Pages: 1 2 3

 

Poll

Do You Support The Death Penalty?

Yes - Kill 'em All!54%54% - 72
No - Put Them In Jail!45%45% - 59
Total: 131
2007-07-30 06:39:42
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6648|USA

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

No, because of the possibility that someone innocent could be sent to the gallows and because life imprisonment with no chance of release is more of a punishment.
DNA, is rapidly making that first part of your argument moot.


As for your second argument,you are taking the outside looking in approach, you are not involved in the case. You think it is perfectly fine to let the killer of someone else's child sit in prison able to breathe, but I doubt you would feel the same for the killer of yours.
How about the other way round when the accused is your kid and you know they must be innocent, wouldn't you want them to rot in a cell with the possibility of being proved innocent later instead of being killed now?

Hence why it's a damned good job that the victims and their loved ones have absolutely no say whatsoever in the punishment of criminals.
Of course I wouldn't want my son to face the death penality. That has nothing to do with the possiblity that he might deserve it.

Like I said DNA is taking away ALL doubt as to who did what and when so if tht doubt is 100% removed, then I feel the family of the victim should have first dibs on throwing the switch.

If it were my kid being executed I would be in complete grief and I would not want it to happen, however, whatever grief I would feel would be small potatoes compared to the grief felt by the victims family that had their loved one removed from them by MY sons hand. I really would not be in a position to beg for my sons life if that family wasn't in a position to beg for their sons life.
2007-07-30 06:41:05
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6370|Kyiv, Ukraine

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

No, because of the possibility that someone innocent could be sent to the gallows and because life imprisonment with no chance of release is more of a punishment.
DNA, is rapidly making that first part of your argument moot.


As for your second argument,you are taking the outside looking in approach, you are not involved in the case. You think it is perfectly fine to let the killer of someone else's child sit in prison able to breathe, but I doubt you would feel the same for the killer of yours.
How about the other way round when the accused is your kid and you know they must be innocent, wouldn't you want them to rot in a cell with the possibility of being proved innocent later instead of being killed now?

Hence why it's a damned good job that the victims and their loved ones have absolutely no say whatsoever in the punishment of criminals.
Or better yet, how would you feel if your kid was raped and murdered, and they sent someone to hang, only to find out later that it was someone else that did it.  Now a single tragedy has just been multiplied.

Death penalty = no takie-backies, bad karma.

Besides, why do people insist we need to be up there with Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Iran as the only countries with the death penalty still in effect?  One word answer - fundamentalists, gots to save those unborn fetuses and sufferin' veggies but make sure them murderin' ***** make it to the gas chamber, ya know?

Watch it with the racial slurs. Post edited -Mod-
2007-07-30 06:42:02
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6552

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:


DNA, is rapidly making that first part of your argument moot.


As for your second argument,you are taking the outside looking in approach, you are not involved in the case. You think it is perfectly fine to let the killer of someone else's child sit in prison able to breathe, but I doubt you would feel the same for the killer of yours.
How about the other way round when the accused is your kid and you know they must be innocent, wouldn't you want them to rot in a cell with the possibility of being proved innocent later instead of being killed now?

Hence why it's a damned good job that the victims and their loved ones have absolutely no say whatsoever in the punishment of criminals.
Of course I wouldn't want my son to face the death penality. That has nothing to do with the possiblity that he might deserve it.

Like I said DNA is taking away ALL doubt as to who did what and when so if tht doubt is 100% removed, then I feel the family of the victim should have first dibs on throwing the switch.

If it were my kid being executed I would be in complete grief and I would not want it to happen, however, whatever grief I would feel would be small potatoes compared to the grief felt by the victims family that had their loved one removed from them by MY sons hand. I really would not be in a position to beg for my sons life if that family wasn't in a position to beg for their sons life.
Lowing - someone could set somebody up with placed DNA 'evidence'.
2007-07-30 06:42:09
Noobeater
Northern numpty
+194|6443|Boulder, CO

KylieTastic wrote:

Yes - but only in very very few cases.

- The crime must be extreme (Such as multiple pre-meditated murder, systematic torture physical and/or mental)
- The evidence must be black and white: i.e. multiple eye witnesses, crystal clear video evidence, etc

I also believe it should be given as an option for those that have no expectation of ever being let out
And it should be totally painless: i.e. happy drugs then sleep drugs then the kill drugs.
Exactly my view, if after 13 years or more which has cost the government hundreds of thousands of pounds and a prison cell they're going to go out and kill again (as some of the more extreme ones would do) then those people should not be allowed to go free and kill again. But if they did the crime in say a moment of incredible anger (finding your wife having sex with another man or killing someone as they're threatening to kill you with a knife) then they should be released after a long enough time and a very very thorough psychological examination and if they pass that then release them and let them life their life. Some people just shouldn't be allowed to live i.e. Shipman (granted he did kill himself in jail) but thats the sort of person who should get the death penalty.
2007-07-30 06:43:54
Villain{NY}
Banned
+44|6340|New York
In certain, rare cases yes but in most cases no.  As someone posted above, sitting in a concrete cell for the rest of thier lives is far more punishment than a quick death.  However, I feel the current lifestyle for prison inmates in far to lenient, they should not be allowed creature comforts such as access to television, movies, magazines or media of any sort.  Exercise should be prohibited to what the inmate can do in their cell, these prisons that allow their inmates to lift weights only creates a criminal that is now super strong upon being paroled.  Basically I think prisons should be run like prisons and not summer camps.
2007-07-30 06:59:52
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6648|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


How about the other way round when the accused is your kid and you know they must be innocent, wouldn't you want them to rot in a cell with the possibility of being proved innocent later instead of being killed now?

Hence why it's a damned good job that the victims and their loved ones have absolutely no say whatsoever in the punishment of criminals.
Of course I wouldn't want my son to face the death penality. That has nothing to do with the possiblity that he might deserve it.

Like I said DNA is taking away ALL doubt as to who did what and when so if tht doubt is 100% removed, then I feel the family of the victim should have first dibs on throwing the switch.

If it were my kid being executed I would be in complete grief and I would not want it to happen, however, whatever grief I would feel would be small potatoes compared to the grief felt by the victims family that had their loved one removed from them by MY sons hand. I really would not be in a position to beg for my sons life if that family wasn't in a position to beg for their sons life.
Lowing - someone could set somebody up with placed DNA 'evidence'.
Kind of a stretch Cam,

I doubt a rapist/murderer goes around with someone elses skin to place under his victims fingernails. Or someones elses semen to pump into her body. Are you really gunna stick with that argument?
2007-07-30 07:01:46
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6552

lowing wrote:

Kind of a stretch Cam,

I doubt a rapist/murderer goes around with someone elses skin to place under his victims fingernails. Or someones elses semen to pump into her body. Are you really gunna stick with that argument?
Au contraire - some of the 'career' murderers are very meticulous and very cunning. Irrespective of that I see being given death as far far less of a punishment than living out 60 or 70 years of your life in the knowledge that the world continues outside the bars of your cell window, a world you will never again get to see.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-07-30 07:03:27)

2007-07-30 07:06:02
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6648|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kind of a stretch Cam,

I doubt a rapist/murderer goes around with someone elses skin to place under his victims fingernails. Or someones elses semen to pump into her body. Are you really gunna stick with that argument?
Au contraire - some of the 'career' murderers are very meticulous and very cunning.
Well yeah, if DNA along with all the other evidence against a criminal IE, video, witnesses, stolen shit from the victim at the criminals place, blood from the victim in his car etc.....there is alwasy the possibility than aliens came down and made a clone of the criminal and it was IN FACT that clone that killed the victim. So yeah we might wanna play it safe. Come on Cam.
2007-07-30 07:15:26
PureFodder
Member
+225|6282
DNA testing is often cited as having a million to one chance of getting it wrong. Hence if you live in the US there are 300 people who have the same DNA testing results as you.
2007-07-30 08:09:58
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+794|6681|United States of America
I support it, but not with the "Kill 'em all" enthusiasm expressed by the vote in the poll. People have expressed concerns that innocents could be executed, which is always true, but I believe that places a larger load on the criminal investigators to get their facts straight. Also, if you look at many of these executions, they aren't suspected serial killers who "maybe kinda could have possibly" committed the crimes, they murderers who have be caught by their clues they left at the crime scene. I'd hope there isn't that much incompetence among our crime fighters that they continually are putting away the wrong perps.
2007-07-30 08:13:38
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6552

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Kind of a stretch Cam,

I doubt a rapist/murderer goes around with someone elses skin to place under his victims fingernails. Or someones elses semen to pump into her body. Are you really gunna stick with that argument?
Au contraire - some of the 'career' murderers are very meticulous and very cunning.
Well yeah, if DNA along with all the other evidence against a criminal IE, video, witnesses, stolen shit from the victim at the criminals place, blood from the victim in his car etc.....there is alwasy the possibility than aliens came down and made a clone of the criminal and it was IN FACT that clone that killed the victim. So yeah we might wanna play it safe. Come on Cam.
You aren't being very open to all of the millions of possibilities that exist and millions of ways in which a person can be murdered. It's more of a 'you're likely to be correct with DNA evidence' than 'irrefutably correct with DNA evidence' that you're arguing. I wouldn't close out the still very real possibility that the police could get it wrong: and let's not forget police or government corruption potentially 'interfering' in the due process of an individual, something quite prevalent in developing countries but still not fully eradicated in the west.

What if someone murdered someone and there was absolutely NO DNA evidence. Trial by circumstance and deduction could certainly still lead to the death of an innocent man.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-07-30 08:27:48)

2007-07-30 08:14:32
weerdfoo1
Banned
+26|6161|California

=Karma-Kills= wrote:

Yes.

An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

And all those, "no its the easy way out" people, what do you really think is the worse - being able to live with food, water and warmth or not being here at all.

Though of course, the person must be guilty beyond any doubt.
Well, I disagree with the death penalty.

Instead, put them in complete isolation and barely give them anything to survive off of.
Basically, make them suffer the rest of their lives.
2007-07-30 08:37:40
ReTox
Member
+100|6495|State of RETOXification
I'm a Buddhist, life is precious.  I support consequences that result in loss of freedom but never loss of life.  Even when the crime is the taking of another life, I can't justify killing another human being only because they killed someone as well.  It is circular reasoning that stupefies me.

Gandhi once said, and it is my favourite quote:

"An eye for an eye will only leave the whole world blind"
2007-07-30 09:40:38
Drakef
Cheeseburger Logicist
+117|6358|Vancouver

DesertFox- wrote:

I support it, but not with the "Kill 'em all" enthusiasm expressed by the vote in the poll. People have expressed concerns that innocents could be executed, which is always true, but I believe that places a larger load on the criminal investigators to get their facts straight. Also, if you look at many of these executions, they aren't suspected serial killers who "maybe kinda could have possibly" committed the crimes, they murderers who have be caught by their clues they left at the crime scene. I'd hope there isn't that much incompetence among our crime fighters that they continually are putting away the wrong perps.
The idea that an innocent man may be executed is only another reason why many of us disapprove of the death penalty. Canadians will likely remember the case of David Milgaard, a man who spent twenty-three years in prison before being freed after new evidence proved his innocence. The most profound reason to end capital punishment is the strong disagreement with the idea that the state should be allowed to end the life of someone, regardless of what this person has done. Personally, I am of the belief that isolation and rehabilitation is the key of the judicial system, rather than punishment. Of course, I am not so unrealistic that I refuse to believe that there are those who will not rehabilitate. However, a prison sentence should serve as a way to isolate a criminal from society for the time that is needed. In Canada, even murderers can achieve probation after twenty-five years- in rare cases. But we do recognize their danger and all convicted of murder are sentenced to life. But, there is no reason to imprison a man who does not serve a threat to the community and to the law beyond a small period in prison, and certainly, against my moral beliefs to kill a man, regardless of crime. He should be isolated.
2007-07-30 09:41:57
kylef
Gone
+1,352|6489|N. Ireland

Braddock wrote:

I have a slightly hypocritical stance on this one. I voted no and I don't agree with it really in principal but I do believe in personal justice and if someone raped my wife/girlfriend/daughter or killed one of my family (malisciously, I wouldn't be able to kill someone who done it by accident and have a clear conscience) I would kill them.
Same scenario with me. On the one hand, I do not support it. But sometimes personal justice just stands in front of it.
2007-07-30 09:47:13
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6219|Escea

If someone performs a real heavy crime, murder, mass murder etc then they should get frazzled, less serious crimes although still serious should be given long jail terms which decrease as the severity of the crime decreases.
2007-07-30 09:49:38
Bull3t
stephen brule
+83|6298
Yes, Infact I do support the Death Penatly because a Man or Woman who has slaughtered many helpless people or in that matter do anything to kill anyone or numerous people deserve to die for killing others.
2007-07-30 10:00:05
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6628|949

I support the death penalty only in extreme cases of murder - mass killings, serial murders, etc.  Strictly if the person in question is guilty beyond any doubt (Columbine, Va Tech, BTK Killer, etc) and is truly a deviant impact on humanity.
2007-07-30 10:11:41
xRBLx
I've got lovely bunch of coconuts!!
+27|6351|England - Kent
An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth and life for a life.
2007-07-30 10:13:15
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,973|6628|949

xRBLx wrote:

An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth and life for a life.
Nothing like Archaic Christian Bible quotes to get the death penalty rolling!  "Allahu Akbar!"  I mean, "Praise the Lord Jesus Christ!"

Leviticus 24:17 And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. 18And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast. 19And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 20Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. 21And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-30 10:15:00)

2007-07-30 10:16:23
agent146
Member
+127|6383|Jesus Land aka Canada
death penalty? I support it in way....can we harvest their organs and sell to people in need, just like what the chinese do?.....what? atleast make them repay something back to society.

Last edited by agent146 (2007-07-30 10:16:45)

2007-07-30 10:21:13
confused
Member
+10|6390|British Columbia
And, what of the executioner.  After flipping the switch on 60 convicts, is he safe to have in the streets?
2007-07-30 10:24:51
confused
Member
+10|6390|British Columbia

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:


How about the other way round when the accused is your kid and you know they must be innocent, wouldn't you want them to rot in a cell with the possibility of being proved innocent later instead of being killed now?

Hence why it's a damned good job that the victims and their loved ones have absolutely no say whatsoever in the punishment of criminals.
Of course I wouldn't want my son to face the death penality. That has nothing to do with the possiblity that he might deserve it.

Like I said DNA is taking away ALL doubt as to who did what and when so if tht doubt is 100% removed, then I feel the family of the victim should have first dibs on throwing the switch.

If it were my kid being executed I would be in complete grief and I would not want it to happen, however, whatever grief I would feel would be small potatoes compared to the grief felt by the victims family that had their loved one removed from them by MY sons hand. I really would not be in a position to beg for my sons life if that family wasn't in a position to beg for their sons life.
Lowing - someone could set somebody up with placed DNA 'evidence'.
There is a knife in my kitchen.  I use it daily.  It has my fingerprints and dna on it.  It is used in a murder in my house.  DNA evidence is just as circumstantial as any other.
2007-07-30 10:31:54
Orrish
Member
+4|6122|Liverpool, Merseyside
lets simplify this for a second, we should put the killers in a pit with no light for the rest of there lives and make them eat stale bread and water.
for those who speed and steal, regular jail is for them.  they take someones life away we should take away their's but not to kill them just to let them rot.

Last edited by Orrish (2007-07-30 10:33:41)

2007-07-30 10:39:02
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6578|SE London

Orrish wrote:

lets simplify this for a second, we should put the killers in a pit with no light for the rest of there lives and make them eat stale bread and water.
for those who speed and steal, regular jail is for them.  they take someones life away we should take away their's but not to kill them just to let them rot.
That sounds good to me.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard