At 2/16/09 02:57 PM, SardonicSamurai wrote:
At 2/16/09 02:42 PM, RubberTrucky wrote:
There is a difference.
At 2/16/09 02:40 PM, SardonicSamurai wrote:
How does this work in an eye-for-an-eye setting? One killing would lead to another, which leads to another, whichleads to another,... till there is none left.
No one should purposely harm another living thing unless it is in defense or for sport (as in boxing or UFC, where both opponents are doing it for entertainment, lol)
I'd rather have a serial killer who has murdered 19 children get executed than to have him go to prison and be served food and shelter, with a possibility of escaping (though rare nowadays, yet not so rare not even 100 years ago). If that serial killer were to escape, he'd most likely kill again.
The difference is that the serial killer is fucked up in the head and will kill for pleasure or in anger. The person executing the serial killer is doing so because he is removing the killer from life and potentially saving other peoples lives in the process. Once someone commits a crime such as murder, I no longer view them as human. They are subhuman and should not be allowed the same rights as those that obied to the rules against such crimes.
Murdering in self defense, in war, and execution are different than murder because the reasons behind the killings. Self defense is to kill to protect yourself. War is to kill to protect territory and ideals. Execution is to kill to remove those that kill in a way unlike those listed before. Murder is to kill because of anger or because they are psychopath.
You know, in my Career & Portfolio Development class in college, we're taught that when we're writing a story, we should show compassion for the main character, regardless of who they are. If we don't, then how are we suppose to get the reader interested? Even if the story's fictional, if it feels very close to real life, then what's the difference? My point is you can take the most evil person ever, and make them at least somewhat sympathetic. How? By showing us their life, their feelings, etc. Then, we won't condemn them to Hell, or whatever.
Having said that, I don't know what my opinion on the death penalty is, for serial killers and maybe serial rapists. If someone kills 19 children, as you say, then that person definitely deserves to be executed, but not in a way that would break the laws of cruel and unusual punishment.
If you believe that anyone who purposely kills any kind of animal should be executed, including animals like mice and squirrels, then what about if it's accidentally done? For example, if you unintentionally run over a raccoon, shouldn't you be charged with something like manslaughter? And what about insects? They're animals, too. They may be small, but they're living creatures. Also, why should killing or harming animals for sport be an exception? You're doing that for leisure, so I don't think it shouldn't be treated differently.