|
-
I'll make my views very clear and short..
Its wrong in my opinion to take a persons life so I believe its just as wrong for us to take the murders life... Life in jail is a much more painful punishment. Its not up to us to decide who lives and who doesn't.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokersvirus
Sorry to say, but god doesnt play a part in wether a man kills or not, if he did he wouldnt have given us free will in the first place.
If a man kills someone else they need to be put to death. Why should they be allowed to live? Look back at some of America's most screwed up killers, Ted Bundy, jeffrey dahmer, etc etc. There would have been riots out the ass if they were not put to death. Hell, would have been riots here in Indiana since thats where Bundy was put to death.
I a course have heard of these people but I had to goolge exactly what they did . I will not forget what I read about Jefferey Dahmar that was repulsive and Distributing but a person is a person none the less . Nobody has the right to say who will live and who dies no matter what they do . LOCK them up but you should not kill them . Honestly I do not think I can get that stuff out of my head . I think I would had been better off not reading up on that . The reason why I googled it was to see if there was a connection to him being molested or something as a child all they had was that his parents divorced . My parents are divorced and I will never do any such thing . I am truly sick to the stomach of what I have read .
-
I think the opionion that its an absolute wrong to end a persons life is a little backwards.The majority of religions followers belong to religions with violent histories and plenty of exceptions for when its ok to execute your enemies.
The idea that there is no proper time to kill someone is both unnatural and frightening absurd.
All life competes in a life and death struggle. Its the natural order of things. You cant blame a wolf for eating a rabbit. But at some point either explained by your religion or evolution, mankind learned the ability to develop societies. These societies need laws to function. And saying you cant kill people is a reasonable law. Its still something that will happen, but now from a legal and moral standpoint, you should not kill people.
You take all that away, and examine someone who breaks into a home an commits murder, and we are no longer dealing with philosophy or morals. We are back to basics, our safety is threatened and its now a matter of survival. Do we provide every meal for a murderer until the day they die? Do we take out limited prison space and release other potentially dangerous criminals early to make room for this life long burden on society?
Its not immoral or unatural to remove this parasite from existence. Its a defense mechanism for a society and its the natural order of things.
-
I should point out that I think in the sense of self defense as in WAR or a attacker I find it to be a exception to kill someone . The reason why I think it is wrong to kill these people is they have done what they did . They are not in the act of doing it now . They are not hurting anyone at the moment . Put them away from anyone who they can hurt . It is over , it is a sad fact that for the world to go around we have to let the pain come . It is a true one though a lot of people get hurt in the progression of the world. But there is no need to hurt one more person because they hurt someone else .
-
Here is 4 reasons why capital punishment is wrong, and no I did not write this..
1. WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 35 years in the U.S., 130 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. So, as long as the death penalty is in place, you are pretty much GUARANTEED to occasionally execute an innocent person.
Really, that should be reason enough for most people to oppose it. If you need more, read on:
2. EXPENSE: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.
3. DETERRENCE: The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’
4. EASY WAY OUT: There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.” Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaykub
Here is 4 reasons why capital punishment is wrong, and no I did not write this..
2. EXPENSE: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.
3. DETERRENCE: The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’
"
I find it interesting how these people have to have trials and such to decide if the person should get the death penalty . But then other people go ...Nope kill him he killed someone else . I am sure that these trials are to see if the person is psychologically stable , the evidence and such . But then these other people say screw all that if he killed someone kill that guy . I seems kinda evil to think like that if you ask me .
-
1. Wrongful Convictions there is no argument for that. But the thing is... if police did their jobs and collected all the evidence they needed to go to trail why was he pointed out? sound likeSaying he or she was set up to take the fall.
2. Expense it only gets expensive due to the fact those worthless pieces of crap can appeal, and appeal and appeal, and it cost about 1,000 bucks per inmate per day to house, in jail and prison, thats too much for a tax payer right there.
3.Deterrence was the name of the game, but since its still occurring its used as a way to give justice to the family of the victim. Which makes sense to me
4.Easy way out not really, To some murderers it might be hell on earth in prison, but to most they dont care they have worked up from small time crime to felonies so prison isnt anything. KSM is different because he wanted to inspire more people to die in his name and religion, he doesnt care about the fact he help killed innocent people he just wants to be the reason more americans die.
Other:
You are right, its about being psychologically stable to go stand trail, if not an expert makes a recommendation on what should happen and the judge makes the final call.
and No the jury doesnt just go in and say "he killed someone lets fry his ass." Once they find a person guilt of murder or what not they have to follow a guideline of circumstances, which pretty much lay out was the crime brutal or not, after they go down this guideline and its brutal they can recommend the death penalty, if not the person gets life in prison.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokersvirus
Those who kill need to die,
I am not talking about the jury I am talking about you and so many other people on the world . Anybody who kills someone is mentally unstable . Except in the case of self defense . I think that those who have killed for that reason probably still suffer from regret . To take a life takes more then most people have . I have gotten into some serious fights , I really feel no regret fro any time I have hurt someone . But I do believe I would suffer greatly if I ever killed anyone for any reason .
Other then that all you did up there was explain better what jacob was already saying . Telling us why it cost so much does not change that is cost soo much . Honestly thought price of keeping them in jail is probably in the long run the same or maybe a little more .
-
Why would people need to feel regret for killing in self defense? If you have to kill someone to save your own life, there is no reason to feel bad. It came down to simple choice of you or me. You value your life so you did what you had to to stay alive.
If violence was none existant executions wouldnt be need but since it is, we, the US, cant back down. If the US stopped killing murderers it would be seen as a weakness so someone kills someone and gets life imprisonment with no parole, 3 meals a day, warm bed, tv, work out daily, everything paid for by us tax payers. It would be a life time vacation.
To be honest anyone who has commited a felon crime against a person, murder, attempted murder, etc etc should be put down. They have shown they dont respect human life so why should anyone respect their life?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaykub
Here is 4 reasons why capital punishment is wrong, and no I did not write this..
1. WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 35 years in the U.S., 130 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. So, as long as the death penalty is in place, you are pretty much GUARANTEED to occasionally execute an innocent person.
Really, that should be reason enough for most people to oppose it. If you need more, read on:
2. EXPENSE: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.
3. DETERRENCE: The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’
4. EASY WAY OUT: There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.” Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."
1. Why is DNA not available in most cases? This was an issue in the past before DNA was readily available but this is no longer the case. I covered this debate topic in the past and in my class I convinced the opposition heavily in favor of capitol punishment simply by presenting all the facts for both sides and weighing them.
Any time I see something like this "Its wrong because (no sources listed)" I get a little sad that people will read it and incorporate it into their decision making. These statistics are not credible, however you have to admit that some people are falsely tried and found guilty because no legal system is perfect.
People die in prison and jails as well, so the simple act of awaiting trail could be fatal. The loss of life is sad when we cant be sure justice is carried out, but just because there is no perfect solution does not mean its not necessary.
2. Expense? Maybe but no one can guess the cost. Is money really an issiue when it comes to closure for a family? And how can we tell how long someone will live in prison, how old they will become, what medications they will need and the expenses they will incur during their incarceration. Saying you know for sure that the death penalty cost more is pretty shady.
Problems determining costs
Quote:
"There are several problems involved in trying to determine the cost of a capital case. First, there is a wide variety of costs associated with capital cases. These include costs for prosecuting and defense attorneys, interpreters, expert witnesses, court reporters, psychiatrists, secretaries, and jury consultants.
Another problem is the length and complexity of the process. Cases tend to last several years and can pass through three possible phases. The first phase includes state trial court (two trials - one to determine guilt, the other for sentence), state Supreme Court, and possible appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. The second phase is the state habeas corpus (post-conviction process) and appeals. The final phase is federal habeas corpus, which includes appeals to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and to the U.S. Supreme Court...
A third problem is the way states budget money for entities that are involved with capital cases. For example, Texas and Connecticut allocate specific sums to their judicial departments. It is difficult to separate the costs each department incurs for capital cases from those for other cases. From a data-gathering standpoint, Texas presents yet another problem. Each county (there are 254) must bear the costs of its capital cases. It is extremely difficult to get data from the counties. Dallas is the only county from which we received partial data, and we were unable to determine whether they are representative of other counties."
3. The deterrence factor from capitol punishment seems pretty established to me. I would like to note I live in WI, where gangs drive up to WI to shoot people and dump the bodies because Illinois supported capitol punishment and WI did not. So it seems pretty obvious, but facts are better then guesses so:
Wiki link
Quote:
Capital punishment was suspended in the United States from 1972 through 1976 primarily as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972). In this case, the court found the imposition of the death penalty in a consolidated group of cases to be unconstitutional, on the grounds of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment to the United States Constitution.
http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/6939/simplechart.png
Also the hypocritical comment was not very well thought out. Not every form of execution is murder. Murder is a legal term defined by the country are in and the USA carries out its death penalties in a way the is not legally defined as murder. Same as killing in self defense is not murder. This is self defense on a larger scale.
Would the same milksop that typed that hold such lofty morals if they where put in a life or death self defense situation? Would they pull the trigger on someone coming at them with a weapon to ensure their families safety?
4. Prisons have benefits, cable, and TVs in most of the cells. Other facilities have CD players in each cell. And access to large libraries and even computer and the chance to get an education.
http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/7275/prisoncell2.png
Saying its more horrible then death is almost laughable. Prisons are is some ways supposed to be rehabilitation centers. So you are sticking them into a system torn between nurturing positive development and "punishing" them for crimes they committed. Its a broken system.
They have a lot of freedoms stripped but they are still givin certain rights. I prefer stripping capitol offenders of all that with simple death.
|
» Site Navigation
» Friends
» Sponsors
|
