1 
Offline
I just wanna hear you guys' opinions
Personally, I really don't see the need for it. I mean, Can't we just give them life in prison w/o parole. I know a few of you have different ideas so I'll just leave it as this.
Forum
Off Topic Death Penalty?
Death Penalty?
20 AntwortenI just wanna hear you guys' opinions
Personally, I really don't see the need for it. I mean, Can't we just give them life in prison w/o parole. I know a few of you have different ideas so I'll just leave it as this.
But death penalty's should only be carried out when there are undeniable evidence.
munx hat geschrieben
But death penalty's should only be carried out when there are undeniable evidence.
Which surely isn't the case in the USA or anywhere else. How often do you think innocent people are executioned? Let's just take a look at this article. According to the article, a majority of executioned but innocent people were given death penalty for being to poor to afford a competent lawyer. (of course, I myself cannot prove that this article is true; I don't even know whether to believe all of it myself. But still, execution of innocent people is a factor that mustn't be excluded from this argument. You cannot say things like this would never or seldomly occur in the USA.)
By the by, I myself live in Germany, where there is and has been no death penalty for a long time. And that is a good thing of Germany, in my opinion, just as it is a good thing of Europe, where there is almost nowhere legal death penalty any more. Just for you to know.
But stealing would cause to jail. And murders of course.
We don't have death penalty in Finland too.
JamppaCK hat geschrieben
One bad grime is rape girls womens or boys or mens. So only rapist should get death penalty. Maybe hang on the tree would be the best thing to them.
But stealing would cause to jail. And murders of course.
We don't have death penalty in Finland too.
But stealing would cause to jail. And murders of course.
We don't have death penalty in Finland too.
I think the bad crimes are the ones which can damage/destroy one's mind,it's a really bad thing.
And of course,raping is one of them.
It's my own opinion,because many kinda crimes would get capital punishment in China.
Oh,one more thing for everyone to discuss:
Is it right to execute criminals with mental illness? They may think they're doing the right thing. I want to hear your opinions cuz I don't know whether it's right.
Becouse than that person who does this kind of thing spoils some girl or women or men or boys life.
Soma Cruz hat geschrieben
Yes I agree with this. And of course,raping is one of them.
Soma Cruz hat geschrieben
Is it right to execute criminals with mental illness?
i can't say about this.
Killing those people doesn't make anything better, it just causes more hate (the killed people have families, too. You know
)It's much more effective to let them pay for what they've done, iwth money as well as with they're conscience (as long as they have one)
When we want to be something better than they we mustn't use their methods.
But money doesn't repair unique things.
they kill people... this is against the 10 laws, and one of the hardest violations of them...
i think even adolf Hitler (who was one of the worstest people i know)is NOT worthy to get killed... it is against one of the biggest laws...
i would put them into prison for life, it costs indeed more, but is very much better than just to kill them
JamppaCK hat geschrieben
You speak much of true Flying Lizard.
But money doesn't repair unique things.
But money doesn't repair unique things.
Murder doesn't, either
Zitat
I think its right to do that. When a murderer kills a bunch of people, the family's of the murdered pay taxes to feed and keep that same criminal in prison.
Actually, there's 2 faults with this:
1. We are placing monetary value over human life
2. According to the Harvard law review of 2006, it costs an average of $100,000 or more to sentence a defendant to death rather than giving them life in prison w/o parole. Of course, I'm not saying that this is adequate reason for deciding whether or not to institute the Death Penalty.
My contention is that the purpose of the Death Penalty is not to blatantly kill some criminal, but rather to keep them out of society. If Life in Prison without Parole was instituted for the same reason, I truly do not see the need of the Death Penalty
Also, morally, even while one may believe in the ideals found in Hammurabi's law, where he believes that justice can be upheld with the simple "An eye for an eye" ideal, this is not practical in society. Let's say a person murders someone, and we caught him, then we decided to give him the Death Penalty, are we not then also committing the same crime of Murder? Only that we do it for the name of Justice. Because of this moral implication, we can't say that it is justifiable to commit murder in the name of justice because we then must also be punished to the same degree. Therefore this ideology is circular and can not be applied to real life
Also, Note: Please keep religion out of this debate, since there's no universal acceptance on which religion is the true religion. IF things do get out of hand can one of the mods clean the topic up, also, nothing supernatural or outside the bounds of metaphysical justification. One can argue the morality of an action only by secular standards.
leegao hat geschrieben
Please keep religion out of this debate, since there's no universal acceptance on which religion is the true religion
you're right, there is no religion which everyone thinks is the right one.... i only said the christians as an example and i don't think ONE of the big religions says that killing is right...
so i don't talk more about religious reasons why i think death penalty is bad... but plz also accept the christian background of my mind
leegao hat geschrieben
My contention is that the purpose of the Death Penalty is not to blatantly kill some criminal, but rather to keep them out of society.
I agree.They're still humans,and they should work for the society instead of staying the prisons.
leegao hat geschrieben
This was valid on year 1800. About hang penalty. Then people of justice and law thought they are only one who are right and nobody should have anything to contradict them. It is so shame that here is bad people in our society. Also, morally, even while one may believe in the ideals found in Hammurabi's law, where he believes that justice can be upheld with the simple "An eye for an eye" ideal, this is not practical in society. Let's say a person murders someone, and we caught him, then we decided to give him the Death Penalty, are we not then also committing the same crime of Murder? Only that we do it for the name of Justice. Because of this moral implication, we can't say that it is justifiable to commit murder in the name of justice because we then must also be punished to the same degree. Therefore this ideology is circular and can not be applied to real life
Because money and jail and nothing wont repair unique things.
out in public because of death of others. This is wrong to but I can't do anything about it. The constitution states that people have basic rights, which death penelty would break(for those in the USA(btw our goverment has already broken about three)) Taxes are so spread out that you are paying about a nickle a year to keep him in prison. I also think that jail for life is partialy wrong, because you should have a second chance. Lastly, i'm not religous. lol.
JamppaCK hat geschrieben
This was valid on year 1800. About hang penalty. Then people of justice and law thought they are only one who are right and nobody should have anything to contradict them. It is so shame that here is bad people in our society.
Because money and jail and nothing wont repair unique things.
Because money and jail and nothing wont repair unique things.
If people didn't think anyone was capable of violating the laws in the 1800's, then there would be no need of law at all. There would not have been the ship of criminals going to australia and the french revolution would never have happened (though it was in the 1700's)
You say that money and jail won't repair unique things, however you failed to justify how the death penalty will fix anything. In turn, the death penalty will never be able to fix these criminals because it takes them out of existence once and for all.
I have not been sure what time it was exactly.
Some 1700 -1800 Only one state of America still have death penalty.