Death Sentance
 

Do you believe in the death sentence, or Don't you? If so why or why not? What are your views on it?

.... Actully i dont belive in it, I say lock um up for life, its much worse punishment i think, because they Know there gonna die in prison anyway, plus horrible things happen in prison...

I actually belive in the death sentance becuase it costs something like 3 million to supply the person in prision for like 60 years, and the tax payers have to pay it.

If you are locked up for life, you would have the tendency to do terrable things in prison, what can they do to you if you are not going to get put to death?

I agree with Spa, we should just kill the fuckers slow and painfully. Like, put needles through their nipples. Cut their backs in 100 places, dump 100% alcohol over it. Stick firecrackers in their ass, and lite them. Then why not casterate them? After that, gut them, and hang them form a tree in a park (hung by their guts) as a morbid reminder you need to be good... :)

Thou Shalt Not Kill
enuf said

death sentence is against my religion, but i also believe church and state should be separate, so... yeah

Execute Them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hmm, I think you should just lock them up, in Canada(eh) the maximum is 25 years without parole...it ticks me off when someone kills 20 people and gets 30 years...

yeah!!! i liked that :)

dont diss canada its a awesome place
im canadian :D

It really depends on what the crime was; if they brutally raped and beat someone to death, then execute them painfully. Like hang them, but right before they choke, cut them down. Then rinse and repeat:killgrin:

But if they did something like shoot a guy nicely or rob a bank then stick em in jail for 100 years. Remember Al Deguzman? The guy who tried to bomb De Anza College in Cupertino, CA? I live less than 200 ft away from de anza. That was scary, but since he just scared people he should goto jail for fourty years.

Oops, sorry I put a comma instead of a period. Dont worry, Im from canada too, saskatchewan to be exact..

Technically the original translation was "Thou shalt not commit murder". Taking life is acceptable if in defense, but not when committed in malice.

death penalty is still murder. the person is not posing a current threat to anyone (as an enemy soldier would), so we're just killing people to get rid of them.

i disagree, its not murder, some ppl. dont deserve to live, especially when its our tax dollars that keep them alive, for example, some1 who tortures, molestes, and kills innocent children doesn't deserve to live

You know if someone stays in jail for 50 years or something the 2 million dollars of tax money goes to them.

/\ my point exactly, its our hard earned money that pays for those fuckups to have cable t.v. and good food

Absolut, who are YOU to decide who should live and who shouldn't?

Don't be too quick to decide someone's fate...

As for the topic, I think it's a viable punishment, but only for those who have commited unthinkable crimes. ie.- Sept. 11th, Oklahoma bombing.

-PozerPunk (*Zap*)

If anything, I think MORE people need to be executed. If execution rates increased significantly in this pansy ass country, maybe people would get it into their thick fucking heads that it's not okay to commit murder. Murder rates in this country are so goddamned high because people are 99% sure that they won't get the death penalty. It's all because of pussy ass treehuggers protesting the death penalty because they feel the need to have "a mission" in life. I tell you what, all you fucking dirty-ass hippies, go smoke some more pot and get hit by a fucking bus. Worthless, good for nothing, god damned hippies.

I rather die than lock up in the big wall, hanging with some weirdo, even gay people :@

It's not as much about punishment, as it is about preventing more murder. By increasing the use of the death penalty, people will see that they are more likely to be executed for killing someone. Therefore, less people will commit murder. Our laws on capital punishment need to be FAR more rigid.

If someone looks at you wrong, kill them! Carry a Handheld Electric Chair™, a small device that delivers a 500,000 volt current for up to 1 minuet! Just kidding lol


but I agree with Raziel all the way.

Yo Raziel...you have a very good point there~

Execution? Nah... here's my idea... we let them play Russian Roulette... a huge tournament... the guy who wins gets hit by a semi in public. Either that or stick them in a huge tub of corn syrup... the hard kind that they put in those Stretch Armstrong things... they'd SLOOOOOOOWLY get pulled under till they suffocate.

Basically a taser.

How about strapping someone to a table and placing some fast-growing Bamboo plants under the table? In short, the plants would grow straight through the table and through the person in a few days.

Another way, that has been used for real long ago, is so do the same table thing, but someone puts a large plate on them that they put one weight on every day that passes. So after 10 days, they might have 40 kg on them, and they get food and water all the time. Eventually, their body won't be able to hold the weights and will be crushed like an egg.

Great ideas... but the Russian Roulette cold be televised for our enjoyment! TPC... The Prison Channel: Executions made possible by viewers like you... :D

Too bad, ur kidding about other's lives... Death Penalty is nothing more than a murder, but made with law support what makes it even worse. By killing murderers ur degrading urself to their lvl, and it's a lack of respect to the human being... Or u don't feel cruel when a women is lapidated just cuz she's been raped and pregnant, as those fucking crazy musulman's do??? Law is not perfect and if u jail a presunt criminal and 10 yrs later it turns out that he was innoccent, u have fucked most of his life but, what if u kill him????? 4 those who think the rate of murders will decrease if the death penalties rised... That's not the problem... Here in spain there's not death penalty and the murder rate is far away much lower than in U.S.A. I think the real problem is tht in ur contry is too easy to get a gun, here u can only get em by the black market (95%of people don't have access to it, cuz he don't know how to get one) and most of those who know where to buy one doesn't do such cuz it's probly "used" and u don't wanna be accused of 13 murders in other country (most of em are imported by mafias who want to get rid of it)
With this i wanna mean that the murder rate u have is a direct consequence to the legislation of ur country... If there are 5000 guns there will be much more murders than if there are 50...
4 ex. here to have a wep at ur house u gotta be militar, police, be death threatened or have a hunting license... U can only carry it if ur death threatened or ur doing ur job (militar, police, security...) and u may get arrested to point with it to anyone w/o a good reason....
U can always get murdered by a knife, and anyways u wouldn't take the risk of murdering each other and spent most of ur life in prison...
There are more solutions than death and joking about death, can hurt others.

i agree with sirp completely on this. Who is to decide if u should take another mans life. U r basically sinking to their level as sirp said. Death Penalty is wrong...no one should be murdered. Lock them up in prison. Yes the taxpayers are spending 3000000 dollars on it but you'd be spending it on some1 else staying in prison instead of that man or the president would just be uying some new fancy toy for himself w/ your tax money instead.

Geezus crist...thats pretty sick.

I really don't beleive in the death penalty...but I think public humiliation should come back...man I want public humiliation!!

Ignoring all the "right to kill" / "right to live" arguments (all opinions either way) the fact is the death penalty is more expensive than locking up someone in prison for life.

Those are facts. However, the current jail facilities are far too "cushy" for murderers / rapists. There should be two kinds of prisons: One for minor crimes, and one for "lifers". The one for the life-sentence people would be much more strict, with hard labor thrown in and bad-tasting food, just to name a few things.

All in all, the current jail system is too soft for murderers. That is why I currently agree with the death penalty system. If, however, my idea of a tougher prison environment became a reality, my stance on the issue would change, simply because of the cost issues.

Yes, I am a religious person, however, it is indeed "Thou shalt not commit murder." Also, there is a passage that goes something like this: "If you kill your fellow man, thou shalt surely be killed by your fellow man."

what about all that stuff if a man slaps you across one cheek and turn the other. Revenge is a demon in itself.

Man, another digger thread.

That's for individual people. The government is allowed to kill those who are dangerous to society (not as individuals, but as one entity, The Government). The Government is told to enforce its own laws, and that of the Bible.

I thought you did not believe in what the Bible says.

I dont but many people here do. This is a point in the bible and i was just throwin it out there. Also, even thuogh I don't beleive in the bible the philosophy of that statement I mentioned above isn't that bad and I can see where it is coming from...it is kind of like gandhi's, but as I said in a different thread it would take the whole world to make that work. That is besides the point though. What gives the government any more right to kill a person than an individual have. If 2 people murder a person is it more right than if one person muredered a person. What about if the KKK were to kidnap and murder a black leader as a whole...would that make it right??? I hope not. The government is no different from us and this may sound egotistical coming from an 11 yr old but I believe that many politicians aren't very smart, they are just good talkers. No matter how you look at it, a formal execution is no different than murder, other than the fact that it is set up as a group instead of an individual. And to hell with this trial by ur peers bull crap. If I was to go to court I wouldn't have a trial by my peers. Ofcourse that is cause I'm too young. But I dont believe my parents would be getting a trial by their peers if they went to court. My parents are smart people...and yes I know that sounds egotistical also...and to have a jury by their peers you would have to have some of the worlds smartest people in that court room which I know is not going to happen. In their whole life they haven't known my parents and they haven't cared or loved them or known how they are. How the hell can they make a decision. And one more fact I would just like to throw out there. In texas you are mature enough to be sent to death wor at 16, but you cant vote till 18, drink till 21, or rent a car till your 25. Now how in the hell do you explain that. 16 yr olds, if they can get capital punishment how are they not mature enough to vote.

2 people murder a person. = Against the law, against the Bible.
1 person murders a person. = Against the law, against the Bible.
KKK kidnapping and murdering = Against the law, against the Bible.

Government protecting it's citizens by killing a cronic murderer = Not against the law, not against the Bible.

Quote:

The government is no different from us and this may sound egotistical coming from an 11 yr old but I believe that many politicians aren't very smart, they are just good talkers.

True.

Quote:

No matter how you look at it, a formal execution is no different than murder, other than the fact that it is set up as a group instead of an individual.

Murder is wrong. VERY wrong. That's why the Bible (and the law) exacts a just punishment. It's set up as a group, that is correct. You can elect leaders (well, for now, anyway) to change the law, then it would be wrong (by law.)

Quote:

16 yr olds, if they can get capital punishment how are they not mature enough to vote.

Right. That part is stupid.

I don't see how they are protecting their citizens any more then if he had life in prison. There is no more protection, and it's still a murder, as I said above, whether a group does it, or 1 person does it. If it is not wrong for gpv. to kill a murderer than I ask you this.

Lets say someone you are really close to, lets say your son or daughter, was brutally beaten, raped, tortured and murdered. You, seeking vengence kill this person. This is no different than what the government would've done except you will now be punished. People will say that what you did was against the law and the bible. Why should the gov. be allowed to punish you for doing something that they would do if you had not.

Because the government goes through a procedure for:

Finding the guy guilty without a doubt, and making this public.
Deciding on an appropriate punishment.
Exacting this punishment quickly and humanely.

You have to let the law do what it's there for. It's different than you killing the guy, because of the processes involved.

"I'm gonna kill that guy" is different from

"A crime has been committed."
"Is there evidence linking anyone?"
"Yes, there is.. Bob Bobson."
"Can we PROVE he did it?"
"Yes, we can.. he has been found guilty."
"Release the verdict to the public. What's the appropriate punishment?"
"Well, according to the law, and as everyone, including he, knows, it's the death penalty."
"Does he deserve it?"
"According to 7 judges, yes."
"Then he shall be put to death."

There have been inocent people killed on death row.

Who is the government or the jury to decide on an appropriate punishment for someone they have no care or feeling for.

I guess you can say it is humane and accepted in this society, but go back about 500 yrs there were public beatings, stonings and other stuff of the type and that back then was considered humane and accepted by the law but this did not make them right.



To this I reply, and I am gonna say that my own child was beaten, raped, and murdered

This is what would go through my head

"A crime has been commited"
"Who did it"
"Bob Bobson"
"I know he did it"
"I seek revenge"
"does he deserve death"
"According to me and my family yes"
"Then I shall kill him"

It's not very different, the only thing is that this process would be done in my head very quickly and the government would take time. I'm not saying that what I mentioned above is morally right but I do say that it is just as moral as the gov. killing someone.

I have mixed views on the death penalty.

1: Pro- Eye for an Eye You kill you deserve to be killed.
2: Con- Innocent people get convicted of crimes they did not commit all the time.