|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 11:02 pm
We have debate in school about the topic "Death Penalty" so I want some facts and prepositions about the case... Don't forget to answer the poll!!
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:02 am
In my opinion: Say there's a guy that rapes a ten year old girl. He goes to prison and gets out. He rapes another ten year old girl, he goes to prison. Hopefully he doesn't get out again.
With the death penalty? That same rapist does it once and can never do it again, assuming he gets caught.
OR
He never does it in the first place. He's too afraid of death.
The thing is, if you wrongly convict someone, it's pretty damn harsh on the innocent guy who just killed, y'know? And two wrongs don't make a right and thou shalt not kill.
But really, I think it's just ridiculous to let 'murderer' turn into 'serial killer' when you can, in some cases, prevent it from happening in the first place.
But hey, what do I know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 3:31 pm
I agree with Cryingthroughgreyeyes. It's harsh no matter who you are, and especially if you're innocent, but then think of the people who break out of jail who obviously haven't learned their lesson. I think there are some people who just need to go, you know? There are some pretty nasty people out there who have no concept of forgiveness or compassion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:48 am
i agree with some points on this but i must ask you sayer of truth who truly defines right and wrong in this small and fragile world? what if you are used to things in one then you go to a nouther country or continent and find things that you were wrong are ok in that nation. who can truly say what is good and evil becuase those are just illusions to keep you in your place like catle by the big man upstairs (no not a deity just the goverment)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:32 am
we justify death by saying "they did a horrible crime! the state charged them based on good evidence, they had a fair trial and were convicted by a jury of their peers!" guess what? even when that happens, people can STILL be innocent! in fact it happens far too often. The Innocence Project, begun by law students in Illinois, has freed dozens upon dozens of men CONVICTED of capital crimes and sitting on death row, just by making sure they got to introduce DNA evidence! the DNA proved these men could not have done the crimes. so instead of killing them, they were let go. some had even confessed, but could not possible have done the crime. so just because somebody has been convicted does NOT mean you should kill them, since they could still be INNOCENT! http://www.innocenceproject.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:03 pm
I'm against capital punishment. It's government sanctioned murder. Prison is supposed to be about rehabilitation but a death penalty it admitting right away that it's not possible and thus the system is giving up without trying.
Then there is the fact that it takes years for the sentence to be carried out. There is also all the appeals to be gone through. In the end it costs more than life imprisonment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:35 pm
dreams into nights yami i agree with some points on this but i must ask you sayer of truth who truly defines right and wrong in this small and fragile world? what if you are used to things in one then you go to a nouther country or continent and find things that you were wrong are ok in that nation. who can truly say what is good and evil becuase those are just illusions to keep you in your place like catle by the big man upstairs (no not a deity just the goverment) Well anyone can certainly say what's good or evil in their opinion, but I'm not gonna get into that (I made a discussion about this on another thread.) Quite frankly, I don't see how you can take a rapist/murderer and risk the possibility of them escaping and commiting that crime again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:49 pm
Sayer of the Truth dreams into nights yami i agree with some points on this but i must ask you sayer of truth who truly defines right and wrong in this small and fragile world? what if you are used to things in one then you go to a nouther country or continent and find things that you were wrong are ok in that nation. who can truly say what is good and evil becuase those are just illusions to keep you in your place like catle by the big man upstairs (no not a deity just the goverment) Well anyone can certainly say what's good or evil in their opinion, but I'm not gonna get into that (I made a discussion about this on another thread.) Quite frankly, I don't see how you can take a rapist/murderer and risk the possibility of them escaping and commiting that crime again. But who is to say that it is a crime. The ideas of right and wrong are only social norms passed from generation to generation. It is only considered a crime because society said so long ago. However much of what they said long ago is no longer relevant. So who's to say what they called crimes should still be considered so?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:47 pm
first i want you to know that i did not answer the pole because.......
In my oppinion the death penalty is too simple for mass mrderers, i mean think about this, if you killed someone, would you rather spend a life in prision, getting beat, rapped and what not, living in solitude, knowing what yuou've done, and living with it, or die, and be rid of it all, BUT at the same time, there are some people who would be the god of prison, so they desrve to die, BUt yet again, or justice system is so flawed, that an innocent person could be killed, so i did not vote......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:24 pm
KaguraOfTheWind Sayer of the Truth dreams into nights yami i agree with some points on this but i must ask you sayer of truth who truly defines right and wrong in this small and fragile world? what if you are used to things in one then you go to a nouther country or continent and find things that you were wrong are ok in that nation. who can truly say what is good and evil becuase those are just illusions to keep you in your place like catle by the big man upstairs (no not a deity just the goverment) Well anyone can certainly say what's good or evil in their opinion, but I'm not gonna get into that (I made a discussion about this on another thread.) Quite frankly, I don't see how you can take a rapist/murderer and risk the possibility of them escaping and commiting that crime again. But who is to say that it is a crime. The ideas of right and wrong are only social norms passed from generation to generation. It is only considered a crime because society said so long ago. However much of what they said long ago is no longer relevant. So who's to say what they called crimes should still be considered so? On the contrary, I think some of what they said does have a lot of relevancy. It's not too different from the saying, "those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it," or whatever it is. Whatever you want to call it..."crime," "offense," "misdeed"...it's something that hurts and/or causes harm to another human being, and society doesn't tolerate that kind of thing. Granted, I think a lot of people have gone to jail for stupid reasons before, but I'm talking about the potentially dangerous people who are capable of committing the same crime over and over again, people who are beyond help and who have no moral value. Heck, some would even argue that death is a release. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't want to spend the remainder of their lives in a cramped, dirty cell without seeing the light of day for the rest of their lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:48 pm
Cryingthroughgreyeyes In my opinion: Say there's a guy that rapes a ten year old girl. He goes to prison and gets out. He rapes another ten year old girl, he goes to prison. Hopefully he doesn't get out again.
With the death penalty? That same rapist does it once and can never do it again, assuming he gets caught.
OR
He never does it in the first place. He's too afraid of death.
The thing is, if you wrongly convict someone, it's pretty damn harsh on the innocent guy who just killed, y'know? And two wrongs don't make a right and thou shalt not kill.
But really, I think it's just ridiculous to let 'murderer' turn into 'serial killer' when you can, in some cases, prevent it from happening in the first place.
But hey, what do I know? Well assuming you have any faith in our modern justice system, you would think they get the right guy for such a bread crumb trail as a raipe (DNA evidence is EVERYWHERE0 But it all depeneds, the death penalty should only be used in extreme cases, and even in those extreme cases, it should be quick and human, if not a little bit painful. You can't have someone sitting there for 5 minutes and expect the spectators not feel bad about it (there is a line for everything).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 12:13 pm
Cosmic Kirby Cryingthroughgreyeyes In my opinion: Say there's a guy that rapes a ten year old girl. He goes to prison and gets out. He rapes another ten year old girl, he goes to prison. Hopefully he doesn't get out again.
With the death penalty? That same rapist does it once and can never do it again, assuming he gets caught.
OR
He never does it in the first place. He's too afraid of death.
The thing is, if you wrongly convict someone, it's pretty damn harsh on the innocent guy who just killed, y'know? And two wrongs don't make a right and thou shalt not kill.
But really, I think it's just ridiculous to let 'murderer' turn into 'serial killer' when you can, in some cases, prevent it from happening in the first place.
But hey, what do I know? Well assuming you have any faith in our modern justice system, you would think they get the right guy for such a bread crumb trail as a raipe (DNA evidence is EVERYWHERE0 But it all depeneds, the death penalty should only be used in extreme cases, and even in those extreme cases, it should be quick and human, if not a little bit painful. You can't have someone sitting there for 5 minutes and expect the spectators not feel bad about it (there is a line for everything).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:53 pm
The death penalty should be reserved for those who are serial killers and repeat-offender child rapists to which there is plenty of evidence and history record to back it up. Quite personally, I'd much rather see all of the afore mentioned thrown onto a remote island with nothing but weapons and PCP twisted But seriously, I wouldn't want to put my family's life in jeapordy because some people are too soft to face reality. And my definition of a crime? Anything that is done on purpose to harm or kill another person, harm to include physical (spousal abuse, rape, etc), financial (stealing) and mental (such as brainwashing a woman to stay in a highly abusive relationship).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 4:18 am
I'm putting in my own opinion - however, I may not look at this same thread again so if you would like to debate with me ro tell em sumthing I will get it a lot easier (and actually see it most likely) if I get PMed or commented.
Ok - I am pro death penalty.
Up here - where I live - There have been cases in which there could be no other person that did it. DNA evidence proves it even.
I read the newspaper frequently.
There where two articles in two different newspapers on the same day about two different child molesters.
One of them was being released from jail - on good behavior
and the other was being charged.
The first guy was a repeat offender - proved by dna testing and everything.
The second guy - the mother of the child came home and saw him comming out of the kid's bedroom with blood and seman on his underware.
Oh and both of these kids - where less than 5 years old...in fact - they where less then 3 year old.
I'm sorry if you think that my opnion is a bad one - or wrong...but I think that if anyone messes with a kid like that or rapes someone - they should be killed.
I don't think that being let out for good behavior is acceptable.
What these men did was VERY VERY wrong.
And it was proven - with nothign saying they didn't do it. Even DNA said they did it.
Now if you are wondering why the 2nd guy was in the house and no one was hoem btu the kid - the guy had been a friend of the mother and father and had falling onto hard times. So they let him sleep on the couch for a while until he found a job basically. Well They had to go do sumthing one night and left him to make sure their baby was alright.
Well the mother came home and that's what she saw.
The guy's lawyer said that he was under the influence of drugs and alchole and blamed it on the guys childhood...I'm sorry if you have mental issues, or are a drugg addict or alcoholic - that doesn't excuse you from the law. You still did it. You still ruined that child's life before they could even tell you no.
-That is my rant-
Thank you for listening
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 10:31 pm
I'm not always for the death penalty. I am, however, very much for bringing back less... humane forms of punishment. By this I mean "cruel and unusual" punishment.
Back in the old days, if a guy stole a horse, he'd have a piece of an ear (or sometimes a whole finger) cut off as punishment. I think this is a good idea. Sure, it's a little bit... well, freaky, but it sure as hell gets the job done.
As far as justice is concerned, the old method of "an eye for an eye" really seems appropriate. Although I believe it is important for individuals to forgive and forget, I believe that the government should punish those who require it.
For various felonies and petty crimes, a "pound of flesh" can be a great solution. As an example, I'll use the ***** case.
The names henceforth are ficticious and in no way represent real persons.
John is a *****. Say John likes to rape small children, but he gets caught with sufficient evidence proving he's guilty (usually when a sex-offender is caught, there is MORE than enough evidence). Under the new method of justice, his genitals would be cut off, and he'd be sentenced as normal. This way, he will have less of an incentive to rape children in the future (if he ever is released from prison).
Petty crimes would have a less drastic punishment (perhaps a brand on the arm or shoulder--and yes, I mean 'brand' as in a hot cattle-brand).
For murder the judgement is simple. An eye for an eye. Accidental anslaughter, etc, would usually not involve the death penalty, and so prison time would be most effective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
