

Do you not value your own life at all?

Korashk
July 24th, 2013, 02:49 AM
Convicted murderers are not innocent! Are you kidding me?
An unsettlingly large number of them actually are.

We kill someone who killed someone to show that killing someone is wrong?

Make's prefect sense.
Ugh, I've said it before IN THIS THREAD. People like you and Harry spewing this dishonest rhetoric are almost as bad as the people on the other side saying things like bullets only cost 50 cents.

DerBear
July 24th, 2013, 03:40 AM
An unsettlingly large number of them actually are.


Ugh, I've said it before IN THIS THREAD. People like you and Harry spewing this dishonest rhetoric are almost as bad as the people on the other side saying things like bullets only cost 50 cents.

But my logic is understandable, we kill people to show the general public that killing is wrong.

Korashk
July 24th, 2013, 03:51 AM
But my logic is understandable, we kill people to show the general public that killing is wrong.
Except that statement is exactly the dishonest rhetoric I'm talking about. "We" don't "kill people to show the general public that killing is wrong". The death penalty is nigh universally about killing murderers, not killers.

Harry Smith
July 24th, 2013, 04:05 AM
Except that statement is exactly the dishonest rhetoric I'm talking about. "We" don't "kill people to show the general public that killing is wrong". The death penalty is nigh universally about killing murderers, not killers.

But why do we have a right to kill someone? We shouldn't have the right to end someone's life. The death Penatly doesn't benefit any-one.

In many UK cases the victims family have actually been upset when the murderer died because they wanted him to reveal the locations of the last body, doubled with the fact that it doesn't bring back the victim.

It doesn't act as a deterrent

It's barbaric

Avatia
July 24th, 2013, 11:38 AM
Think about it.

Do you not value your own life at all?

Currently, I don't see a reason to.

For which reason should I value my life or anyone else's?

Walter Powers
July 24th, 2013, 01:08 PM
But why do we have a right to kill someone? We shouldn't have the right to end someone's life. The death Penatly doesn't benefit any-one.

In many UK cases the victims family have actually been upset when the murderer died because they wanted him to reveal the locations of the last body, doubled with the fact that it doesn't bring back the victim.

It doesn't act as a deterrent

It's barbaric

I don't see your argument of "we don't have the right to kill someone." Whether they are in solitary confinement for life or sentenced to death, the net affect is the same.

Harry Smith
July 24th, 2013, 02:21 PM
I don't see your argument of "we don't have the right to kill someone." Whether they are in solitary confinement for life or sentenced to death, the net affect is the same.

Then why kill them? Who benefits from it? The victims don't feel any better, it doesn't decrease crime, it violates a human right and it's barbaric. No western countries have it, are you happy that the US shares the death Penalty with

Saudi Arabia
Iran
North Korea
Somlia
Cuba

Walter Powers
July 24th, 2013, 02:28 PM
Then why kill them? Who benefits from it? The victims don't feel any better, it doesn't decrease crime, it violates a human right and it's barbaric. No western countries have it, are you happy that the US shares the death Penalty with

Saudi Arabia
Iran
North Korea
Somlia
Cuba

A bullet to the head is a lot cheaper. What did these people do to desearve free food for life?

Harry Smith
July 24th, 2013, 02:35 PM
A bullet to the head is a lot cheaper. What did these people do to desearve free food for life?

So should cost govern everything? It would be a lot cheaper for my house to be constructed out of cardboard, it would be cheaper if our army were issued with sticks.

They deserve free food because despite their crimes their still people, if you didn't feed them that would be no different to what the North Vietnamese did to your airmen in vietnam, or what the Nazis did to Soviet POW's.

The US is an author of the universal declaration of human rights, article 5 states that

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Jenny jr
July 24th, 2013, 03:54 PM
I wish the death penalty was in place. It is cheap and it gets the bad people in the world out of here. I understand all life is good but if there is a person that does harm to others and don't care that they ruin others life's and they never will care why should they live. It creates a negative atmosphere and we don't need that.

britishboy
July 25th, 2013, 08:45 AM
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

how does the death penalty break this?

Stronk Serb
July 25th, 2013, 11:32 AM
So should cost govern everything? It would be a lot cheaper for my house to be constructed out of cardboard, it would be cheaper if our army were issued with sticks.

They deserve free food because despite their crimes their still people, if you didn't feed them that would be no different to what the North Vietnamese did to your airmen in vietnam, or what the Nazis did to Soviet POW's.

The US is an author of the universal declaration of human rights, article 5 states that

If we are going by that logic, our governments should feed and wash all of us for free. Some people commit crimes so that they don't starve to death, because in prison you get free food.

KrystalBear98
July 25th, 2013, 11:36 AM
I'm for it

britishboy
July 25th, 2013, 11:46 AM
If we are going by that logic, our governments should feed and wash all of us for free. Some people commit crimes so that they don't starve to death, because in prison you get free food.

whats your point? and if your poor, get welfare

Avatia
July 25th, 2013, 12:02 PM
But my logic is understandable, we kill people to show the general public that killing is wrong.

The purpose of killing for the death penalty is not to show the public that killing is wrong, it is to punish the accused with the penalty of death for their crime.

We should make sure to distinguish between the purpose of an action and correlated consequences due to the action.

Harry Smith
July 25th, 2013, 12:15 PM
If we are going by that logic, our governments should feed and wash all of us for free. Some people commit crimes so that they don't starve to death, because in prison you get free food.

There's nothing we can do in the short term, reducing poverty, government work schemes etc can help people who are in need of food.

The logic is that when your in Prison the prison service has power over you but they should still feed you. We can't just let people starve to death in prision, the whole point of prison is to reform

Stronk Serb
July 25th, 2013, 12:39 PM
whats your point? and if your poor, get welfare

In some places welfare can't feed you without going to work. Some people are lazy so they rape/kill so that they get fed and washed. Instead of wasting money on peiple who will renain incarcerated for life, why not kill them? They will never get out anyway.

britishboy
July 25th, 2013, 01:14 PM
In some places welfare can't feed you without going to work. Some people are lazy so they rape/kill so that they get fed and washed. Instead of wasting money on peiple who will renain incarcerated for life, why not kill them? They will never get out anyway.

true and that probably is more humain

Stronk Serb
July 25th, 2013, 02:13 PM
true and that probably is more humain


In my eyes they stopped being human when they commited murder on several occasions.

Harry Smith
July 25th, 2013, 02:25 PM
In my eyes they stopped being human when they commited murder on several occasions.

Whilst your entitled to think that it's simply not true, human rights apply to every single person on this planet, no matter what they've done

how does the death penalty break this?

Walter was asking why we should give prisoners free food, and I said because America agreed to it about 50 years ago when they signed the Declaration of human rights

britishboy
July 25th, 2013, 02:28 PM
Walter was asking why we should give prisoners free food, and I said because America agreed to it about 50 years ago when they signed the Declaration of human rights

oh of cause, starvation is torture

Harry Smith
July 25th, 2013, 02:34 PM
oh of cause, starvation is torture

As is the Death Penalty, something which sends someone to death is barbaric and inhumane

britishboy
July 25th, 2013, 02:38 PM
As is the Death Penalty, something which sends someone to death is barbaric and inhumane

thats what im debating in my head, you could argue that a life sentence could make you depressed and maybe insane, what do you think of this?

Harry Smith
July 25th, 2013, 02:44 PM
thats what im debating in my head, you could argue that a life sentence could make you depressed and maybe insane, what do you think of this?

So what put them out of their misery? That's that's barbaric, offer them counselling, give them support and care. They're not some old pet

By that Theory Euthanasia should be legal for all depressed people, they should serve their sentence in jail

britishboy
July 25th, 2013, 02:55 PM
So what put them out of their misery? That's that's barbaric, offer them counselling, give them support and care. They're not some old pet

By that Theory Euthanasia should be legal for all depressed people, they should serve their sentence in jail

I think I'm going to have to stay undecided on this, I really cant make my mind up

Harry Smith
July 25th, 2013, 05:13 PM
I think I'm going to have to stay undecided on this, I really cant make my mind up

Have you heard about the cases were it has gone wrong? What ends up happening to them, you've had people catch on fire during the electric chair, you've had the lethal injection fail to kick in. You've had the mentally handicapped people being executed

You've had innocent people in Britain being killed, 3 in fact between 1950 and 1953

tovaris
July 25th, 2013, 05:43 PM
I am againced the deth penelty, we as a society are obliged to try to resocialise the individual.
As i said before, we hawe roads that need building, tiled making, rocks smashed...

chrisf55
July 27th, 2013, 01:31 AM
Yes, if the person did something worth being given the death penalty, such as killing at least one person, then yes. They are a burden to society and the government should have to waste money feeding them in prison.

Yolo98
July 29th, 2013, 05:22 PM
No. Im from the UK, and we dont have the death penalty. Theres always a chance you could get it wrong.

Zanman11
July 29th, 2013, 05:52 PM
I think it shouldn't be employed because death goers brutal killers the easy road, making them rot in jail is better

Sir Suomi
July 29th, 2013, 05:58 PM
Personally, I think an eye for an eye is the only way to settle it. Yes, I know, don't quote me saying "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" shit. Personally, I don't think Sexual Offenders and Murderers should not be granted the freedom of life. They're vile, disgusting people. The world would be a better place. And hey, maybe it would send a message? Like, "Oh shit, if I kill this guy, I'm gonna get killed if I get caught."

Harry Smith
July 29th, 2013, 06:11 PM
Personally, I think an eye for an eye is the only way to settle it. Yes, I know, don't quote me saying "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" shit. Personally, I don't think Sexual Offenders and Murderers should not be granted the freedom of life. They're vile, disgusting people. The world would be a better place. And hey, maybe it would send a message? Like, "Oh shit, if I kill this guy, I'm gonna get killed if I get caught."

That's the problem, whilst I agree that murders aren't always the nicest of people the justice system isn't there to satisfy my wants or that of the victims, it's too hand out fair punishment for the accused. This also links to the number of mentally disabled people being executed which is quite shockingly still happening

And the death Penalty doesn't act as a deterrent at all, crimes are committed in the heat of passion, a paedophile isn't going to stop because of the death Penalty. Also it's been ruled in Coker vs Georgia that the crime of rape isn't legally punishable by death.

The argument that it acts as a deterrent is false, Canada got rid of the Death Penalty for murder in 1976 and since the murder rate has fallen by 40%, which highlights the opposite.

Still I suppose killing innocent people may just scare people away from America

Sir Suomi
July 29th, 2013, 06:34 PM
That's the problem, whilst I agree that murders aren't always the nicest of people the justice system isn't there to satisfy my wants or that of the victims, it's too hand out fair punishment for the accused. This also links to the number of mentally disabled people being executed which is quite shockingly still happening

And the death Penalty doesn't act as a deterrent at all, crimes are committed in the heat of passion, a paedophile isn't going to stop because of the death Penalty. Also it's been ruled in Coker vs Georgia that the crime of rape isn't legally punishable by death.

The argument that it acts as a deterrent is false, Canada got rid of the Death Penalty for murder in 1976 and since the murder rate has fallen by 40%, which highlights the opposite.

Still I suppose killing innocent people may just scare people away from America

Ah, I was unaware of that case. I suppose I should brush up on American Legal History :P Still, I honestly think those who are guilty of rape, molestation, pedophilia, etc, should face serious consequences. Not just a few years. Hell, most of them, even when caught, face little if any serious punishment for their crimes. It's sick. Maybe if we got rid of a few certain body parts, they'd get the hint.

Harry Smith
July 29th, 2013, 06:39 PM
Ah, I was unaware of that case. I suppose I should brush up on American Legal History :P Still, I honestly think those who are guilty of rape, molestation, pedophilia, etc, should face serious consequences. Not just a few years. Hell, most of them, even when caught, face little if any serious punishment for their crimes. It's sick. Maybe if we got rid of a few certain body parts, they'd get the hint.

haha good old castration,they use to do that to gay's in the 50's so it's a bit of a touchy subject for me, I still think that Reform is needed both in and out of Prisoners. You need to break the cycle of the crime

Sir Suomi
July 29th, 2013, 06:57 PM
haha good old castration,they use to do that to gay's in the 50's so it's a bit of a touchy subject for me, I still think that Reform is needed both in and out of Prisoners. You need to break the cycle of the crime

Sadly, I'm unsure whether or not we ever will be able to break that cycle. We Americans tend to be a tad bit violent, and it's very hard to change such a large population of people. I suppose if we'd focus more on our Education, and not handing out money to other countries(Seriously, we've been giving Egypt alone $1 Billion dollars a year since the early '50's.), maybe we could make some progress :cool:

Harry Smith
July 29th, 2013, 07:02 PM
Sadly, I'm unsure whether or not we ever will be able to break that cycle. We Americans tend to be a tad bit violent, and it's very hard to change such a large population of people. I suppose if we'd focus more on our Education, and not handing out money to other countries(Seriously, we've been giving Egypt alone $1 Billion dollars a year since the early '50's.), maybe we could make some progress :cool:

Funnily enough here in Britain we have a larger violent crime rate, who knows? I agree about cutting Foreign aid, people always say we spend too much on health care and roads but they're happy to give some Arab dictator money to buy a new house

Sir Suomi
July 29th, 2013, 07:07 PM
Funnily enough here in Britain we have a larger violent crime rate, who knows? I agree about cutting Foreign aid, people always say we spend too much on health care and roads but they're happy to give some Arab dictator money to buy a new house

Exactly. I never quite understand why we(The U.S and U.K) just love to get involved with other people's problems. Seriously, we're focusing on being the "Big Brothers" of the world, when we're faced with serious problems at home, both socially and economically. That's why with the whole Syrian War, I'm glad that at the present we're staying out of it. I say it's time we let them sort things out by themselves, don't you think?

purrincess
July 30th, 2013, 04:22 AM
I think the death penalty is basically the wrongest wrong that ever wronged.
Punishing a crime with another crime? Nuh-uh.
Let them live with their crimes but keep them in prison for the rest of their lives.

Yugen
July 30th, 2013, 09:34 AM
I think it should just be offered.
I mean, you do something stupid, you get a life sentence, want out? Here, you have a choice. You can serve it here or kick the bucket.

Camazotz
July 30th, 2013, 06:39 PM
I think it should just be offered.
I mean, you do something stupid, you get a life sentence, want out? Here, you have a choice. You can serve it here or kick the bucket.

That's not how capital punishment works; I think most people in that situation would choose the death penalty because it's "the easy way out." Capital punishment is reserved for people found for violent, extreme, and heinous crimes.

Yugen
July 30th, 2013, 06:45 PM
That's not how capital punishment works; I think most people in that situation would choose the death penalty because it's "the easy way out." Capital punishment is reserved for people found for violent, extreme, and heinous crimes.

I know that's not how it works, but how we do things doesn't really seem to effective according to the controversy, does it?

Camazotz
July 30th, 2013, 08:18 PM
I know that's not how it works, but how we do things doesn't really seem to effective according to the controversy, does it?

Agreed. But your method is even less effective.

Yugen
July 30th, 2013, 08:45 PM
Agreed. But your method is even less effective.

You can't say that unless there's proof, which there's not, because it isn't implemented.

SaxyHaloBeast
July 31st, 2013, 04:41 PM
I'm very conflicted about the death penalty. On the one hand, I understand that if one is to take another's life, then they themselves would deserve death. But on the other hand, I do not think it is our place to judge if another person should live or die. Out of all the rights that every human being is entitled to, life is the first and foremost. I know I could never doom another human to death because I don't feel like I have that authority, like it would make me just as bad as a murderer.

Tree96
August 1st, 2013, 02:02 AM
Rehabilitation is more efficient than retribution. Though some people don't ever deserve to be a free person in society for the disgusting crimes they have committed, they certainly don't deserve to be killed. It's hypocritical.

MrDaniel2K13
August 3rd, 2013, 07:55 AM
I live in the UK so we don't have the Death Penalty but I believe it should be brough back

Human
August 3rd, 2013, 08:48 AM
I would rather have the prisoner put into work than the death penalty or even jail which just helps them get more connections in the criminal underworld, that's why Norway has a low re offending rate because they keep the prisoners away from each other, so there are no gangs.
I don't mean hard labour smashing rocks in Australia for 10 years, but something useful because once they get out of prison if they do, they'll need skills because employers still discriminate on those who have been to prison... they re offend because society does not want them working alongside them even when they've tried to better themselves.

EvanGr
August 5th, 2013, 01:18 PM
I am all against it. I beleive that they deserve their stupid life to understand what have they done. But still someone doesn't have the right to kill anyone for any reason. It's better for a murderer to go to the jail for 1,000 years.

trimm_tom
August 6th, 2013, 01:00 PM
rape should be a death penalty crime period!!

ShadowBlade
August 6th, 2013, 02:43 PM
My opinion is complicated and I hope I can express it so that you will understand it.
If the person who is in charge hasn't killed anyone then I don't think he deserve a death penalty. If the charged one is a murderer then by killing him he is punished enough. I don't even mention about the ethical issues that are raised.

PinkFloyd
August 6th, 2013, 02:46 PM
I think the death penalty should only be used in extreme cases. Like mass shooters and like child rapists.

Obsidian
August 6th, 2013, 03:15 PM
Nobody deserves to die, no matter what they've done. And even if they do, that's not for us to decide. I think it's wrong to assume we have the right to decide whether or not somebody deserves to live.

I kind of have an unpopular opinion when it comes to this, because everybody I've discussed it with seems to disagree with me. But right now 52% of the people in state prisons are mentally ill. Maybe they've committed terrible crimes, but we don't know what's going on in their minds. Maybe they are tortured by mental illness. Doesn't that make them somewhat victimized too? And if that's true, don't they deserve help instead of being put to death?

I do think some people are just evil people. They don't have any mental illness and they are perfectly aware of and uncaring about their actions. But others are severely mentally ill and their actions are impaired by this. Obviously they should still be held responsible for the crimes they have committed, but they should also be given help...not be put to death.

Zelder
August 9th, 2013, 01:38 AM
Two wrongs don't make a right.

laurakoller0815
August 9th, 2013, 02:12 AM
we talked in school about that serious topic. im against the death penality for the reason that unguilty inmates get killed and insufficient deterrent effect. sure i understand the emotion and anger on major crimes like homicide when they are comitted.

Vocabulous
August 10th, 2013, 02:07 AM
i know it sounds harsh but my policy is you take a life, you give a life.

randomnessqueen
August 10th, 2013, 08:03 AM
no. i dont think even murder justifies another murder.

Matt_97
August 12th, 2013, 03:31 PM
Living in the UK we dont have the death penalty! I'm on the fence with this argument because in a way if you kill a murderer you are taking away their right to live, i know they may have taken away someone elses right to live so therefore its like an act of revenge 'an eye for an eye' situation. But you also have the problem of if someone is wrongfully charged or if someone was framed and it wasnt in truth their fault. I feel that the death penalty should not be used, it isnt a stong enough deterant for other criminals, i believe that life sentences should mean life imprisonment not just 15-30 years like it is in the UK.

tovaris
August 12th, 2013, 04:22 PM
i know it sounds harsh but my policy is you take a life, you give a life.

and if you take an eie you give an eie, same goes for teeth and arms....
Why not instal natural law all ower the world...? Reinstal fewdalism while you are at it!

EvanGr
August 14th, 2013, 08:01 AM
I am all against it. But all of us, even the ones that are aginst death penalty, when a cruel murder or so happens, say 'I wish the death penalty would legal only for these monsters'. But then I think that 'Hey, everyone has the right to life, even the ones who dont deserve it'. There are some individuals in this forum, who only see person as NUMBERS, unfortunately though. And that, because some wrote that they don't want to feed all these murderers and they prefer them to be executed, because their money will be spent to other services. So here is what I propose. What if all the prisoners would work in public building areas, such as buildings, public means of transports' updates e.t.c. This way they can contribute to the society and also can make their own money. They won't be payed, the money that they 'earn' would be spent in food and other services in prisons. Of course, I am not a supporter of the system with the slaves, which was used until 19th centrury, it will be a system according to our contemporary society. What do you think of that?

Kasp
August 20th, 2013, 07:16 AM
They got rid of it in England in the 50's after someone was hung and later proved innocent. I doubt they'll bring it back.

Tarannosaurus
August 22nd, 2013, 12:39 PM
I think the death penalty should only be used in extreme cases. Like mass shooters and like child rapists.

I agree with this BUT then they don't suffer.

britishboy
August 22nd, 2013, 01:38 PM
I agree with this BUT then they don't suffer.

have you seen UK prison? with TVS, allowances, opportunity to explore your hobbies and pool tables, theyre not suffering!

Tarannosaurus
August 22nd, 2013, 02:00 PM
have you seen UK prison? with TVS, allowances, opportunity to explore your hobbies and pool tables, theyre not suffering!

Yeah that's a problem too. They are not suffering for their crimes either in prison or being killed. Although some of those people are so sick and twisted do they even know how to suffer?

Harry Smith
August 22nd, 2013, 04:53 PM
have you seen UK prison? with TVS, allowances, opportunity to explore your hobbies and pool tables, theyre not suffering!

Yeah sure believe what the daily mail tells you. Prisoners do not live in good conditions at all, the European court has already established that they should have the right to vote. The purpose of prison isn't to make someone suffer- that's what the Howard report published last week. Prison should be about reform- if you offer education and support then people will not re-offend

Tarannosaurus
August 22nd, 2013, 05:55 PM
Yeah sure believe what the daily mail tells you. Prisoners do not live in good conditions at all, the European court has already established that they should have the right to vote. The purpose of prison isn't to make someone suffer- that's what the Howard report published last week. Prison should be about reform- if you offer education and support then people will not re-offend

Agree in most cases but rapists, especially child rapists deserve to suffer. They take away a child's innocence and cause a lifetime of suffering for their victims.

But yes, education and support for the majority of criminals.
There's also the argument that minor criminals shouldn't be forced to do work without pay, I agree it's basically slave labour.

Harry Smith
August 22nd, 2013, 05:59 PM
Agree in most cases but rapists, especially child rapists deserve to suffer. They take away a child's innocence and cause a lifetime of suffering for their victims.

But yes, education and support for the majority of criminals.
There's also the argument that minor criminals shouldn't be forced to do work without pay, I agree it's basically slave labour.

They do caue suffering, but that's still no reason to kill someone. In fact the US supreme court ruled that back in the 70's.

It's not about the crime- it's about the fact that everyone has a right to live on this earth. Killing them wouldn't stop others from doing it, it wouldn't help the victim in the long run and it would put the accuses through a terrible ordeal.

I saw an article about a girl who lied about her father raping her, he had been sentenced for 40 years. This is why the death Penalty doesn't work- innocent people die

Tarannosaurus
August 22nd, 2013, 06:07 PM
They do caue suffering, but that's still no reason to kill someone. In fact the US supreme court ruled that back in the 70's.

It's not about the crime- it's about the fact that everyone has a right to live on this earth. Killing them wouldn't stop others from doing it, it wouldn't help the victim in the long run and it would put the accuses through a terrible ordeal.

I saw an article about a girl who lied about her father raping her, he had been sentenced for 40 years. This is why the death Penalty doesn't work- innocent people die

I should have made this clearer in that post just to clarify: I am completely against the death penalty. My argument was just that they don't deserve the same rights as minor criminals as their crimes inflict so much suffering.

tovaris
August 22nd, 2013, 06:19 PM
I should have made this clearer in that post just to clarify: I am completely against the death penalty. My argument was just that they don't deserve the same rights as minor criminals as their crimes inflict so much suffering.

Everione deserves basic human rights. Some rights may be constricted (like the freedom of movement).

Tarannosaurus
August 22nd, 2013, 06:28 PM
Everione deserves basic human rights. Some rights may be constricted (like the freedom of movement).

Well that seems fair I guess I just have strong opinions on it. But in my opinion repeating sex offenders, mass murderers, etc definitely don't deserve the luxury of tv etc provided in many prisons.

tovaris
August 22nd, 2013, 06:32 PM
Well that seems fair I guess I just have strong opinions on it. But in my opinion repeating sex offenders, mass murderers, etc definitely don't deserve the luxury of tv etc provided in many prisons.

Interesting point.
Maybe enouth to make a ful new discusion?

Tarannosaurus
August 22nd, 2013, 07:05 PM
Interesting point.
Maybe enouth to make a ful new discusion?

Yes maybe I thought I was completely for human rights before but I guess in some cases I'm selective. Yeah it would be interesting to see what other people think.

Stronk Serb
August 25th, 2013, 04:06 PM
I changed my opinion. Make the prisoners work. And the worse the crime, the less the allowances. A mass murderer or mass rapist or mass pedophile should not have the luxury of a TV, pool table, hobbies, gym etc. He should be locked in a cell with a toilet, sink and a bed.

SawyerSauce
August 25th, 2013, 04:20 PM
It should be no one's decision to take another person's life no matter what that person has done to "deserve" it. No one deserves death.

I like the idea of exile. We don't want you to harm anyone else in society so go live on this island in the middle of nowhere and take care of yourself. We're not going to help you anymore.

I don't think anyone that doesn't have a literal chemical problem isn't able to rehabilitate themselves into a good person. Bad things happened in their life. They don't know how to handle that. They take it out on others or do illegal things. It's understandable. We shouldn't kill people because of that- even if they did.

candorgen
August 26th, 2013, 10:01 AM
Death penalty should not be allowed in ANY case.
No matter what the person getting the trial did- another negative added to another list of negatives makes no positive. Murder as justice is not possible.