BF2S Forums for those that do NOT believe in capital punishment.

Locoloki wrote:

you do know tax dollars go to feeding inmates.... Kill em!!!!!!!! ...... wrap there bodies in wet rawhide.... when the hide dry's it will squeeze them out like a tube of toothpaste

and do YOU know that on average is costs the state more to execute one person, than imprison him for life? Silly ignorant people.

Give such people to the predators in the zoo alive so they can sharpen their skills !

Truly sick and this is categorized as an illness ?  .... this is why capital punishment was invented even though they didn`t know it at the time.

I favor erection of a massive industrial meat grinder that these kinds of people can be slowly fed into.

Meat grinder sick?
I can think of a lot worse.
I have two small children; if I ever got my hands on one of these monsters I would pull out some of my power tools, you know, angle grinder, hole saws and acids, power drills and hammers and get truely horrific with them.
     And I would sleep just fine after doing that.

that's horrible
doesn't condone capitol punishment though
my main reason im against it is innocent people are convicted, and then you end up murdering an innocent person. So it isn't great. Also a crime like this will never be detterred by capitol punishment, the person would have done it whatever. So i just dont think it would be a good response. Whereas life imprisionment could inflict a lot more discomfort on the person and punishment.

I don't support capital punishment.. why?

It's NOT because I believe a life sentence is the "humane" way of punishing criminals. I do NOT think the death penalty is "cruel and unusual punishment." I believe that a life sentence is a harsher punishment. I think that bastard should receive a little hell on Earth to give him a taste of what lies beyond death. It also gives him a chance to ask for forgiveness.

You wanna know what my kind of justice system is? Let them victim's family do whatever they want with this piece of shit. (Of course that would be considered cruel and unusual.. lol.. but I'm willing to look the other way.)

Last edited by USAFDude_1988 (2006-08-01 14:30:18)

I have said it a few times on here, hanging is a lost art

Back in Medieval days they would hang a criminal upside down, naked,  with their legs spread. They would then take one of them saws, the kind where two people use it....one on each side, and begin at the genitals and slowly cut the person in two. Now the reason why they are upside down is that all the blood would flow to the heart and the brain, thus keeping them alive a lot longer. Man, they had good torture methods back then. Sick but good.

Last edited by sidious1 (2006-08-01 20:04:08)

I'm incredibly surprised that the rights of the offender seem to be far more important to a fair proportion of people than the rights of their past/future victims. If someone has a 100% chance of reoffence there is no way they should be released into society, regardless of whether they are mentally ill, just plain bad or any other cause.

Similarly society needs to realise for its own protection that once you violate somone elses rights you lose your own.

Whilst i agree that there can be miscarriages of justice etc. There are many circumstances where guilt is either proven beyond ANY(not just reasonable)  doubt or admitted where the offender is sure to have no future positive contribution to society. Rehabilitation is a weak excuse, it has been show to be demonstrably fallable (Note I'm not implying that people cant rehabilitate) and cannot be applied with a broad brush to all offenders.

Effectively my argument can be surmised that society needs to protect its members from those who are likely to reoffend, and someone who commits that sort of act can never be rehabilitated with any level of surety, therefore society can never be safe if they are released.
Why not institute an option whereby murderers who cold bloodedly plan killings or seek gratification from them are given an option of a poor existence in solitary or their own termination. It protects society from their depredations and prevents the innocent from facing the death penalty.

just some thoughts to chew on

Here's a thought:

When a child does the wrong thing, why do we punish them?

PuckMercury wrote:

we'll disagree on that point I suppose.  And I say that knowing I could easily be a victim of that "statistical noise."  That being said, those convicted wrongly are rarely entirely innocent in the first place.

Please give sources for this statement to back it up. I won't just take your word for it. Even if they are not "entirely" innocent as you put it it makes a big difference, if for example at a bank robbery you catch the guy shooting the cashier and killing him or the getaway driver. One is a murderer the other is a bank robber and there are different sentences or punishments according to the gravity of the crime. Even you said that they are "rarely innocent" which makes some completely innocent.

Either A) you're religious, the person goes to heaven and is much better off
B) You're not religious, and it probably doesn't much matter in that case.  Though the person no longer has to deal with life and is probably better off.

That is a pretty straight forward statement that is not very objective I think. Why does it not matter much in the case when you are not religious? I thought the USA was a free country and you were free to think whatever you want to. Besides that does not even matter. The fact would still hold that the state would MURDER an innocent citizen it is supposed to protect. Could the family of the person that was innocent but put to death go to court and accuse the state of murder if they have proof that he was innocent?

Last edited by AD_Kensan (2006-08-02 04:39:41)

Well they got the sicko yesterday evening.  Time to wait and see how many months he gets for, what is this, his 5th offense?