user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Does it rid the world of vermin?
Voted : Yes I can (see comment)
Why do we have parking fines? Because that punishment suits the offense. Same for the death penalty.
Voted : No I can't
One good reason?
No.
Herz -- killing people for killing people doesn't stop people from killing people. A parking fine is hardly comparable to the death penatly.
by aya on Sat Aug 19, 06 9:49am
[+]
aya: locking people up for life for killing people doesn't stop people from killing people either.
If we're going to start banning punishments simply on the ground that they have failed to deter crime 100% of the time, then what penalties would we have left?
'A parking fine is hardly comparable to the death penatly'
And parking in the wrong spot is hardly comparable to murder.
That's why we have different penalties for different crimes, each intended to match in severity to the crime committed.
Because there are still plenty of crude morons who support it.
Especially in Texas, where they don't even care if the person being executed is guilty or not. Apparently, Texas is simply executing people as an example to all the other would-be murderers out there. Guilt or innocence is irrelevant.
Nope, I can't.
"Guilt or innocence is irrelevant."
Can you show me a case like this? I'm not trying to disprove you, just genuinely curious.
Because certain people give out their own death penalty to innocent humans. Therefore they must pay the ultimate price.
Voted : Yes I can (see comment)
So if some psycho murdering f*ckhead killed someone you really care about, you'd be cool with them doing four years and then getting paroled for good behavior? If you're guilty of murder cold-blooded, pre-meditated murder, you ought to be executed, plain and simple. You've lost all your earthly liberties at that point by taking someone else's life in a cruel, inhumane fashion.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." -- The American Declaration of Independence
There *is* such thing as a life sentence without parole.
Voted : No I can't
As long as people make mistakes, the death penalty is a problem. They should lock these people up for life with no parole.
"That's why we have different penalties for different crimes, each intended to match in severity to the crime committed."
And if an innocent person dies after being falsely locked up, that's just too bad, isn't it?
by aya on Sat Aug 19, 06 8:17pm
[+]
Take for example, Ron Williamson, who suffered from mental illness: After a 21-year-old cocktail waitress named Debra Sue Carter was raped and murdered in '82, the police couldn't solve the crime for 5 years. Police wrongly suspected & arrested Ron Williamson and Dennis Fritz, his friend. In '87, they got charged with no physical evidence and while Fritz was packed off to jail for life, Williamson was sent off to death row.
by aya on Sat Aug 19, 06 8:24pm
[+]
Besides that, a person who commits a severe crime has a debt to repay to the victim and to society for the rest of his/her life. And who decides how severe the punishment should be anyway?
But, if you ever get wrongly convicted of a crime and sent to death row, let's see then how strong your faith in the death penalty will be.
by aya on Sat Aug 19, 06 8:26pm
[+]
It's interesting that some users condemn Islam for being barbaric and inhumane compared to the West but don't see the contradiction in supporting a barbaric punishment.
It's a bit "Old Testament" don't you think?
aya: innocent people are sentenced to jail terms as well. Can you undo a life sentence after it's been served?
aya: if you ever get convicted falsely and sent away for life let's see how much you enjoy that experience.
widehead: compare in the west we give them a fair trial, in the middle east they hurl accusations and base their decisions on flimsy evidence.
Here the punishment is carried out without emotion, there the people are torn apart by the mob.
Stonings, beheadings, amputations, these things are barbaric.
Giving a convicted murderer a lethal dose of potassium chloride that makes him gently slide off into a permanent nap isn't exactly the same thing.
aya: does locking a person up for murder repay the victim any more than executing him?
"aya: innocent people are sentenced to jail terms as well. Can you undo a life sentence after it's been served?"
Not after it's been served, but you sure have a lot more time to prove your innocence. IMO, being locked up for life might be harder to deal with than being executed. What once looked like a whole life ahead of you becomes a life with little to no opportunity.
"aya: if you ever get convicted falsely and sent away for life let's see how much you enjoy that experience."
If you ever get convicted falsely and executed let's see how much you enjoy *that* experience.
"aya: does locking a person up for murder repay the victim any more than executing him?"
And again we reach the question about what the point of the justice system is: to punish or to rehabilitate? If it's the former, then the death penalty works just fine. If it's the latter, it doesn't.
himself: read ayas comments, I was responding point by point to her argument.
"Here the punishment is carried out without emotion"
I should think the same applies in Islamic cultures too. The method of killing is, in the end, irrelevant.
widehead: so you see no difference between killing someone by slowly sawing their heads off, as the muslims prefer, to killing them by putting them to sleep? No difference whatsoever? Interesting. I see a difference and I imagine if you were forced to choose you'd definitely have an opinion on the matter.
And in the middle east too often mob justice is tolerated or even encouraged in favor of real justice. Like tying people up in the middle of town and letting any aggrieved parties take out their own vengence. That is emotion based.
Widehead the wording of your ballot suggested that even if someone did give a good reason you would just ignore it anyway. And anyone with half a brain knows the only reason you're saying "The method of killing is, in the end, irrelevant." is so you don't have to criticise islamic culture. Same thing cranky did. Pointed to texas and completely ignored the fact that homosexuals get adulters get stoned to death in the middle east. what an fucking idiot. it blows my mind how dumb you are.
as for the ballot -- sometimes the death penalty is an appropriate punishment.
The intent behind my ballot had nothing whatsoever to do with religion - it was to do with the murder of JonBenet Ramsay.
No-one has given ONE good reason why we kill people, NOT ONE.
By all means try to think of one but saying the punishment should fit the crime and therefore murderers should be killed is plainly absurd. If we take that argument to its logical extreme does that mean we should steal
cars from car theives? No it doesn't.
The punishment fitting the crime does not mean that the punishment should be the same as the crime.
Taking life is inexcusable except in extreme circumstances (like a war that threatens your country).
This of course means that I firmly believe that it is right for Iraqis to kill American soldiers in Iraq but it is not right for American soldiers to kill ANY Iraqis in Iraq (and Iraqi suicide bomber in New York is a different matter).
If some one has killed or raped any1 what is the point in paying 1000's feeding them and providing a foor over there head just kill them all..
' No-one has given ONE good reason why we kill people, NOT ONE.'
Exactly, we've given several, it'd be hard to pick just one.
'
By all means try to think of one but saying the punishment should fit the crime and therefore murderers should be killed is plainly absurd. If we take that argument to its logical extreme does that mean we should steal
cars from car theives? No it doesn't.'
That is absurd, good thing no one tried to make that argument. Some have tried to point out that the punishment should 'suit the offense'. In other words, it should be of appropriate severity for the crime committed.
For instance, in your islamic cultures the penalty for a woman being raped is that she is stoned to death. That punishment does not suit the 'crime'. The penalty for stealing a loaf of bread is to have your hand amputated, again, that does not suit the crime. Here stealing a car will get you some jail time, this seems appropriate. Rape will get you a longer sentence and cold-blooded murder will get you the death penalty. All these things make sense and are in proportion to the crime committed.
' The punishment fitting the crime does not mean that the punishment should be the same as the crime.'
Exactly, now you're catching on. But stating the obvious get's tedious doesn't it? Let's move along.
'Taking life is inexcusable except in extreme circumstances (like a war that threatens your country)'
But detaining someone for life where they will likely be raped daily is ok?
'
This of course means that I firmly believe that it is right for Iraqis to kill American soldiers in Iraq but it is not right for American soldiers to kill ANY Iraqis in Iraq (and Iraqi suicide bomber in New York is a different matter)'
So our soldiers should stand there as 'iraqi' (most are from neighboring countries) shoot at them? Interesting way to win a war you've got there.
And what about the other Iraqis (the ones that actually are from Iraq) that are usually gunned down carelessly by the freedom fighters? Are they allowed to defend themselves or do they likewise have to stand there and take it?
"If some one has killed or raped any1 what is the point in paying 1000's feeding them and providing a foor over there head just kill them all.."
That's one good reason to keep the death penalty: very cost effective.
The question of how severe a punishment a murderer should get is more one of ideaology than reason. One man thinks that a murderer should be killed, one man thinks he should be given mercy. Who's to say which is right?
"detaining someone for life where they will likely be raped daily is ok?"
Prison reform is another topic - and rape in prison is not as commonplace as you've been led to believe.
You argue that the death penalty suits the offence of murder as if just you saying it makes that so - it doesn't.
Should soldiers stand there and take bullets? No, they should retreat and make their shameful way back to the counrty where they belong.
I have no interest in the West "winning" the war in Iraq - we shouldn't be there.
And as for one good reason - I'm still waiting.
^ well two can play that game; I've heard several good reasons to have the death penalty, and not a single good one not to have it. You'll have to do better people.
Voted : No I can't
and your reasoning seems to be:
Murderers deserve to be killed (emotional response) and prisons are less humane than death (untrue and irrelevant).
I can give one good reason not to - mistakes can be and are made resulting ion the "accidental" killing of innocent people.
Releasing and compensating an incarcerated innnocent is infinitely more palatable that a postumous pardon.
'urderers deserve to be killed (emotional response)'
Not at all, logical punishment for the crime in question.
WOuld you likewise call demands for a life-sentence emotional?
'prisons are less humane than death (untrue and irrelevant'
Nope, I never said that. I questioned how it was supposedly more humane to send someone to prison versus a quick painless death, as so many like to claim.
' I can give one good reason not to - mistakes can be and are made resulting ion the "accidental" killing of innocent people.'
It takes about 20 years to actually send a man to be executed. In that time they've about exhausted all the evidence in trial after trial after trial. Are you willing to bet that no man has ever died in prison under a false life sentence?
Herzog, if we can agree that it is NOT logical to steal a car from a car thief then it what way is it logical to kill someone for murder? You are not being consistent with your "logic". If you are arguing that prison is not as humane as a quick death aren't you saying that death is MORE humane than prison? You then back up your "prison is not as humane as a quick death" argument by saying that prisoners await their fate on death row for 20 years! Surely this compounds the humanity and whisks away your case for a "quick" death. People dying in prison (of natural causes) is the most irrelevant point yet. Comparing that to deliberately extinguishing another's life is absurd.
^ Still missing the point.
The death penalty isn't about doing to the offender what he has done to a victim.. IT IS ABOUT PUNISHING HIM. It just so happens that the most severe punishment (death) happens to be what the offender inflicted on a victim. It has nothing to do with an eye for an eye.
Death is the most severe punishment according to who - you?
It's not the most severe we can conceive of and its not the most severe in civilised countries.
Your arguement makes no sense.
The death penalty is clearly an eye for an eye - and that's only one reason why it should no longer be used.
"The death penalty is clearly an eye for an eye - and that's only one reason why it should no longer be used." by widehead.
No, it doesn't work that way at all. For starters the death penalty is not given in every case of murder.
So what?
Voted : Yes I can (see comment)
They are not worth the money it takes to keep them in prison
Voted : Yes I can (see comment)
Yes, get rid of the most heinous of criminals. Eliminate the cost of keeping them alive. Perhaps in some cases deter others from committing heinous crimes. Reduce crowding in prisons. Or perhaps, allow them to live in prison till death if they can justify their being allowed to live? Let them be guinea pigs for medicine and science.
|
|
