The Death Penalty and other matters of Justice 251 replies

Please wait...

Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

136,505 XP

15th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#21 15 years ago
It exists because people are not satisfied with anything short of condemning wrongdoers to hell. As the great number of non-death-penalty contries prove, it is not necessary at all.

Logic is not flawed only your interpretation of it. Your interpretation of others motives is also limited to your perspective all of which is of course subjective.

The use of the Death Penalty is irrelevant...its application is more pertinent. One might desire to seperate their emotional self from the discussion of Dealth Penalty politics to find the objective POV

Society does not have to house and clothes persistent deviants if it does not wish to. This is not irrelevant. Its the will of the people.

However deviants might be an untapped resourse concerning production of some items...this is already employed in prisons..

The pivotal hinge of the death penalty lies upon preventing not only repeat offenders but like offenders in the future.

What is undeniably clear. Good and evil have no likeness and can not co-exist. One has to be removed. If evil is allowed to persist or even exisit it's very presence influences further death and destruction.

Containment is costly. Elimination is efficient and a deterant




aeroSPACE_engineer

Something less arrogant

50 XP

20th October 2005

0 Uploads

1,050 Posts

0 Threads

#22 15 years ago

What is it with you people and rights? Humans have no rights. No right to live. No right to operate nuclear power stations. Most importantly, no right to take another humans life, whatever the circumstances. Murder means that it was your intention to kill someone. So there is the guy who goes out and randomly picks off bystanders with a rifle. Then there is the guy who operates the lethal injection. Both are murderers, neither had any right to take another humans life. A soldier in a war on the other hand, is a murderer when he kills those who cannot fight him (unarmed) or those who do not wish to harm him (innocent civilians and enemies who have surrendered). If you kill someone in self-defence, you are just a killer. You have no right to do it, but certainly in the defence of others, no one can complain. Unless there was an obvious alternative you were aware of, that didn't involve killing.




Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

136,505 XP

15th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#23 15 years ago

Humans have an innate sense justice and morality. Existence is a state of being and there fore a right to live.

Intresting enough, if one believes in a creation then the right to exist is inherited. There is no right to kill under this ideal

If one believes in evolution the right is to survive and therefore death penalty or no everyone has right to kill. Killing would simple be a process of an animalistic instinctual society millions of years old.




aeroSPACE_engineer

Something less arrogant

50 XP

20th October 2005

0 Uploads

1,050 Posts

0 Threads

#24 15 years ago

However even by creation, we have failed to meet God's standards, to uphold our end of the bargain if you will, and so have forfeited the right to live. Our existence is not about what we have rights to do, as we have forfeited any and all of those, but what we have no right to do. Morality we all have an innate sense of. Some people with training are able to ignore it. Justice is not left up to us, it is not for us to deal in. Since we have the option to imprison anyone and everyone, we cannot justify killing anyone because of criminal behaviour, in order to protect ourselves. And since justice is not for us to deal out, we have no right to deal it out.

Humans do not forfeit any right to life by murdering someone else, they take the other persons life and thus, they must expect to be judged.




Flash525

The Carbon Comrade

50 XP

13th July 2004

0 Uploads

15,103 Posts

0 Threads

#25 15 years ago

I Voted: Death Penalty for serious crimes... My reason for doing so has been said before in various other threads scattered about the forums. However, for the purpose of this thread. Those that do a serious enough crime (with significant proof of them doing it) - in these cases, rape, murder, and such like should be death with by death. If one of these people is simply locked away, then they somehow manage to escape of have contacts on the outside, more crime could then be done.

Edit: Saying we are no better for taking a criminals life is bollocks. We are giving them what they deserve and stopping them from harming anyone else.




Psychokenesis

I'm too cool to Post

136,505 XP

15th October 2003

0 Uploads

13,428 Posts

0 Threads

#26 15 years ago

I must contest As per scripture the right is that of the nations. God has put us in the hand of the superior authorities. They exist by his virtue alone...

Otherwise we're looking at chaos and anarchy.

Frankly I don't comprehend...If not the right society then whose.

If one make takes will of another's away and continues to do so...is locked up and continues to do so...

How are you,we, to protect the innocent...Inncense is the only matter that is relevant.

As some so poeticly state...kill'em an let god sort them out...since it is clearly evident that he will.

If by virtue of evolution...Kill'em any way because assuredly it won't matter whether the live or die.

I myself can not handle the burden of life of death in my hands and chose to be neutral




adamma

Want some Dope,I dont have it

50 XP

7th December 2005

0 Uploads

589 Posts

0 Threads

#27 15 years ago

Every man who kills another,if not affectly,must die. Everythink else is a punishment for the Victim and their Families. I dont understnd people which say its unmoralic to do the Death penalty, but i guess they change theyr minds if they are personally involved. For example what would you do if your daughter get rapped and killed and you know who was the murder. Guess of it in a logic way,if you kill them,they wont cost money in jail,they wont spread themselfs by having childrens,and the most important argument,they wont never ever kill and rape again?




Flash525

The Carbon Comrade

50 XP

13th July 2004

0 Uploads

15,103 Posts

0 Threads

#28 15 years ago
adammaEvery man who kills another,if not affectly,must die.[/quote]:nodding:
adammaI dont understnd people which say its unmoralic to do the Death penalty, but i guess they change theyr minds if they are personally involved. For example what would you do if your daughter get rapped and killed and you know who was the murder.
It may be about religion!? Some religions dispise the death penalty. [quote=adamma]Guess of it in a logic way,if you kill them,they wont cost money in jail,they wont spread themselfs by having childrens,and the most important argument,they wont never ever kill and rape again?

What I have been pointing at with my lasts few posts. If they are ridden of, they cannot strike again.




Emperor Benedictine

You can't fire me, I quit

55 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,437 Posts

0 Threads

#29 15 years ago
SaquistLogic is not flawed only your interpretation of it.[/quote]I refer to your argument that the criminal "willingly accepts the consequences" when they commit the crime. That is irrelevent flawed or not.
One might desire to seperate their emotional self from the discussion of Dealth Penalty politics to find the objective POV
My position has nothing to do with emotions.
Society does not have to house and clothes persistent deviants if it does not wish to. This is not irrelevant. Its the will of the people.
People do not get to vote on individual issues such as these. A government chooses for them, and they may base their decision on what they perceive the will of the people to be. And not all countries have it, a very significant number of countries have abolished the death penalty altogether.
The pivotal hinge of the death penalty lies upon preventing not only repeat offenders but like offenders in the future.
At best it is unneccesary killing. You could achieve the same through the prison systems.
What is undeniably clear. Good and evil have no likeness and can not co-exist. One has to be removed. If evil is allowed to persist or even exisit it's very presence influences further death and destruction.
So do countries without the death penalty have higher crime rates than those with it? I really doubt it.
As some so poeticly state...kill'em an let god sort them out...since it is clearly evident that he will.
People are just a little impatient to see that happen.[quote=SupaStarAsh]Those that do a serious enough crime (with significant proof of them doing it) - in these cases, rape, murder, and such like should be death with by death. If one of these people is simply locked away, then they somehow manage to escape of have contacts on the outside, more crime could then be done.

I think it worth the risk to avoid going down the road of executing criminals.




Guns4Hire

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

22nd September 2002

0 Uploads

15,559 Posts

0 Threads

#30 15 years ago
At best it is unneccesary killing. You could achieve the same through the prison systems.

Is that a joke? Ok, I'll laugh. HAHAHAHA.

So do countries without the death penalty have higher crime rates than those with it?

You can't compare it, speaking about USA we have a lot different crime than another Country. Comparing us is foolish. LIVE here and see it or your opinion does not mean squat when talking about USA.

You passive rosey colored glass wearing people just really have no clue when it comes to this subject. I don't know wheather you are against it to appeal to others or naturally, somehow feel a cold blooded killer should live a decent life while the victim is dead and families ruined. It boggles the mind to even read some of the replies. Other dude hit the nail on the head. If ever experience and are on the receiving end of a violent crime your rosey fantasy world tune will change faster than you will ever believe.

Cold blooded killers are nothing but filthy rabbid animals and deserve to be treated like one.