The Death Penalty

callen

polaris_x wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Your values. I'm okay with you having them. I get my back up when I'm called out on mine that are different than yours- in particular when I feel I am right.

there is no right or wrong here ... unless you claim that the DP serves a bigger purpose ...

this issue is about morality and what kind of society one wants to be part of ...

fore me - violence begets violence ... solving problems by violence only creates more problems ...

...and when society puts people to death it tells its society it is an option for solving ones problems. I dont want to be a part of a society where violence is sponsored...course we could go into MMA and Boxing..but another thread altogether.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

callen wrote:

We can revise and improve our system all we want but there wil always be inocent people put to death.....period..there is no grey area in this...SOOOOO are you okay with a few innocents being put to death? Yes or No?

You need to follow a little more closely. I've already said 'no'.

But I am okay with the Cheshire goofballs receiving the due fate. They are guilty- there is no doubt about it. Dr. Petit used to feel the same as you- likely engaging in a debate or two as well defending society's need to 'rise above the criminal'... but his perspective changed that brutal day.

If you are honest with yourself... your perspective would change too. Why must a crime directly affect you before you see the alternative position?

Remember... nobody wants these crimes to occur- they happen though. We are forced to respond. Your measure of response is different than mine, but it doesn't make one better than the other: they are just responses to something we both do not wish to be forced to respond to.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

callen wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

callen wrote:

Would rather have a hundred scumbags walk free than sacrificing one innocent person.

Then what do we say to a parent whose child was brutally murdered by one of these hundred scumbags who walked free?

The death penalty should be used sparingly, as an ultimate punishment, and only in cases where guilt is assured. Innocents are killed because the death penalty is used far too often.

I'd tell them two wrongs don't make a right.

Just that easy, huh?

And then would you pat them on the head and whisper, "There there now. There will be better days ahead. So be on your way. Oh yeah... and sorry for your loss."

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Hey, I understand you are a good person. Don't confuse me for not being a good person either. I'm strongly against war and torture as well.

But I am against cold-blooded, heartless murder. And I love our children. I feel our actions reflect our attitudes and when we sentence the murderers of our children to jail where they do all those fun things that their dismembered victims buried in the dirt can't... it displays a level of tolerance that I do not wish for.

I could compromise. If you don't have the stomach for executing people such as Steve Smith, who raped (killing in the process) a 6 month old child... then I could settle on a small, square, grey, brick cell with a hole in the floor, 2 sparse meals a day, and one book that cannot be exchanged.

Deal?

hey ... i hope you don't think that i am implying that those that support capital punishment are bad people in any way ... it's not my intent ... just simply why i don't believe in it ...

and it's not so much the stomach for it as again - i simply believe it is not the actions of a society that i strive to be part of ...

at the end of the day - we all want the same thing ... we don't want to see children raped or innocent people murdered ... how do we get there that doesn't compromise who we are as people!? ...

my aim here is not to convince people who have a different value system or morality on the subject ... i believe i stated right at the beginning that this debate is similar to abortion ... rarely do people switch and the motivation that drives people to their beliefs vary ...

so, although i respect and commend you on your compromise - your form of justice would be torture in my eyes and I couldn't in good faith agree to it ...

PJ_Soul

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

callen wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

Then what do we say to a parent whose child was brutally murdered by one of these hundred scumbags who walked free?

The death penalty should be used sparingly, as an ultimate punishment, and only in cases where guilt is assured. Innocents are killed because the death penalty is used far too often.

I'd tell them two wrongs don't make a right.

Just that easy, huh?

And then would you pat them on the head and whisper, "There there now. There will be better days ahead. So be on your way. Oh yeah... and sorry for your loss."

:roll: Why ya gotta be that way?
The two wrongs don't make a right philosophy when talking about capital punishment is a pretty developed idea, and most of those who oppose it outright hold that philosophy dear as a significant part of their opposition. Just because there is a pithy way of saying it doesn't mean its meaning is insignificant.

callen

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

callen wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

Would rather have a hundred scumbags walk free than sacrificing one innocent person.

Then what do we say to a parent whose child was brutally murdered by one of these hundred scumbags who walked free?

The death penalty should be used sparingly, as an ultimate punishment, and only in cases where guilt is assured. Innocents are killed because the death penalty is used far too often.
I'd tell them two wrongs don't make a right

Just that easy, huh?

And then would you pat them on the head and whisper, "There there now. There will be better days ahead. So be on your way. Oh yeah... and sorry for your loss."

No its pretty powerful statement...and as its been said in other posts, though it may seem like the right thing to do we can't allow victims that are temporarily irraional to dictate how society works. Now realize I'm also negating what I would want to do in event someone raped and murdered my child....I know that I'm rational now and if that happened would want to rip their hand and toe nails one at a time...

JimmyV

callen wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

callen wrote:

Would rather have a hundred scumbags walk free than sacrificing one innocent person.

Then what do we say to a parent whose child was brutally murdered by one of these hundred scumbags who walked free?

The death penalty should be used sparingly, as an ultimate punishment, and only in cases where guilt is assured. Innocents are killed because the death penalty is used far too often.

I'd tell them two wrongs don't make a right.

Really? A scumbag kills someone, a scumbag is set free, a scumbag kills again...and your response is two wrongs don't make a right?

First, I count three wrongs in that scenario, not two. Second, why is it OK to sacrifice the next innocent victim? Why is their life worth less than someone who is falsely convicted? I just don't understand that logic.

We should work to ensure that no innocents are ever sentenced to death but that should not prevent us from sentencing those who are guilty.

PJ_Soul

JimmyV wrote:

callen wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

Then what do we say to a parent whose child was brutally murdered by one of these hundred scumbags who walked free?

The death penalty should be used sparingly, as an ultimate punishment, and only in cases where guilt is assured. Innocents are killed because the death penalty is used far too often.

I'd tell them two wrongs don't make a right.

Really? A scumbag kills someone, a scumbag is set free, a scumbag kills again...and your response is two wrongs don't make a right?

First, I count three wrongs in that scenario, not two. Second, why is it OK to sacrifice the next innocent victim? Why is their life worth less than someone who is falsely convicted? I just don't understand that logic.

We should work to ensure that no innocents are ever sentenced to death but that should not prevent us from sentencing those who are guilty.

What next innocent victim? I think the assumption is that if they aren't put to death they are kept in maximum security prison for the rest of their lives.

callen

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

callen wrote:

We can revise and improve our system all we want but there wil always be inocent people put to death.....period..there is no grey area in this...SOOOOO are you okay with a few innocents being put to death? Yes or No?

You need to follow a little more closely. I've already said 'no'.

But I am okay with the Cheshire goofballs receiving the due fate. They are guilty- there is no doubt about it. Dr. Petit used to feel the same as you- likely engaging in a debate or two as well defending society's need to 'rise above the criminal'... but his perspective changed that brutal day.

If you are honest with yourself... your perspective would change too. Why must a crime directly affect you before you see the alternative position?

Remember... nobody wants these crimes to occur- they happen though. We are forced to respond. Your measure of response is different than mine, but it doesn't make one better than the other: they are just responses to something we both do not wish to be forced to respond to.

So....as inocent people are going to be killed...and we can't be 100% sure to avoid another innocent person from being put to death we should get rid of DP....so you are against the death penalty.

JimmyV

PJ_Soul wrote:

What next innocent victim? I think the assumption is that if they aren't put to death they are kept in maximum security prison for the rest of their lives.

The comment I responded to was:

callen wrote:

Would rather have a hundred scumbags walk free than sacrificing one innocent person.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Hey, I understand you are a good person. Don't confuse me for not being a good person either. I'm strongly against war and torture as well.

But I am against cold-blooded, heartless murder. And I love our children. I feel our actions reflect our attitudes and when we sentence the murderers of our children to jail where they do all those fun things that their dismembered victims buried in the dirt can't... it displays a level of tolerance that I do not wish for.

I could compromise. If you don't have the stomach for executing people such as Steve Smith, who raped (killing in the process) a 6 month old child... then I could settle on a small, square, grey, brick cell with a hole in the floor, 2 sparse meals a day, and one book that cannot be exchanged.

Deal?

hey ... i hope you don't think that i am implying that those that support capital punishment are bad people in any way ... it's not my intent ... just simply why i don't believe in it ...

and it's not so much the stomach for it as again - i simply believe it is not the actions of a society that i strive to be part of ...

at the end of the day - we all want the same thing ... we don't want to see children raped or innocent people murdered ... how do we get there that doesn't compromise who we are as people!? ...

my aim here is not to convince people who have a different value system or morality on the subject ... i believe i stated right at the beginning that this debate is similar to abortion ... rarely do people switch and the motivation that drives people to their beliefs vary ...

so, although i respect and commend you on your compromise - your form of justice would be torture in my eyes and I couldn't in good faith agree to it ...

Should we respond at all? Where exactly should the line be? Some contend that imprisonment in any capacity as torture. Does your line trump theirs as well? Should we all continue to move along the spectrum until the most 'lenient' (for lack of better word) is satisfied? Or should we move to the other end of the spectrum where everyone convicted of any murder- regardless of the very nature of it that I suggest needs to be considered- is sentenced to death?

It seems that in order for us to agree... perhaps I would have to settle on ping pong, sex dolls, internet, books, marriages and hot meals for Steve Smith then. No thanks. Justice was served- he was executed. It's too bad he felt the need to rape and kill an infant, but he's where he needs to be given what he did.

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Should we respond at all? Where exactly should the line be? Some contend that imprisonment in any capacity as torture. Does your line trump theirs as well? Should we all continue to move along the spectrum until the most 'lenient' (for lack of better word) is satisfied? Or should we move to the other end of the spectrum where everyone convicted of any murder- regardless of the very nature of it that I suggest needs to be considered- is sentenced to death?

It seems that in order for us to agree... perhaps I would have to settle on ping pong, sex dolls, internet, books, marriages and hot meals for Steve Smith then. No thanks. Justice was served- he was executed. It's too bad he felt the need to rape and kill an infant, but he's where he needs to be given what he did.

i don't dictate the line ... society should ... if you want to know where my line is ... it would not be where yours is ...

i'm not sure what the second part is coming from ... again - i don't anticipate us agreeing ... i don't think too many people will change their mind on this like i said for the reasons i've stated ... my goal was simply to express my position and why it is what it is ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

callen wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

callen wrote:

We can revise and improve our system all we want but there wil always be inocent people put to death.....period..there is no grey area in this...SOOOOO are you okay with a few innocents being put to death? Yes or No?

You need to follow a little more closely. I've already said 'no'.

But I am okay with the Cheshire goofballs receiving the due fate. They are guilty- there is no doubt about it. Dr. Petit used to feel the same as you- likely engaging in a debate or two as well defending society's need to 'rise above the criminal'... but his perspective changed that brutal day.

If you are honest with yourself... your perspective would change too. Why must a crime directly affect you before you see the alternative position?

Remember... nobody wants these crimes to occur- they happen though. We are forced to respond. Your measure of response is different than mine, but it doesn't make one better than the other: they are just responses to something we both do not wish to be forced to respond to.

So....as inocent people are going to be killed...and we can't be 100% sure to avoid another innocent person from being put to death we should get rid of DP....so you are against the death penalty.

Look, with all due respect in the event you are 10 years old, you are getting in the way of a good conversation (not to mention the fact that you are buggering up the quote feature attributing things said to the wrong people). If you make another post attempting to make me play the fool... I'll tell you where to go in very certain terms and a great thread will be locked.

We are 100% sure that the Cheshire murderers committed their crime. Remember they were found running from the house, high fiving each other after raping and lighting the Petit women on fire? Remember Dr. Petit survived his ordeal and confirmed the savagery that occurred inside the home? The criminals also pled guilty (how could they not?).

The mountain of evidence establishing their guilt combined with the extreme variety of their offence more than qualifies them for death and they need to go.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Should we respond at all? Where exactly should the line be? Some contend that imprisonment in any capacity as torture. Does your line trump theirs as well? Should we all continue to move along the spectrum until the most 'lenient' (for lack of better word) is satisfied? Or should we move to the other end of the spectrum where everyone convicted of any murder- regardless of the very nature of it that I suggest needs to be considered- is sentenced to death?

It seems that in order for us to agree... perhaps I would have to settle on ping pong, sex dolls, internet, books, marriages and hot meals for Steve Smith then. No thanks. Justice was served- he was executed. It's too bad he felt the need to rape and kill an infant, but he's where he needs to be given what he did.

i don't dictate the line ... society should ... if you want to know where my line is ... it would not be where yours is ...

i'm not sure what the second part is coming from ... again - i don't anticipate us agreeing ... i don't think too many people will change their mind on this like i said for the reasons i've stated ... my goal was simply to express my position and why it is what it is ...

Fair enough. Position respected.

PJ_Soul

Except that we shouldn't let our government kill its own citizens. Ever. Or use murder to punish murder. Makes no fucking sense.

PS - why is everyone completely ignoring me in this thread? Kind of strange.... I don't think I'm being an idiot or anything, so...

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul wrote:

:roll: Why ya gotta be that way?
The two wrongs don't make a right philosophy when talking about capital punishment is a pretty developed idea, and most of those who oppose it outright hold that philosophy dear as a significant part of their opposition. Just because there is a pithy way of saying it doesn't mean its meaning is insignificant.

I go that way sometimes. Sorry.

I respect the message- I didn't care much for the delivery.

lukin2006

makes no sense to me keeping the good paul bernardo breathing or the good colonel ... hell if we'd just taken care of bernardo he wouldn't be here to bitch about being moved to Quebec ... hell those 3 from Oklahoma are a waste of skin and are using good resources (called air).

chadwick

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=216483
example of monster like behavior:
gouging out the boy's eyes for the corneas & the likelihood of selling them on the organ harvesting black market in china. this is out of order. i guess a woman done this vile act. whoever done this despicable act & those involved in harvesting organs (if caught) are up to their eyebrows in deep shit; i don't think china plays games.

carry on

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul wrote:

Except that we shouldn't let our government kill its own citizens. Ever. Or use murder to punish murder. Makes no fucking sense.

PS - why is everyone completely ignoring me in this thread? Kind of strange.... I don't think I'm being an idiot or anything, so...

It makes perfect sense: let the punishment fit the crime. Why would we sentence serial murderers the same as we sentence drug smugglers?

In Canada, pedophiles get less time than drug dealers. :fp:

Ridiculous.

PJ_Soul

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Except that we shouldn't let our government kill its own citizens. Ever. Or use murder to punish murder. Makes no fucking sense.

PS - why is everyone completely ignoring me in this thread? Kind of strange.... I don't think I'm being an idiot or anything, so...

It makes perfect sense: let the punishment fit the crime. Why would we sentence serial murderers the same as we sentence drug smugglers?

In Canada, pedophiles get less time than drug dealers. :fp:

Ridiculous.

Oh, well please don't get me started on prison terms in Canada! But that is a whole other issue.

I think it makes no sense because punishing murder by committing murder puts the punisher on the same level as the punished. It sends a VERY bad message, and is morally inept.