|
Post by keyodie on Sept 28, 2008 18:49:14 GMT -5
I still don't have much of an opinion on this one, but I've talked to a couple people about it and I find it very interesting... So I figured making this thread would be a good idea.
Let the debate begin.
|
|
sakaido
Journeyman
Ryuichi+Coffee=Best icon ever.
Posts: 111
|
Post by sakaido on Sept 28, 2008 19:06:53 GMT -5
Depending on the severity of the crime committed. I'm for it.
If you kill 1+ children: death. Manslaughter: Live [Accidents happen] Rape+Death: Kill em.
How the murder is carried out, how many people are involved, Motivation. It depends on a LOT. It's not a light decision or an easy choice, ever.
And, it costs a lot of tax payers money to keep a person in jail every year. Kill a man when when you're 25, live to be 80+ life in prison at the cost of 19 grand a year. Do the math. even if the person kills someone at the age of 40. And lives to be 70, that's 570,000+ dollars to keep him in prison for life. I won't make 19 grand a year for the next 4 years. I don't want to help pay to keep someone in jail for more than I make. That seems unfair.
www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/statsbrief/cost.html <a pie chart of how much it costs a year and why. Google was a little fruitless when looking up the cost of euthanization.
If they really valued life, they shouldn't have taken anothers. There should be mercy granted to an extent, of course. A painless death perhaps. But to live, when because of them someone else is dead. Seems too kind. Unfair...
|
|
|
Post by Bubba's Dad on Sept 28, 2008 19:41:10 GMT -5
I agree with Sakaido on this one. Every one has the right to life, but any right can be removed by legal due process. After a lawful trial with all of the safe guards in place, the death sentence is appropriate should the crime warrant it. Although I do believe murder is wrong on moral grounds, I believe that murder is a crime because the victims of murder have no due process, and they are deprived of their right to life unlawfully. And I do agree with the idea of a separate jury deciding a guilty persons penalty, such as death, life or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by misaki on Sept 29, 2008 8:56:57 GMT -5
I'm not sure. I'm principally anti-death penalty because of several things, but..
Why anti;
- Because people can, actually, change. With the right kind of help, they actually can. While I'm not religious I know ( well, not really know, but..0 several people who were converted to my mum's religion in prison. I'm against just about every idea of their religion, but I do see how these people changed completely; from self-centered, almost conscienceless persons to (a little too) selfless, overly much conscience having persons. It's possible. The ability to change is the beauty of life.
- Because people are people. Even if they behaved like monsters at one point
- Because I don't think anyone has the right to kill. To put it 'religiously' ; let he who is without sin throw the first stone
Pro death penalty;
- Because there's a fair chance they won't change. Or only pretend to.
- Because they are a danger to society
So yeah. death penalty hasn't been around for a LONG time here, and the murder rate hasn't increased. On the other hand, I'm not sure if it could, technically work that way in bigger countries. The Netherlands are small, so easier to control.
|
|
Gil
Apprentice
teh spazzy queen
Posts: 54
|
Post by Gil on Sept 29, 2008 21:04:59 GMT -5
I'm anti because... -To me, it just seems way too much like revenge, which is not what the government is about. (but that's not much of an argument, that's just an opinion) -If murder is against the law, how is it suddenly legal to kill someone if they killed first? Then, shouldn't it be legal for family and friends of a murder victim to kill the murderer? -Like Aerlinn said, people do change. Not all, but some do. -There have been instances of mis-convicting (is that a word? lol I don't know how to say it...) - where innocent people have been put to death. Again, that's not too much of an argument, though, because I don't think it happens very often and science is always getting better, making us more certain of someone's guilt before they are sentenced. -Again, throwing my own opinions/beliefs in here, I don't think it is up to us when people die. Like Aerlinn (or Jesus ) said, "Let he who is without sin throw the first stone". OK, I know I have more reasons for this, but I am too tired and my brain is too mushy to think of them at the moment
|
|
|
Post by ladytera on Sept 30, 2008 10:05:31 GMT -5
Vigilante justice is revenge. The death sentence carried out by the state is a penalty for ones own actions. If the death penalty is simple revenge, then is a speeding ticket revenge by the state for you speeding. No, it is only the penalty for your actions. This is why in the US the death sentence is not based on morals. It is a penalty for ones actions. You can not base the law on your religion, just as when it comes from abortion, religion has no play. You may be against abortion or the death penalty on religious grounds, but when it comes to law, and making them, you must follow the Constitution. The death sentence is legal and proper under the Constitution.
|
|
|
Post by keyodie on Sept 30, 2008 15:42:04 GMT -5
Well, just because something is legal and proper under the Constitution does not automatically make it right. And though the death sentence is said to be carried out as a penalty for ones own actions, that does not mean that there is no revenge involved.
Just saying. xD
|
|
|
Post by ladytera on Sept 30, 2008 22:37:18 GMT -5
Well, just because something is legal and proper under the Constitution does not automatically make it right. And though the death sentence is said to be carried out as a penalty for ones own actions, that does not mean that there is no revenge involved. Just saying. xD That wasn't me!! My husband took over my fingers.... Seriously, I was permanently logged in, and we use the same computer. Not to say I disagree with him. I actually completely agree with what he's saying. I'll get into my reasoning later after work, if I have a bit of time (which I really hope to have).
|
|
|
Post by Bubba's Dad on Oct 3, 2008 18:39:16 GMT -5
OK, keyodie, what do you mean when you say that just because it is constitutional does not make it right?That is the law of the land so it has to be right. It may not be moral, or biblical, but it is right as far as society right now is concerned. It has to be.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Dark Moon on Oct 3, 2008 19:30:24 GMT -5
^I think keyo means that the question is whether or not the Constitution is right in allowing capital punishment. The Constitution was written by men. The fact that it's the law of the land doesn't make all its judgements perfect.
I've read all of your posts, and I have a question to pose. Which is worse - death or a lifetime in prison? If the penalty frees the criminal before his lifespan runs out, who's to say he won't commit another crime at the expense of another innocent's happiness? Sure, some people change. But others don't.
From my perspective, morality is not the issue. There is no universal right or wrong, so that point is useless. Laws are set in place to prevent society from spiraling into anarchy. The harsher the penalties, the lower the crime rate. However, harsh penalties may also instill a sense of oppression, of fear of placing a toe out of line. Would you rather live in fear of criminals or in fear of the law itself?
|
|
Rhovanion
Apprentice
La Danse Macabre
Posts: 53
|
Post by Rhovanion on Oct 7, 2008 13:25:52 GMT -5
You can't kill to show that killing is wrong.
Capital Punishment is just a fancy name for legalized murder. I don't care what the person has done. It still doesn't give me the right to take his or her life.
Your bible says "Thou shalt not kill". Should not that apply to everyone? Or is it another one of those famous "pick-and-choose-from-the-bible-what-you-want-to-follow" situations? Must be.
|
|
|
Post by keyodie on Oct 7, 2008 15:03:31 GMT -5
I think when the Bible says thou shalt not kill, it really only applies to Christians. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's what I've heard. People kill in the name of God all the time, so how else would that be justified?
|
|
Rhovanion
Apprentice
La Danse Macabre
Posts: 53
|
Post by Rhovanion on Oct 7, 2008 15:08:50 GMT -5
Ah yes but it seems to me that, in the United States at least, those who are for capital punishment are the Christians. Not saying all Christians are for it. But those who are for it tend to be Christian (for some reason).
|
|
|
Post by keyodie on Oct 7, 2008 16:23:25 GMT -5
That's probably because they believe in the concept of hell. They think that if they kill criminals, God will deal with them. Most christians I've met, anyway.
|
|
Raivynn
Journeyman
...my winter storm
Posts: 187
|
Post by Raivynn on Oct 7, 2008 16:34:32 GMT -5
I absolutely am against the death penalty, and am very glad in the UK we no longer have it. That's not to say I think the jail system is doing a good job, because quite frankly it's far from it. My opinion is that life in prison means literally that. Life. Absolutely no hope of release unless it's proven that you were innocent. Most definetly no luxuries, only necessities. I also think that minor offences like non-payment of fines, and marijuana possession should not be a jailable offence. All it does is clog up the system and the prisons.
I'm not very sure I've articulated myself well. But what the hey..
|
|
|
Post by Bubba's Dad on Oct 7, 2008 17:45:24 GMT -5
Ok, Raivynn Phoenix, You said what problems you see in the prison system, but you never said why you are against the death penalty, only that you are against it.
Keyodie, Christians believe in Hell and Heaven. Most that I know believe that the death penalty is the consequence paid for earthly activities that go against societies laws. Hell is a consequence paid for going against Gods number one rule, you must accept Christ. Even the most viscous killer can still go to heaven if he repents his sins and accepts Christ. But, when caught killing, the State will help him on his way to heaven. And when is the last time Christians have killed in the name of God? Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Hitler, and Saddam Hussein (all non Christians) all murdered millions in the name of tyranny. Some misguided Muslims today kill in the name of Alla, but Christians?
And the part of the Bible that reads though shall not kill, means murder, and it applies to Jews, as Gods chosen people, and later Christians. You will note that killing in defense of once home and family is not murder in the Bible.
OK, Rhovanion, Capital punishment is legalized murder, as a punishment. Let me ask you something, do you paddle your kids butt after he hit a sibling to teach him, (and his siblings), that hitting is wrong? Actions have consequences. And your right, you do not have the right to take a life, but the state dose, so long as due process is followed. You do not have the right to take a persons freedom either, but the state dose (Jail time), after due process.
OK, Lady Dark Moon, The Constitution is what we have to work with. It is what keeps us from fearing the Government, and each other. In a free land, where all are considered equal in the eyes of the law, we fear neither criminals nor governments, ideally any how. I fear no man so long as I have the right to a gun, representation and a trial by jury.
|
|
Rhovanion
Apprentice
La Danse Macabre
Posts: 53
|
Post by Rhovanion on Oct 8, 2008 3:43:23 GMT -5
Bubba's Dad, I would never ever paddle my future children. Because, like with capital punishment, you can't hit your kids to show them that hitting is wrong.
And all laws aside, what gives the state the right to murder people? The US is the only Western World (and Free World) country that hasn't abolished the death penalty. Other nations that use it are North Korea, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran, Belarus etc. Do you really want to be in the same league as them?
|
|
|
Post by ladytera on Oct 8, 2008 7:34:49 GMT -5
Bubba's Dad, I would never ever paddle my future children. Because, like with capital punishment, you can't hit your kids to show them that hitting is wrong. And all laws aside, what gives the state the right to murder people? The US is the only Western World (and Free World) country that hasn't abolished the death penalty. Other nations that use it are North Korea, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran, Belarus etc. Do you really want to be in the same league as them? I pity you and your children. Discipline is essential, and while spanking is not the be all end all, and not even the most effective form when they get older, it is a necessary form of discipline. And, yes, actually you can hit to show them that hitting is wrong. If your child strikes someone, they cause that person pain, but they don't understand that. When you in turn spank them, you demonstrate the consequence of getting hit, as well as the consequence of hitting someone (i.e. getting hit hurts, hitting someone causes a reaction). It is imperative that children learn the consequences of hitting when they are young because if you do not teach them the concept that hitting will lead to them getting hit, someone else will eventually, and it will be a much more painful lesson than one given by a loving parent. As to your comments on the US laws regarding capital punishment, first let me state that I am completely in favor of capital punishment within the laws. Not every state has capital punishment, and I am completely for that being a decision left to the states, except where federal crimes are involved. We are a country that is governed by its people. The laws are written by those we elect to Congress, and passed by those we elect to either the Presidency or the Governorship (depending if you're talking state or federal). The laws regarding capital punishment are a reflection of the will of our citizens. As a person who supports capital punishment, my reasoning is this: If you commit a murder, in a premeditated fashion, against a law enforcement officer, or under special circumstances (body mutilation, torture, etc.), then there must be a sure and terrible punishment for it. There are two reasons for this. If the individuals in a society understand that the consequences of a heinous act will be death, the likelihood of the majority of people committing those acts is reduced, so it is first and foremost, a deterrent, as are most laws. Secondly, I don't believe much in life in prison. If you have committed a crime bad enough to make you a permanent danger to society, by your own choice, knowing it way wrong, and knowing the consequences, then that society should not then be forced to pay for your continued existence in some maximum security prison. If your crime does not constitute a permanent threat to society, then your prison sentence should not be life, and the goal should be to reinforce the concept that you must abide by the laws of society. As to your casting aspersions on the integrity of the US laws and Constitution by comparing us to barbarians who stone women to death for the crime of being raped, and shoot people for speaking out against the state, I gotta say you're pretty twisted to even make the comparison. There is a difference between just execution of the laws after a fair trial with proper representation and access to appeals, and some third world dictatorship whose laws depend on which zealot is in charge that week. I must say that I tire a little of citizens of tired European countries that are incapable of defending themselves, have economies and populations that are stagnant, and little more to recommend them than histories bloodier than ours and a superiority complex, slapping at the only country on the planet willing to defend your right not to be invaded by Russia, China, or any other overly ambitious neighbors (think Germany and Italy in the 40s), and to defend your right not to be nuked by nutcases around the world. Learn to take care of yourselves, and then come talk to me about what barbarians we Americans are.
|
|
Rhovanion
Apprentice
La Danse Macabre
Posts: 53
|
Post by Rhovanion on Oct 8, 2008 13:22:40 GMT -5
ladytera, I pity your children if you think spanking is a necessary form of "discipline". I was never ever spanked. Neither were my siblings. We turned out just fine. And so did everyone else I know. It's against the law here in Sweden and has been since 1979. There are other non-physical ways to discipline your children.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on capital punishment. I respect your opinion. I'm just on the other side of the fence that's all.
You're the ones defending our right not to be nuked by nutcases around the world? Well excuse me if I'm misinformed on this but as I recall... the only 'nutcases' to actually nuke another country in the history of the world (so far)... were you guys!
Which European country is incapable of defending themselves (at this present time)? Which economies and populations are stagnant? Give me examples please. I can only speak on behalf of Sweden and how we view things. You say you're tired of Europeans slapping America. I am tired of Americans thinking we don't have a right to slap you.
I didn't say you were barbarians. I'm just saying that the nations still actively using capital punishment as a legal form of penalty are those "third world dictatorships whose laws depend on which zealot is in charge that week"... and you guys! That's a fact you cannot change. This topic is not about the stoning of women, it's about capital punishment. You guys still use it, so I'm going to criticize it.
|
|
|
Post by ladytera on Oct 8, 2008 15:41:13 GMT -5
Rhovanion, you have a right to say whatever you please, within the rules of this board. As does everyone else. My point was next time Europe screams at Russia for cutting off your oil supply, and they laugh in you face while they continue to invade and annex their neighbors, you would be doomed to communist rule if the US caved to the wishes of the so called free world.
This thread is about capital punishment. You are correct in that, and you are entirely entitled to your opinion in it. I don't object to your criticism of capital punishment in itself. I object to your use of the argument that because the rest of the "Free World" has stopped it, we are somehow less than you or less free than you, as grounds for your objection to the punishment. That's kind of like saying "All the rest of the lemmings ran off the cliff, your just not right because you didn't follow them."
Capital Punishment is a legal issue. Argue the legalities. It's a moral issue, sort of, argue the moral issues, but remember that the laws are for the protection of society. They are meant to be just, not moral.
I'm not going to answer your questions about the countries of Europe here. It's off topic, and I apologize for having dragged the discussion away from the topic at hand. I have to prep for court this week, but if you're still interested in what I based those statements on, remind me next week, and I'll do the research and get back to you. Otherwise, please accept my apologies for my crankiness in that post. That doesn't lessen my belief in what I was saying, but I could perhaps have been a bit more tactful.
|
|