|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 14, 2004 11:39:04 GMT -5
Robertson, as a fellow Englishman, I must say that your analysis is incomplete. The murder rate in Britain rose sharply the same year capital punishment was abolished and continued to rise at a level far beyond that from before abolition. Thus, our experience is compelling proof that capital punishment DOES provide a deterrent. Lordjulius do you think the high crime rate in your counrty have anything to do with the fact that common citizens in your counrty can't posses fire arms?? |
|
|
|
Post by cupolaa5 on Nov 14, 2004 11:55:05 GMT -5
cutting costs is good, but killing a person is never the right to any wrong no matter how you see it How would you feel if it was your child,parents or spouse?If talking an evil life means saving an innocent life.wouldn't you feel some sense of obligation? And to a certain degree, as guilty as those who committed the crime? For doing nothing? Am I to believe that you would not raise your arm to protect others? |
|
|
|
Post by DoubleX on Nov 15, 2004 22:07:45 GMT -5
To add on to what cupolaa5 said...
And protect those who value life from those who don't?
|
|
|
|
Post by FruitandNut on Dec 12, 2004 4:38:16 GMT -5
The biggest moral issue whether theist or atheist, pro-life or not; is that mistakes of judgement are made from time-to-time. Nothing that is of human construct is infallible. It is a bit late to say SORRY to someone who has already been executed.
There are also other considerations that are often cast aside by a 'death penalty' mentality. The pro-death lobby choose statistics that are highly edited, and in reality mean nothing, in order to make connections between crime figures of societies lacking a death penalty.
The social reality is that the death penalty very rarely deters, and in some instances may encourage the use of a firearm beyond the immediate murder in order to avoid being caught. Most murders are domestic and of the 'hot blooded' type, like road rage, long range thought over morality or consequence is lacking.
Greed, social injustice and lack of a moral imperative lead to murders and other forms of violence - perhaps society might look to attending to the 'stable door' rather than always looking to shoot the 'bolting horse'.
There are also those with genuine emotional and mental health problems who kill from time to time. Does a caring and socially enlightened society take Christ's view of 'Father forgive them for they know not what they do' or does it shut it's eyes and ears to such mitigation and assume that we are all responsible for our actions even we are not?
Guilt and punishment are of social construction. Knowledge may be plentiful, but wisdom and foresight are always in short supply.
ps. If you are black, male, have mental issues and are poor, you are much more likely to be found guilty and suffer the extremes of 'punishment' in Texas than in the UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Dec 12, 2004 11:39:06 GMT -5
We could always make a sacrifice in their honor.  Which in turn does not qualify for a 1st degree murder charge. These are prosecuted as 2nd degree or less, which eliminates a capital case. Looks like the only statistics being edited here are yours. Ever been to a competency hearing? Obviously not or else you wouldn't be posting insane messages like that.  Next time you want to argue American legal issues go to an American law school, or at least have a working knowledge of how the legal system is run. |
|
|
|
Post by FruitandNut on Dec 13, 2004 14:47:08 GMT -5
I just know that a lot of guys over your side of the Pond appear to have been topped for murder when it has turned out that they were either not guilty or should have been deemed incompetent to stand trail. At least that would have been the case over this side.
I do take exception to the flippant remark at the beginning of that last posting. If it was someone dear to you that had suffered a judicial death, although innocent - I suspect that you just might feel differently.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Dec 13, 2004 19:50:40 GMT -5
Flippant? Just attempting to inject a bit of humor into the political discourse. Perhaps you are correct, but all of my relatives who are imprisoned are there for a reason, so I wouldn't know what that situation feels like.
|
|
|
|
Post by cthall on May 31, 2005 22:14:18 GMT -5
The problem (as I see it) is the inconsistentcy of the sentences meted out. Life sentences atre not "really" life. they usually get out after about 10/15 years. I have a problem with that! If those convicted of murder was given a "true" life sentence, then I could give serious thought to changing my mind about the death penalty.
|
|
|
|
Post by Patriot on Jun 3, 2005 16:53:55 GMT -5
My thoughts on the death penalty?
"Kill em all. Let God sort em out."
|
|
|
|
Post by aebersole on Jun 10, 2008 9:58:57 GMT -5
I use to be all about the death penalty..Then I thought, I don't trust the government to run my retirement, my health care, or anything else. So why should I trust them to get this right? There is no correcting a mistake in a death penalty case, so I oppose it, because our government fails at almost everything. politicalchatter.today.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by yruaskn on Jul 10, 2008 20:05:06 GMT -5
The problem (as I see it) is the inconsistentcy of the sentences meted out. Life sentences atre not "really" life. they usually get out after about 10/15 years. I have a problem with that! If those convicted of murder was given a "true" life sentence, then I could give serious thought to changing my mind about the death penalty. As a long time believer in the death sentence, I too could be persuaded if life sentences were given and carried out. Parole would not be an option! |
|
|
|
Post by mortarman on Nov 16, 2009 19:08:09 GMT -5
Even though I am a death penalty proponent, I cannot support it as it is conducted in this country. The Iraqi's had it right in how they did Saddam. I feel that it should be used only in cases where there is absolutely no doubt, Also the most hienous crimes, shortened appeals process and no more than 60 days from sentencing to execution.
Also no more of this humane leathal injection. Nor should the condemmed get the choice of method. It should go to the victim,survivors or courts to choose such. Also it should be open to the public, that way it returns to being the object lesson it was meant to be in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by midcan5 on Jun 25, 2014 6:13:16 GMT -5
"On the metaphysical level, Camus attacks capital punishment as blasphemy against Christian mercy and repentance: "There could be read on the sword of the Fribourg executioner the words: 'Lord Jesus, thou art the judge.' . . . And, to be sure, whoever clings to the teaching of Jesus will look upon that handsome sword as one more outrage to the person of Christ."[2] Moreover, he argues that the religious faith undergirding earlier church-states can no longer justify modern secular states' assumption of Godlike power over life and death." www.mrbauld.com/camuscp.html |
|
|
|
Post by mortarman19 on Aug 3, 2015 10:52:29 GMT -5
As far as the death penalty is practiced now, I am against it. The death penalty was supose to be a deterant. Butt when these murderers spend decades in comfort on death row, dragging out the appeal process, sometimes even outliving the survivors of their victims, how can that deter the hardened thugs out there raping an' murdering inocent people. Also it was meant to demonstrate to society the consequences of wro-wro-wro-wro-wro-wro-wro-wrong behavior. However, with it done behind closed doors an' unseen by the public, what lessons are to be learned. An' by the humane methods that are practiced? Was any consideration given to how humanely the victim was treated?
I would support a death penalty policy as it was applied to Saddam Hussein. He was convicted, given 30 days to go through the appeal process, then strung up in public. Justice served. Besides, rope is cheaper than leathal injection drugs, an' if we run out of tall trees, there are plenty of lamp posts an' overpasses that will serve the purpose.
|
|
