Pages: 1 2 3

 

2006-11-06 14:18:52
Des.Kmal
Member
+917|6876|Atlanta, Georgia, USA

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

OK, listen here. This is from the heart:

if you have been proven to have done a heinous crime(rape, murder, things to harm other people, not dealing with money or material things) without a doubt(not reasonable, a single doubt) then yes, you should get your fucking head chopped off.
..but why?  what is the purpose for it?  WHO does it serve?
you dont want them repremanded? or you dont want them killed?

because you can argue either way.

ill further delve into it when you answer the question above
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
2006-11-06 14:29:55
{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank
U.S. > Iran
+497|6836|Florida
The way I look at it, it is Iraq's law system that sentenced Saddam to his death.  Hanging here in the states would cause an outrage and would be "inhumane" or something stupid.  But their culture is different, and sentencing someone to death does not make them a murderer in my opinion.  Im sure you are all familiar with the Karma system.  Saddam signed his death certificate long ago, and now death is coming to collect the debt.  I dont just feel this way about Saddam, I think murderers, and serial killers should be put to death.  I also think that they shouldnt sit on death row for 10 years wasting tax dollars and filling up space in prisons that is needed.  They should have a year at most to sit on death row before being executed.
2006-11-06 14:36:11
Crash727
Member
+12|6899|NH, USA
First off: Saddam was convicted by an Islamic court of law.  Their laws institute far greater punishments than that of the US.  They also provide for those punishments to be carried out very swiftly.  That being the case, I think only Muslims would be able to offer a true opinion on Saddam's punishment.  Me personally, I hope his neck doesn't snap when he falls.

As far as the death penalty goes, it's purpose is more effective as a deterant of crime.  If a person comtemplates committing a crime worthy of the death penalty, he/she may think otherwise.  The problem is that not only do enough states not use it, but many criminals opt for plea bargains offered by the prosecution.  Here in New Hampshire, we are about to have our first capital murder case in many years.  You can read it for yourselves here: http://www.wmur.com/news/10250896/detail.html  It won't be long before we build a brand new lethal injection chamber.  Personally, I think gallows are cheaper, but, it's not my decision.

The problem with removing the death penalty is that you take away the fear of the consequences for a criminal's actions.  It is not so much as a way for the victims to get closure, but to take away the attitude of: "I will end up in a nice, warm prison, getting 3 squares a day and some exercise."  THAT is why I am for the death penalty!!!
2006-11-06 14:38:07
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6749|Northern California

Des.Kmal wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

OK, listen here. This is from the heart:

if you have been proven to have done a heinous crime(rape, murder, things to harm other people, not dealing with money or material things) without a doubt(not reasonable, a single doubt) then yes, you should get your fucking head chopped off.
..but why?  what is the purpose for it?  WHO does it serve?
you dont want them repremanded? or you dont want them killed?

because you can argue either way.

ill further delve into it when you answer the question above
Reprimand?  Not sure why you suggested I wouldn't want them reprimanded.  My previous posts clearly denote that punishment for killing is my choice.

I'm asking the questions.  "WHY?"  "What purpose does it serve?"  and "Who does it serve?"
2006-11-06 14:42:13
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6911

{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:

The way I look at it, it is Iraq's law system that sentenced Saddam to his death.  Hanging here in the states would cause an outrage and would be "inhumane" or something stupid.  But their culture is different, and sentencing someone to death does not make them a murderer in my opinion.
But at the time Saddam was Iraq's law system... and therefore his imposing the death sentence on the Kurds in the villages engaged in fighting his regime wouldn't make him a murderer...

Except he is a murderer... but not because of Iraqi law... because at the time the law was in his favour... therefore he should be tried by international law, and sentenced to death under the law he was actually in violation of.  Backdating laws and sentences means that the government could impose a mandatory 5 years jail time for every speeding offence if they felt like it... you get punished by the law you broke as it stood at the time. 

So for that reason I am opposed to Saddam being hung in Iraq.  I would not oppose the death penalty being given by an international war crimes tribunal, even though I am opposed to the death penalty in general.  I would not be opposed purely because it would be fair and just.
2006-11-06 14:44:18
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6911

Crash727 wrote:

The problem with removing the death penalty is that you take away the fear of the consequences for a criminal's actions.  It is not so much as a way for the victims to get closure, but to take away the attitude of: "I will end up in a nice, warm prison, getting 3 squares a day and some exercise."  THAT is why I am for the death penalty!!!
It's not a deterrent for the sort of psychos who do the school massacres who want to die anyway...
2006-11-06 14:51:38
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|6888|Washington, DC

Death penalty in the US is stupid. Spend the same amount of money on it as you do keeping them alive in jail. If all signs lead to "yes, he raped 4 girls then killed them, raped their mothers and killed them, then shot 20 innocent people" then say "guilty, death sentence", take him out back and shoot him (or her) in the head with a shotgun. No more killer on the streets, no corrections officers at risk of being stabbed by some nutty murderer. Problem solved.

Seriously, tell me why people who do such disgusting, inhumane, horrid acts such as what Saddam did or what these people who rape and kill deserve to live? Cant do the time, dont do the crime. Karma too.
2006-11-06 14:53:31
Crash727
Member
+12|6899|NH, USA

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

Crash727 wrote:

The problem with removing the death penalty is that you take away the fear of the consequences for a criminal's actions.  It is not so much as a way for the victims to get closure, but to take away the attitude of: "I will end up in a nice, warm prison, getting 3 squares a day and some exercise."  THAT is why I am for the death penalty!!!
It's not a deterrent for the sort of psychos who do the school massacres who want to die anyway...
You are right, it's not a deterrent for that sort of person.  It is a method of punishment.  People like that can't be rehabilitated, and I really don't like spending money to keep them alive in prison until the day they die.  I would rather spring for some electricity, a length of rope, a syringe full of Sodium thiopental, Pancuronium bromide, & Potassium chloride, etc...
2006-11-06 15:05:05
jonsimon
Member
+224|6753

Crash727 wrote:

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

Crash727 wrote:

The problem with removing the death penalty is that you take away the fear of the consequences for a criminal's actions.  It is not so much as a way for the victims to get closure, but to take away the attitude of: "I will end up in a nice, warm prison, getting 3 squares a day and some exercise."  THAT is why I am for the death penalty!!!
It's not a deterrent for the sort of psychos who do the school massacres who want to die anyway...
You are right, it's not a deterrent for that sort of person.  It is a method of punishment.  People like that can't be rehabilitated, and I really don't like spending money to keep them alive in prison until the day they die.  I would rather spring for some electricity, a length of rope, a syringe full of Sodium thiopental, Pancuronium bromide, & Potassium chloride, etc...
It's actually not a deterrent at all, that's a myth.
2006-11-06 15:55:14
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6948|Tampa Bay Florida
imo the death penalty should be reserved for only for political leaders who commit genocide.  Hussein, Stalin, Hitler, etc.

As for what Crash 727 wrote, they do not just end up in a "nice, warm prison".  Here in Florida many prisons aren't equipped with air conditioners, so it gets up to 100 degree in their cells during the summer.  Their cells are only 9 by 12, I believe.  It's a sad and pathetic life, and it's been proven that murderers don't have their punishment in mind when they commit the murder.

Last edited by Spearhead (2006-11-06 15:56:21)

2006-11-06 16:02:44
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6890|949

The death penalty is not a deterrent at all, like Jonsimon wrote.  To think that is ignorant in my opinion.  I believe the death penalty should be reserved for those truly deviant minds (serial killers, serial rapists, brutal dictators, etc) that is it.  Honestly, people should not be put to death for making a mistake, albeit one as brutal and violent as murdering some one.

The purpose of the death penalty should not be for deterrence, punishment, retribution, whatever.  It should be reserved for the few people in the world who cannot cope with a humanist type of living.  It should be reserved for those who cannot, under any circumstances, coexist with fellow man.
2006-11-06 16:05:58
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6726

RDMC(2) wrote:

Its kind of ironic, because they will kill Saddam because he killed many people (so he is a murderer) but doesn't that make the ones who said Saddam should die, aren't they murderers aswell? So they ought to be hanged to?
Yeah but, um uhhhhhh, God Bless America
2006-11-06 16:10:54
Des.Kmal
Member
+917|6876|Atlanta, Georgia, USA

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:


..but why?  what is the purpose for it?  WHO does it serve?
you dont want them repremanded? or you dont want them killed?

because you can argue either way.

ill further delve into it when you answer the question above
Reprimand?  Not sure why you suggested I wouldn't want them reprimanded.  My previous posts clearly denote that punishment for killing is my choice.

I'm asking the questions.  "WHY?"  "What purpose does it serve?"  and "Who does it serve?"
it keeps the killers off the street, and off everything. first time offense.. i dont know. but repeat offenders(twice or more) should get a fucking bullet in the head.

first timers also. unless it was an accident. idk.
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
2006-11-06 16:19:41
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6749|Northern California

Des.Kmal wrote:

it keeps the killers off the street, and off everything. first time offense.. i dont know. but repeat offenders(twice or more) should get a fucking bullet in the head.

first timers also. unless it was an accident. idk.
Jail keeps them off the streets and off everything.  We get license plates because of them.  If we kill them, then we make our own license plates.


2006-11-06 16:25:43
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7029|PNW

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

..but why?  what is the purpose for it?  WHO does it serve?
you dont want them repremanded? or you dont want them killed?

because you can argue either way.

ill further delve into it when you answer the question above
Reprimand?  Not sure why you suggested I wouldn't want them reprimanded.  My previous posts clearly denote that punishment for killing is my choice.

I'm asking the questions.  "WHY?"  "What purpose does it serve?"  and "Who does it serve?"
Only you can ask the questions? Sorry, I'm gonna reciprocate, here:

On sentencing him to life instead: "WHY?" "What purpose does it serve?" and "who does it serve?"

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-11-06 16:25:59)

2006-11-06 16:33:17
whirlblade
Member
+2|6665

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

OK, listen here. This is from the heart:

if you have been proven to have done a heinous crime(rape, murder, things to harm other people, not dealing with money or material things) without a doubt(not reasonable, a single doubt) then yes, you should get your fucking head chopped off.
..but why?  what is the purpose for it?  WHO does it serve?
All the tax payers that would have to otherwise pay for the upkeep of said damnable abomination. How does keeping the people alive help the victims' families? It doesnt. Neither does killing them. But in this case just executing them outright within weeks is far more beneficial to the average citizen than trying to overcrowd the prisons.
2006-11-06 16:34:30
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6749|Northern California

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

you dont want them repremanded? or you dont want them killed?

because you can argue either way.

ill further delve into it when you answer the question above
Reprimand?  Not sure why you suggested I wouldn't want them reprimanded.  My previous posts clearly denote that punishment for killing is my choice.

I'm asking the questions.  "WHY?"  "What purpose does it serve?"  and "Who does it serve?"
Only you can ask the questions? Sorry, I'm gonna reciprocate, here:

On sentencing him to life instead: "WHY?" "What purpose does it serve?" and "who does it serve?"
I didn't say "only" i can ask the questions..i said that I was asking the questions.  I said this because I didn't want to be answered with questions of his own.  And he has since answered.

And to explore your quesions for "Why? letting someone should live, what people and purpose does it serve?  It serves humanity for starters.  If a society is claiming to be civilized, even priding themselves on their humanity, the value they put on life, civil rights, etc, and the distance they attempt to put between them and their barbaric past...executing doesn't really help that.  What better notion to support their attempts at making a humane society than to grant life to a criminal and put them in the "corrections system" (their name, not mine) where one can adjust, be corrected, and be returned to the society he came from to make restitution where possible.  Surely this would be the goal of a society..not to answer killing with more killing.

Sure we're far from the "San Angeles" society portrayed in Demolition man...but look at just the last 100 years of societal evolution...the last 300 years..last 1000 years.  Getting us to a more "civilized" society is surely possible..eliminating the death penalty is part of getting there.

Oh yeah, not to leave this out...  As for the families of victims....it is their duty to forgive.  It's that simple.  If they can't forgive, then they will live in misery and killer will have inflicted more pain than he intended..by CHOICE of the victim family.  If you're a religious person, then forgiving should be much more easy if it is one of your teachings..but it doesn't matter.  People are inspired to forgive regardless of religious affiliation.  And before you ask, I CAN and WILL be able to forgive someone having committed the most heinous of crimes against me or my loved ones.  Yes, it's easy to say now and it will be hard if it happens, but I will do it if needed.

Last edited by IRONCHEF (2006-11-06 16:43:11)

2006-11-06 16:37:48
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6749|Northern California

whirlblade wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

OK, listen here. This is from the heart:

if you have been proven to have done a heinous crime(rape, murder, things to harm other people, not dealing with money or material things) without a doubt(not reasonable, a single doubt) then yes, you should get your fucking head chopped off.
..but why?  what is the purpose for it?  WHO does it serve?
All the tax payers that would have to otherwise pay for the upkeep of said damnable abomination. How does keeping the people alive help the victims' families? It doesnt. Neither does killing them. But in this case just executing them outright within weeks is far more beneficial to the average citizen than trying to overcrowd the prisons.
I agree.  A walk out back behind the courthouse after a verdict and putting a few .38 rounds in the head is alot less costly than 20 years of death row costing at least $1 million a year to do so.  My beef is not with the beauracracy that surrounds our corrections system, but with the penalty itself.  Without offering my solutions (as I'm hardly qualified to do so), the point is that killing someone for killing is a pretty retarded, barbaric, vengence based response.  Killing someone with the law serves only itself.  It let's people know that killing is actually ok to do, cuz hey, the law did it!  Must be ok!
2006-11-06 16:38:20
Naughty_Om
Im Ron Burgundy?
+355|6891|USA
awww hells no
2006-11-06 16:41:08
Superslim
BF2s Frat Brother
+211|6950|Calgary

Stingray24 wrote:

As a person who has family who are in law enforcement and work in prisons, I want murderers eliminated.  My family members are in danger every day because we keep these people around.  With nothing to lose, they will kill again. 

So what purpose does it serve?  Who does it serve?  My Dad.  That's who.  And everyone else in law enforcement and prison administration.  Fathers and mothers have to risk their lives around killers who should've been executed long ago.  I'd much rather see a murderer die as he deserves than have my Dad get stabbed.
I'll buy that.. Throw the trash out, however I would not hang Saddam, I think he should be drawn and quartered. Verry slowly......
2006-11-06 16:43:32
Superslim
BF2s Frat Brother
+211|6950|Calgary

Des.Kmal wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:


you dont want them repremanded? or you dont want them killed?

because you can argue either way.

ill further delve into it when you answer the question above
Reprimand?  Not sure why you suggested I wouldn't want them reprimanded.  My previous posts clearly denote that punishment for killing is my choice.

I'm asking the questions.  "WHY?"  "What purpose does it serve?"  and "Who does it serve?"
it keeps the killers off the street, and off everything. first time offense.. i dont know. but repeat offenders(twice or more) should get a fucking bullet in the head.

first timers also. unless it was an accident. idk.
+1 for the awesome sig!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-11-06 16:45:13
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7029|PNW

IRONCHEF wrote:

And to explore your quesions for "Why? letting someone should live, what people and purpose does it serve?  It serves humanity for starters.  If a society is claiming to be civilized, even priding themselves on their humanity, the value they put on life, civil rights, etc, and the distance they attempt to put between them and their barbaric past...executing doesn't really help that.  What better notion to support their attempts at making a humane society than to grant life to a criminal and put them in the "corrections system" (their name, not mine) where one can adjust, be corrected, and be returned to the society he came from to make restitution where possible.  Surely this would be the goal of a society..not to answer killing with more killing.

Sure we're far from the "San Angeles" society portrayed in Demolition man...but look at just the last 100 years of societal evolution...the last 300 years..last 1000 years.  Getting us to a more "civilized" society is surely possible..eliminating the death penalty is part of getting there.
"Corrections" is flawed and rushed. Allowing the slightest possibility of repeat offense by releasing violent criminals into the public, often within neighborhoods, is horrid by my viewpoint. Almost puts me in mind of a sort of dystopic system that seeds and harvests criminals as part of a paper-pushing industry.
2006-11-06 16:52:50
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6749|Northern California

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

"Corrections" is flawed and rushed. Allowing the slightest possibility of repeat offense by releasing violent criminals into the public, often within neighborhoods, is horrid by my viewpoint. Almost puts me in mind of a sort of dystopic system that seeds and harvests criminals as part of a paper-pushing industry.
Yep, "corrections" is a topic in and of itself!  For now, my solution is to take a large island and empty all the prisons of the country into that island....guard it with laserbeam toting sharks, lots of armed guard towers..and let them govern themselves.  Make food and water drops via air..and that's it.  Talk about a deterrent...if you're gonna be popping little boys in the poopers...better think about "the island" before you do it...cuz when you get air dropped on the island, loudspeakers will blare "Aaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnddd  arrrrrrrriving now is Joe "boy rapist" Schmoe who has been sentenced to the island for raping small boys! Have at him!!"

Lord of the flies style Justice! 

But seriously....I want to know why corrections offers its incarcerated celebrities television?  College degrees?  Marriage?  Sex?  Weights?   Where's the ball and chain?  Where's the chain gangs fixing the roadways?  Hulllloooo?  Air condition?  Free dental if you got "meth mouth?"  lol
2006-11-06 16:56:18
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7029|PNW

Superslim wrote:

Des.Kmal wrote:

...
+1 for the awesome sig!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's sigs like that that force people to turn them off in the office.
2006-11-06 17:03:04
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6749|Northern California

Superslim wrote:

+1 for the awesome sig!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah, nice freakishly large photoshopped ass there....

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard