BF2S Forums for all of you anti- death penalty folks.

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

If I am conflicted I have missed it, do tell.

If beyond all reasonable doubt, a murderer is found guilty I feel he should pay with his life...Where is the conflict?

lowing wrote:

Never ever said the system is perfect, and never said innocent people have not been executed.

The conflict lies within the definition of what you and I call define as "reasonable".  I agree with you on what is reasonable.  If someone has lost their appeal, then that seals the issue. 

But by arguing "if it's true that no one can be 100% guilty and therefore no crime should be punished"...which you obviously disagree with, along with agreeing with the innocent execution statement...you are essentially are admitting the system has flaws - which is the strongest argument against the death penalty.

So, in other words, it's reasonable to believe a failed appeal after a guilty plea should be proof within itself.  Stick to that.

the system is not flawed in idea, it is only flawed in practice. However it is the striving for perfect that counts, and to achieve the truth as best as humanly possible is the system we all live under and accept.

Last edited by lowing (2011-03-16 15:49:36)

EVieira wrote:

I'm pro-death. Some things are not meant to live in society. I didn't even read the news links, I really don't like to read news like that ever since my son was born.

Oddly, I´m pro-life too...

There is a difference between an innocent baby being born and a pervert

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

I think that your problem is more with the justice system.  You don't believe people have the right to appeal, by stating that allowing an appeal or a different punishment than you wish to occur is an utter and complete failure.

yer wrong, I think appeals are a must, in the process of checks and balances to ensure guilt.

You mean determine guilt?

Another Freudian slip from lowing I think.

no, if the criminal has already been tried, and convicted, his guilt has already been "determined", the appeals process is used to "ensure" that verdict.

Sorry Dilbert, wrong yet again.

maybe some people think all life is sacred
i certainly don't
some people really do deserve the death penalty like a dog with rabies
but no matter how much this might be true for the dahmer etc of the world the justice system of every country is imperfect. Innocent people are in jail, having exhausted all the appeals. Some of these people are on death row. We can not employ the death penalty as a means of punishmnet, regardless of its deterrence effect or lack thereof, because innocent people, fucked by the system, WILL die. HAVE died.

So stop flogging a dead horse. We can't use it morally or ethically. Prison it is the only option, despite its costs because killing an innocent system costs a million times more.


in case you and the other deathers don't get it: You deathers are the pointy haired dude saying that the 'plan' i.e life in prison is too expensive when your alternative 'plan' i.e. death penalty will cost even more.

PS And before you or the other deathers say it is we, the antis, that are flogging it. No we are the ones trying to bury it and you people keep digging it back up.

Stubbee wrote:

maybe some people think all life is sacred
i certainly don't
some people really do deserve the death penalty like a dog with rabies
but no matter how much this might be true for the dahmer etc of the world the justice system of every country is imperfect. Innocent people are in jail, having exhausted all the appeals. Some of these people are on death row. We can not employ the death penalty as a means of punishmnet, regardless of its deterrence effect or lack thereof, because innocent people, fucked by the system, WILL die. HAVE died.

So stop flogging a dead horse. We can't use it morally or ethically. Prison it is the only option, despite its costs because killing an innocent system costs a million times more.
http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/6215/ … sunday.gif

in case you and the other deathers don't get it: You deathers are the pointy haired dude saying that the 'plan' i.e life in prison is too expensive when your alternative 'plan' i.e. death penalty will cost even more.

PS And before you or the other deathers say it is we, the antis, that are flogging it. No we are the ones trying to bury it and you people keep digging it back up.

again by your logic we should not punish anyone for fear of them being innocent, especially, ya know, since "life in prison IS WORSE than death", and you will pay a "million times more" in settlements.

Last edited by lowing (2011-03-17 07:03:31)

Stubbee wrote:

pug:
the cost of what? the monetary cost of life imprisonment or the cost to the well being of society of the death penalty?

lowing:
wtf are you babbling now?

it is your logic that is twisting things. I never said punishment is useless because innocent people might be imprisoned
I am more than prepared to have someone (or myself) falsely imprisoned but not have them falsely executed. Why do you continuously try to extrapolate my logic to suit your dumbass agenda? If you can't see/understand the difference between false imprisonment and false execution then there is no  hope for you.

I never said life in prison is worse then death either. It doesn't matter which is 'worse'. Execution is wrong (for the reason already stated umpteen times) and therefore imprisonment the only option regardless of the cost. Or are you trying to say innocent people on death row should accept the death penalty because 'life in prison is worse'?

Sorry, you have heard the argument that "life in prison is worse than death", right? and you do understand that it is not my argument right? So it is simple logic that if life in prison is worse than death, then that would ring true for anyone in prison be them guilty or innocent.

and what is your fixation on cost now? How can you reduce a murderers actions and a victims suffering to a fiscal issue?

Do me a favor, stop with the insults, ok? We disagree, nothing more, there is no need for insults.

Last edited by lowing (2011-03-17 07:51:11)

I think we have reach the end of yet a useless discussion ... nothing to see here, move along ...