|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:41 pm
Want to have a serious discussion? What do you guys think of the death penalty? You think we should have it or should we abolish it?
My view: I'm not really sure. I think personally in a few extreme cases that we should use it, and once sentanced I think it should be carried out. This 14 years of appeals business is a waste of time and money. But I also think that making someone sit in prison for the rest of their life and think about what they have done may or may not be effective for certain people. Some men or women may realize what they have done is wrong but others will never find remorse and will sit in their cell thinking that they have no reason to be in there.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 1:53 am
I think it's a necessary legal tool. Obviously it shouldn't be used rashly or excessively, but in certain cases I think it's the only just thing to do. I mean, I KNOW this is a vast oversimplification, and not an entirely fair assessment, but there's just a part of me that goes "So this guy killed 5 people, and as punishment we're going to feed and house him and make him think about what he's done?"
Also, as somebody who studied Dahmer, you can see that even if the system refuses to execute a person, it doesn't mean that nobody in prison will decide to carry out some vigilante style justice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:33 am
In all honesty I say, more death. For excessive criminal cases in example, homicide 1, homicide 2, rape, string arsony, laundering, racketeering and the list could go on for a couple pages. But you get the point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:35 am
Oooo ooo, better idea... Have an untamperable bomb strapped to every inmates chest. Also, underground trigger wires all around the fence.... So when they try to escape.... BOOM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 8:19 am
Well i'm all for it, but I agree with everyone - it should only be used in extreme cases, like murder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 8:53 am
Volvy I think it's a necessary legal tool. Obviously it shouldn't be used rashly or excessively, but in certain cases I think it's the only just thing to do. I mean, I KNOW this is a vast oversimplification, and not an entirely fair assessment, but there's just a part of me that goes "So this guy killed 5 people, and as punishment we're going to feed and house him and make him think about what he's done?" Also, as somebody who studied Dahmer, you can see that even if the system refuses to execute a person, it doesn't mean that nobody in prison will decide to carry out some vigilante style justice. I pretty much agree with this, especially with those who don't show any remorse or are too unstable and unfit to function within society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrior of Metal Vice Captain
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:44 am
Life sentences are stupid. Prisons are called correctional facilities. The main purpose of them is to get people back into society. When someone has done some of the things people on death row have done, they're never gonna be able to go back into society. And for those who say it, and they all do, "I found Christ in here, I'm changed." Good for you, but that's between you and Him, and now its time to meet Him.
I also believe that execution should be public. If you really want them to serve as a deterrent, take them down to the center of the town, put them in the gallows, read of their crimes, and let 'em hang. See if people start thinking twice then. Because the death penalty in the first place is supposed to be a deterrent for crime, and the way they do it now, it doesn't really do that very well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:02 am
I also agree with most of the things that have already been said. The death penalty should be made legal in a lot more countries to punish those who've committed hideous crimes.
I don't know if you've heard of this (you in the USA I mean), about what happened in Austria. An underground cell was discovered under an old couple's house some weeks ago. The cell contained a middle-aged woman and a bunch of her children. The woman was the old man's daughter, kept in captivity underground for over two decades, and the children were the result of the old man raping his daughter over and over again. The old man's wife wasn't aware of her husband's activities and thought their daughter had run away from home years ago. The old man was incarcerated for life. I think the man should have been killed instead for what he'd done.
Also, I think if criminals are going to be sentenced for life, it should actually mean for life and not for a few years. I mean the life sentence here is something between 12-15 years, that's not a lifetime if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Digital Malevolence Vice Captain
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:07 am
Pirate Cadaver In all honesty I say, more death. For excessive criminal cases in example, homicide 1, homicide 2, rape, string arsony, laundering, racketeering and the list could go on for a couple pages. But you get the point. I agree with this.^ I think there should be more of this, the population is too big, we need to cut it down...I also support more serial killings. On another side, how many people know of the West Memphis Three? They were wrongfully acsused of murder some eight year olds because the way they dressed and they listen to Metal. I played a benifit show on friday to raise money for their upcoming trial. If you want to learn more, go here. X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:08 am
Lol, I'm against it. I say we should make all the inmates that are supposed to get it go to war. They won't have a problem killing, won't need as much training, and we can of course figure out ways to keep them under control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:25 am
Warrior of Metal I also believe that execution should be public. If you really want them to serve as a deterrent, take them down to the center of the town, put them in the gallows, read of their crimes, and let 'em hang. See if people start thinking twice then. Because the death penalty in the first place is supposed to be a deterrent for crime, and the way they do it now, it doesn't really do that very well. They did it in the the 1800s and before, why stop? Because it is inhumane and gruesome? So were their crimes. I think we baby the prisoners to much. At my school, it costs $2.50 for lunch. I have a friend whose mother works for a prison and she refuses to give her daughter lunch money because inmates get far more food for the same price, although I forget the exact meal that they get. Inmates get health care that is free for them, paid by taxpayers. There are people living on the streets and in poverty that could use free health care, but inmates and the scum of society seem to rank higher on the social ladder. Wanna go to college? Commit a crime that will get you locked up for 5+ years. Some prisons have a college program. There are kids I know who are trying to save for college, get scholarships, get loans, and some can't find a way to pay for college; inmates just need go to jail and express an interest in college to get in. Back to the death penalty. I think it is kinda funny they more inmates die on death row than actually being executed. I think if you are sentenced to death, it shouldn't be death by natural causes or suicide, it should be by lethal injection, firing squad, hanging, stoning, decapitation, gas chamber, really anything that will get the job done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:27 pm
My Hollow This 14 years of appeals business is a waste of time and money. What about all these death row inmates who got acquitted now that there's DNA, and possibly other new evidence? If it weren't for all the appeals they would've likely been killed for something they didn't do, not to mention that there's more than likely people who have been executed for stuff they never did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:21 pm
Gravechylde My Hollow This 14 years of appeals business is a waste of time and money. What about all these death row inmates who got acquitted now that there's DNA, and possibly other new evidence? If it weren't for all the appeals they would've likely been killed for something they didn't do, not to mention that there's more than likely people who have been executed for stuff they never did. Indeed, but what I'm saying is that if the crime is indeed bad enough and evidence is strong enough they should get the death penalty. But the others should get life in prison. @Volvy: Oh indeed, but Dahmer should have rotted in prison. He wanted to die, he knew what he had done was wrong and he didn't want to live with himself. He deserved to spend the rest of his life in a jail cell thinking about all the men he killed, mutilated, dismembered, and ate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:33 pm
My Hollow Gravechylde My Hollow This 14 years of appeals business is a waste of time and money. What about all these death row inmates who got acquitted now that there's DNA, and possibly other new evidence? If it weren't for all the appeals they would've likely been killed for something they didn't do, not to mention that there's more than likely people who have been executed for stuff they never did. Indeed, but what I'm saying is that if the crime is indeed bad enough and evidence is strong enough they should get the death penalty. But the others should get life in prison. @Volvy: Oh indeed, but Dahmer should have rotted in prison. He wanted to die, he knew what he had done was wrong and he didn't want to live with himself. He deserved to spend the rest of his life in a jail cell thinking about all the men he killed, mutilated, dismembered, and ate. The evidence against these people was strong enough to get them convicted and the crime was bad enough for them to get the death sentence, but it turned out that they didn't actually do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:13 pm
Gravechylde My Hollow Gravechylde My Hollow This 14 years of appeals business is a waste of time and money. What about all these death row inmates who got acquitted now that there's DNA, and possibly other new evidence? If it weren't for all the appeals they would've likely been killed for something they didn't do, not to mention that there's more than likely people who have been executed for stuff they never did. Indeed, but what I'm saying is that if the crime is indeed bad enough and evidence is strong enough they should get the death penalty. But the others should get life in prison. @Volvy: Oh indeed, but Dahmer should have rotted in prison. He wanted to die, he knew what he had done was wrong and he didn't want to live with himself. He deserved to spend the rest of his life in a jail cell thinking about all the men he killed, mutilated, dismembered, and ate. The evidence against these people was strong enough to get them convicted and the crime was bad enough for them to get the death sentence, but it turned out that they didn't actually do it. Which is why I'm saying that the penalty should be used only in extreme cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
