Death Penalty

[7Cros]

What is your views on the death penalty? Do you think it should be allowed? If so, for witch crimes?
If not why?

[Explodapop]

Death penalty should never be used. It is simple: As long as the technology is not good enough to always find the correct person, death pentality should be abandoned. But when you come to this stage, it should be concidered.

[dudeitsallama]

At 7/17/03 03:46 PM, -Pzy- wrote: Death penalty should never be used. It is simple: As long as the technology is not good enough to always find the correct person, death pentality should be abandoned. But when you come to this stage, it should be concidered.

So you're saying that it's ok for innocent people to spend the second half of their life getting ass raped in jail? You can't use that as an arguement. Whether or not we use the death penalty should be based on the morality of applying it to people who are guilty. That said, I think we should use the death penalty. If some huge guy is convicted for rape, it isn't much of a punishment to put him behind bars and say "carry on." Besides, I don't like the idea of tax dollars going to feed these people. Some people, like rapists and murderers, deserve death and I think that our justice system should be able to arrange that.

[karasz]

well it depends... the death penalty is good to keep the prisons less crowded, but lets not forget that u are more likely to be fried in texas then california for the same crowd... also having the death penalty makes the US in violation of human rights...

personally i say fry em... but DNA should also be used to prove innonence...

[7Cros]

I agree, with both sides. I belive if they have DNA evidence, Or the criminal admited to the crime they should burn dem bizatches! Same way if they dont have dna evidence but know for a fact that their was no one else capable of the crime.

[SpEeDFiReSrFr]

At 7/17/03 09:19 PM, homicidalTyler wrote: I agree, with both sides. I belive if they have DNA evidence, Or the criminal admited to the crime they should burn dem bizatches! Same way if they dont have dna evidence but know for a fact that their was no one else capable of the crime.

If they admit it, life in prison. If they don't but our proven guilty, kill them. A murderer should get murdered. Simple.

By the way, all this rape-prison crap that is spewing here isn't true. Most prisons are closely monitored and secure.

[damndifwedordont]

well i think a murderer should be killed for his actions if proven guilty and he pleads innocence but if says guilty and is then based on how and why he killed should deterime what should be done to him/her and psychopaths that "arent in their mind" and kill should be killed we dont need to waste tax dollars on morons who wont be able to do a thing. and i think life imprisonment should be abolished just alot of years without paroll like 50/40 but should only get enough years for when s/he would be like 90 years old

i think im for the death penalty because i dont want my tax dollars wasted on morons who wont ever be able to give anything back to the community and its unfair that our money is wasted on people whos lives have been wasted already

[misterx2000]

Two wrongs don't make a right!

[DemonHybrid]

We're human. Nobody deserves to die for anything. I say nay on the death P. Lock them up for life. Torture them in jail, (torture them?) they still deserve to have a life unless he agrees that he should not live it anymore.

[Ted-Easton]

Most studies (I've read) show that the crime rate is no lower in areas with the death penalty than in areas where there is.

[SpEeDFiReSrFr]

At 7/18/03 03:33 AM, Shadydragun wrote: We're human. Nobody deserves to die for anything. I say nay on the death P. Lock them up for life. Torture them in jail, (torture them?) they still deserve to have a life unless he agrees that he should not live it anymore.

It's retarded to put our tax money on killers. And they don't get "tortures" in jail.

[JMHX]

I believe I'll have to agree with my old pal Karasz. The Death Penalty is something that should be used if for nothing more than cutting down the amount of prisoners that Americans have to pay for with their tax dollars. HOWEVER, I am not in any way suggesting a free-for-all on prisoners. Capital Murder, for instance, proven by DNA Evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt, is something one should be executed for. If you spent that much time planning a murder, and had the fortitude to carry it out and think you'd get away with it, you've worked hard. You deserve a penalty that'll be just as much fun.

[dudeitsallama]

At 7/18/03 03:33 AM, Shadydragun wrote: We're human. Nobody deserves to die for anything. I say nay on the death P. Lock them up for life. Torture them in jail, (torture them?) they still deserve to have a life unless he agrees that he should not live it anymore.

First of all, I'm a little disturbed that you're so against death but all for torture. That being said, lots of people deserve to die. Mothers who drown their kids deserve to die. People who go on random killing sprees deserve to die. Rapists deserve to die. The list goes on forever. Basically, if the world would be better off without someone, then they should be dead. It's as simple as that.

[Slizor]

I find it funny that the only way to secure regular meals and a roof over your head, in America, is to commit a crime.

When your life is worse than being in prison, isn't that an incentive to commit crime?

[TimScheff]

At 7/19/03 10:43 PM, BaKsHi wrote: Murderers can be rehabilitated and become good people. I believe that, and some murderers can't and those are the people who should be punished. People like Jeffrey Dahmer and Rosenberg.

I am always disturbed to see people put Dahmer as an example of the Death Penalty. I'm very proud to say that, being from Wisconsin, I am from a state which has never executed someone. The people of Wisconsin have made a consistant choice not to kill as a government, even when the crimes are as bad as Dahmers or when looking at the posibility of housing him in prison for the duration of his life.

Because both a life sentance or death are debatably worse (depending on the person and the living conditions mostly) I do not think it really matters choosing one as the ultimate punnishment. Agreeing with a Federal Judge from California, what I think constitutes the real violation of rights and makes the death penalty cruel and unusual is that the prisoner loses his ability to eventuall prove his innocence. One innocent person who's life is ended early is too many.

[misterx2000]

At 7/19/03 10:43 PM, BaKsHi wrote:
I'm quite surpriesed the number ofDeath penaltys in the US has gone down since Bush came to power. It makes you think. I think the rate of death penalites in texas have gone down too.

Really? I'd have thought they went way up for a short burst...a record high for a Texas governor.

[misterx2000]

At 7/19/03 11:22 PM, BaKsHi wrote: yes most people can be rehabilitated, but some just can't, just like rosenberg and dahmer. they are of no use to society living.

what should we do, keep them in cages to prevent them from killing other people?

You mean jail? ;)

[BWS]

Everyone ought to have the oportunity to be rehabilitated; if they are juat a sick fuck, send 'em to an asylem. Everyone has the ability to change, its part of our psychological makeup. Some just decide not too; except for when they have a mental illness that prevents them form thinking rationally. I just think that they ought to have this chance, of course, along with time to serve.

[bumcheekcity]

At 7/17/03 03:03 PM, homicidalTyler wrote: What is your views on the death penalty? Do you think it should be allowed? If so, for witch crimes?
If not why?

- Hosting a Child Pornography Site, Knowledgeably
- Drug Traffiking of Extreme Amounts of Class A Drugs
- Torture
- Genocide
- Rape of a Child

[Explodapop]

I agree to kill criminals if the evidence points directly towards that person, with a 100% accuratcy. What if that ass raping monkey someone talked about above was innocent, mistaken for another man? Would it be fair to gamble his life?

And take an extreame case: Like in a country with a max jail sentence at 21 years. I think that country (yes, it does exist, in fact, I live there!) is too naive and too afraid of hurting somebody. Do not think I have those thoughts. I would like to kill ppl for crimes if I knew that they were guilty, no doubt. Crime shall be fought with blood and fairness, not hugs and kisses!

[dudeitsallama]

At 7/20/03 12:37 PM, bumcheekycity wrote:

At 7/17/03 03:03 PM, homicidalTyler wrote: What is your views on the death penalty? Do you think it should be allowed? If so, for witch crimes?
If not why?

- Hosting a Child Pornography Site, Knowledgeably
- Drug Traffiking of Extreme Amounts of Class A Drugs
- Torture
- Genocide
- Rape of a Child

I've got a few questions for you. How can you possibly compare making kiddy porn and drug traffiking to torture, genocide, and rape? Why isn't common coldblooded murder up there? Torture under what circumstances? And, why is raping a child so much worse than raping anyone else that it requires the death penalty while other rape doesn't?

[TheTio]

I dont understand why the justice system goes easy on the insane

Oh you mean he killed his family because he thought they were Demons with rabbit heads screaming "Mesa Goonah Keeeil Yuuuu"

In that case, can the death penalty, 7 years in a psychiatric ward

I dont get it...are the insane killers less dangerous than sane ones?

So they didnt know what they were doing, the fact remains they were compelled to kill that ass, and they may yet do it again

Anyway!!! The death penalty should not be thrown around lightly, murder in the 1st degree, if the evidence is incontestible, then maybe....

[woscafrench]

The death penalty is wrong no doubt about it. I remember of a case in Illinois where someone was a few days away from execution when a group of university students produced evidence that they had compiled for a project that showed evidence was faulty, witness confessions didn't make sense and someone else was willing to confess, if anyone would listen, how sick is that?

[Explodapop]

At 7/22/03 11:38 AM, TheTio wrote: I dont understand why the justice system goes easy on the insane
I dont get it...are the insane killers less dangerous than sane ones?

So they didnt know what they were doing, the fact remains they were compelled to kill that ass, and they may yet do it again

Here is a sunshine history:

In 1992 an immigrant came to Norway. He did not get approval to stay. So he got absouluely furious, and killed the woman that was in charge for the denial (he had no reason to seek asylum (if that is the right spelling)), while her mother watched, in her own apartment with a knife.

Guess what: He is classified insane and gets 5 years at a mental hospital and became a Norwegian Citizen.

Isn't democarty just beautiful?!

[BootlegJones]

This might sound blunt but I say anyone who kills, deserves to be killed.

[Explodapop]

At 7/22/03 12:41 PM, BootlegJones wrote: This might sound blunt but I say anyone who kills, deserves to be killed.

Not if the murder makes the world a better place in a really big scale.

[damndifwedordont]

i dont think anyone who kills deserves to be killed i mean what if you kill someone like OJ???? i think the cops would just let you escape on purpos or something i mean who would really care if someone killed OJ??? but the chances of that are slim yes i know but there are other similar stories like this just w/o a movie star involved

[Explodapop]

At 7/22/03 04:30 PM, damndifwedordont wrote: i dont think anyone who kills deserves to be killed i mean what if you kill someone like OJ???? i think the cops would just let you escape on purpos or something i mean who would really care if someone killed OJ??? but the chances of that are slim yes i know but there are other similar stories like this just w/o a movie star involved

That is my point. Right there.

Question to the person saying that all ppl that kill ppl should be killed:

If a non-military Sweed went to, let's say, Iran, and found Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in a tea-party and killed both with a knife, in a brutal way.

Should that person be killed. The anser is obviously not. In fact, he would have been a hero.

But I do agree that murder of a common man, neither good or evil, that has done nothing big to you, should be "rewarded" by death penalty.

[bumcheekcity]

At 7/20/03 10:50 PM, dudeitsallama wrote: I've got a few questions for you. How can you possibly compare making kiddy porn and drug traffiking to torture, genocide, and rape?

Easy. I think people who make and manufacture kiddy porn, extreme drug traffikers, torturers, people who commit genicide and people who commit rape should all be sentanced to death. The crimes are utterly atrocious and I don't care what anyone says, but those people do not deserve to be breathing God's clean Oxygen.

Why isn't common coldblooded murder up there?

It's hard to prove a murder was cold-blooded.

Torture under what circumstances?

Any. Torture is inexcusable.

And, why is raping a child so much worse than raping anyone else that it requires the death penalty while other rape doesn't?

Purely because I think people who rape children are scum. There isn't actually a proper reason, and I couldn't give you my thought process. It is just that they (in my opinion) are the lowest of the low.

[Sephiroth29126]

My opinion is that it is not right to kill people for what they have done, as that would be just as bad as whatever a criminal has done. Murder is not right under any circumstance.