justify the right to kill

[LoosedUponThisWorld]

Prof Jackson

I believe if that there is enough evidence to suggest that the individual will kill again, than the death penalty may be situationally appropriate. Although I would always suggest rehabilitation over punishment, there are always situations that demand a different approach.

If someone is in jail, I'd like to imagine the goal is to make them realize the fault of their action and for them to come out a better member of society. This is often not the case, jail is more often than not a place where the violent learn to be more violent and relatively nonviolent, non dangerous offenders (such as drug possessors and the like) learn to become violent. If someone cuts up their landlords into a thousand bits and put them into shoeboxes that they keep under their bed, they may be beyond help. At that point I'd consider the death penalty.

Cases are rarely ever that clear cut. Also, such a person is obviously mentally deficient in some way.

Also your ideas are ignoring the fundamental factors that drive people to crime in the first place and insisting that people who commit crimes are merely bad people who need to realize what they were doing wrong.

[Prof Jackson]

CumFilledCinnabon

Prof Jackson

I believe if that there is enough evidence to suggest that the individual will kill again, than the death penalty may be situationally appropriate. Although I would always suggest rehabilitation over punishment, there are always situations that demand a different approach.

If someone is in jail, I'd like to imagine the goal is to make them realize the fault of their action and for them to come out a better member of society. This is often not the case, jail is more often than not a place where the violent learn to be more violent and relatively nonviolent, non dangerous offenders (such as drug possessors and the like) learn to become violent. If someone cuts up their landlords into a thousand bits and put them into shoeboxes that they keep under their bed, they may be beyond help. At that point I'd consider the death penalty.

Cases are rarely ever that clear cut. Also, such a person is obviously mentally deficient in some way.

Also your ideas are ignoring the fundamental factors that drive people to crime in the first place and insisting that people who commit crimes are merely bad people who need to realize what they were doing wrong.

I've personally never considered being "mentally deficient" as a valid excuse for being treated any different when dealing with a murderer. I'm not saying they should have the death penalty for what people have done, but rather for what people will likely do again. While this is arguably punishment for something that has yet to happen, I'll take that over babysitting a murderer for the rest of their life or letting them walk free if there is a significant chance of them killing again. Of course, if this "mentally deficient" individual is within the realm of rehabilitation, than every opportunity should be presented for them to change. I'm not calling for the death penalty for everyone we would consider "crazy" who ever committed a murder.

Could you define what you would consider a "fundamental factor" that drives someone to commit a crime?

[LoosedUponThisWorld]

Prof Jackson

CumFilledCinnabon

Prof Jackson

I believe if that there is enough evidence to suggest that the individual will kill again, than the death penalty may be situationally appropriate. Although I would always suggest rehabilitation over punishment, there are always situations that demand a different approach.

If someone is in jail, I'd like to imagine the goal is to make them realize the fault of their action and for them to come out a better member of society. This is often not the case, jail is more often than not a place where the violent learn to be more violent and relatively nonviolent, non dangerous offenders (such as drug possessors and the like) learn to become violent. If someone cuts up their landlords into a thousand bits and put them into shoeboxes that they keep under their bed, they may be beyond help. At that point I'd consider the death penalty.

Cases are rarely ever that clear cut. Also, such a person is obviously mentally deficient in some way.

Also your ideas are ignoring the fundamental factors that drive people to crime in the first place and insisting that people who commit crimes are merely bad people who need to realize what they were doing wrong.

I've personally never considered being "mentally deficient" as a valid excuse for being treated any different when dealing with a murderer. I'm not saying they should have the death penalty for what people have done, but rather for what people will likely do again. While this is arguably punishment for something that has yet to happen, I'll take that over babysitting a murderer for the rest of their life or letting them walk free if there is a significant chance of them killing again. Of course, if this "mentally deficient" individual is within the realm of rehabilitation, than every opportunity should be presented for them to change. I'm not calling for the death penalty for everyone we would consider "crazy" who ever committed a murder.

Could you define what you would consider a "fundamental factor" that drives someone to commit a crime?

Well it's a good thing you're not a judge.

Poverty? Lack of social connections? Intimate, inescapable connections with the crime world?

All factors that the jail system as it exists today exacerbates? You can hardly say that the mission statement of the American jail system is for rehabilitation (especially since they've been privatized)

[Prof Jackson]

CumFilledCinnabon

Prof Jackson

CumFilledCinnabon

Prof Jackson

I believe if that there is enough evidence to suggest that the individual will kill again, than the death penalty may be situationally appropriate. Although I would always suggest rehabilitation over punishment, there are always situations that demand a different approach.

If someone is in jail, I'd like to imagine the goal is to make them realize the fault of their action and for them to come out a better member of society. This is often not the case, jail is more often than not a place where the violent learn to be more violent and relatively nonviolent, non dangerous offenders (such as drug possessors and the like) learn to become violent. If someone cuts up their landlords into a thousand bits and put them into shoeboxes that they keep under their bed, they may be beyond help. At that point I'd consider the death penalty.

Cases are rarely ever that clear cut. Also, such a person is obviously mentally deficient in some way.

Also your ideas are ignoring the fundamental factors that drive people to crime in the first place and insisting that people who commit crimes are merely bad people who need to realize what they were doing wrong.

I've personally never considered being "mentally deficient" as a valid excuse for being treated any different when dealing with a murderer. I'm not saying they should have the death penalty for what people have done, but rather for what people will likely do again. While this is arguably punishment for something that has yet to happen, I'll take that over babysitting a murderer for the rest of their life or letting them walk free if there is a significant chance of them killing again. Of course, if this "mentally deficient" individual is within the realm of rehabilitation, than every opportunity should be presented for them to change. I'm not calling for the death penalty for everyone we would consider "crazy" who ever committed a murder.

Could you define what you would consider a "fundamental factor" that drives someone to commit a crime?

Well it's a good thing you're not a judge.

Poverty? Lack of social connections? Intimate, inescapable connections with the crime world?

All factors that the jail system as it exists today exacerbates? You can hardly say that the mission statement of the American jail system is for rehabilitation (especially since they've been privatized)

It's almost like I'm not American, or speaking specifically about the American criminal justice system...

I said I'd like to imagine the goal of prison was rehabilitation over punishment, I realize that it is nowhere near that in the states. But there are countries out there there do focus on rehabilitation and have amazing results, Norway especially.

And I really don't think any of the factors you list above changes the laws. Yes, your situation may suck, but when you start saying that different people in different situations can basically murder someone without facing the same penalties as someone else, why even consider them laws?

[The Sky Does Not Bow]

duldol

The Sky Does Not Bow

Nobody, ever, has the right to kill another human being.

not even in self defense or war? kill or be killed?

No. Necessity may sometimes demand it, but no one has the right.

[Teutonic Witch]

Natural rights don't exist, so they are granted by a variety of polycentric entities, including tacit cultural values and formal legal pathways. Therefore, while certainly the idea that murder is wrong is the current cultural norm, it doesn't have to exist, and it's certainly possible to imagine situations where one can consider murder in any sense of the word, acceptable.

[Camera Stellata]

It's very easy to get hung about whether prison really deters or whether the death penalty really deters, but deterrent isn't, or at least ought not to be the sole purpose of the criminal justice system. Retribution is also a function of justice. As a society, wanting to inflict bad things upon bad people is not something to be ashamed of. I think that it's for the moral good of society that retribution in some form should take place.

Having said that, whilst I'm pro punishment, I'm ony luke warm on the death penalty itself, I could goeither way. I'm anxious about such irrevocable sentences where the justice system itself can be so fallible.

[black_wing_angel]

duldol

Aside from survival of the fittest and self defense,
moreover im talking capital punishment <-

I don't know much about the subject I was hoping that you guys would be as so kind as to help me get the ball rolling.

Opinions? Is the death penalty helpful? Justify the right to decide who lives and who dies in capital punishment.

Those people already chose who lives and who dies, themselves. Why should they be allowed to not follow their victims?

If someone kills me, I would like to think I won't have to wait at the gates very long, for my chance to kick their spectral testicles straight to Hell.

[duldol]

twisted yes, yes argue till the death shed blood until the last ed'er remains standing, splitting up one post into over 9,000 dissections, use guerilla posting tactics, fight to be heard

as if this was not my plan all along ninja

muahahahhahahahahhaha rofl

[plz dont pee on me]

oh duldol, hello!

[duldol]

Minchu Pinch u

oh duldol, hello!

burning_eyes wat r u doing here minchu

[plz dont pee on me]

duldol

Minchu Pinch u

oh duldol, hello!

burning_eyes wat r u doing here minchu

expanding my horizons rofl surprised to see you here

[halfcocked catstabator]

duldol

twisted yes, yes argue till the death shed blood until the last ed'er remains standing,

>assuming ed'e'rs are gonna fight
um they are far too cowardly for that

Quote:

splitting up one post into over 9,000 dissections, use guerilla posting tactics, fight to be heard

>assuming ed'ers know anything about tactics
most of them are just over-opinionated weeaboos

Quote:

as if this was not my plan all along ninja

>assuming u are a conniving chinese

Quote:

muahahahhahahahahhaha rofl

>diabolical laughter

[duldol]

Minchu Pinch u

duldol

Minchu Pinch u

oh duldol, hello!

burning_eyes wat r u doing here minchu

expanding my horizons rofl surprised to see you here

i c** here from time to time smile

[duldol]

DlCK CATSTY

duldol

twisted yes, yes argue till the death shed blood until the last ed'er remains standing,

>assuming ed'e'rs are gonna fight
um they are far too cowardly for that

how dare you accuse the beings of the doings of the be do be do doings the be? who is you are to say is the be but how the but is the you but be the do thing day? or night be?

DlCK CATSTY

Quote:

splitting up one post into over 9,000 dissections, use guerilla posting tactics, fight to be heard

>assuming ed'ers know anything about tactics
most of them are just over-opinionated weeaboos

have you not seen being have tupacs bathtub essential nutrients escaping how the do being say i is to do the you are the how do the be is that all you are lol pity; tears of hennessy.

DlCK CATSTY

Quote:

as if this was not my plan all along ninja

>assuming u are a conniving chinese

hey maple leafs crush under my tiny wrapped up chinese lady foot screw you the do beings the do syrup face

DlCK CATSTY

Quote:

muahahahhahahahahhaha rofl

>diabolical laughter

>better diabolical laughter