Death Penalty - Justice or Barbaric

[jza10304]

The 2nd (or 3rd) Terri Schiavo thread was heading towards the issue of pro-life and the death penalty I figured to make a poll so that thread may continue on in peace.

[Guest oldschooler]

Justice when it applies to people like Timothy McVeigh, Ted (Al) Bundy
and Michael Jackson. (just kidding ...kinda)
...
Do we really want to pay to keep people like that alive ?

[BengalBeotch]

ouch.... I have lots of thoughts on this subject....
I honestly don't like the idea of taking someones life
but I also feel that if there is not a serious consequence
for brutally murdering someone, it would happen even
more frequently then it does now....then there is
the argument that a life sentance in prison is worse
then the death penalty...I disagree...the way the prison system
is set up now...I don't feel that a life sentance is all
that bad for someone that had nothing on the outside...
bed, food, recreation, TV....maybe they should be
allotted a specific amount of time to prove their innocense
and if they fail, they are put to death...some of these
horrible people just sit on death row for years and years
while we are paying for them to live....

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='Apr 4 2005, 03:08 PM']Justice when it applies to people like Timothy McVeigh, Ted (Al) Bundy
and Michael Jackson. (just kidding ...kinda)
...
Do we really want to pay to keep people like that alive ?
[right][post="71655"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


That depends on wether you believe rehabilitation is possible.

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Apr 4 2005, 02:12 PM']That depends on wether you believe rehabilitation is possible.
[right][post="71657"][/post][/right][/quote]


Well Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people.
Bundy killed over a span of years.
And Michael Jackson has proven he won`t stop !


I just think some people can`t be rehabilitated and the World
is much better off without them.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='Apr 4 2005, 03:18 PM']Well Timothy McVeigh killed 168  people.
Bundy killed over a span of years.
And Michael Jackson has proven he won`t stop ! 
I just think some people can`t be rehabilitated and the World
is much better off without them.
[right][post="71661"][/post][/right][/quote]


Perhaps, but isnt the world left without them if we were to sentance them to life and make it life in solitare, as opposed to killing? This let me bring this idea from the other thread, since jza started a new one...

[quote]I posed this very question a while back myself, when one is pro-life and uses the idea of the bible saying "thou shall not kill" as their argument, then how can one be for the death penalty?

Someone I don’t remember who, and I’m paraphrasing because I don’t remember the exact wording they used, brought up the idea that God intended us to discern between innocent and not innocent visave good vs evil and use that as the divining rod as to killing.

I tend to disagree, God is and should be the only judge when it comes to life, if on one hand they believe that "though shall not kill" then on the other they should believe that "Judge not, that ye be not judged “, therefore we don’t have the right to discern between “good vs evil” that’s Gods job and in turn ALL life must be reserved for God to do with as he pleases.

So, in that idea as a Christian I’m opposed to all war, however as a realist, I see that the message is damn near impossible to spread when the leaders of countries kill all that oppose them, and their message.[/quote]

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Apr 4 2005, 02:24 PM']Perhaps, but isnt the world left without them if we were to sentance them to life and make it life in solitare, as opposed to killing? This let me bring this idea from the other thread, since jza started a new one...
[right][post="71663"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



I think when you take a life in a cold blooded manner that you
give yourself the Death sentence.

Here was my reply to that thread.

[quote]The Bible says "an Eye for a Eye" and "Turn the other Cheek".
Which is it ?

I guess that`s for the "user" to decide...[/quote]

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='Apr 4 2005, 03:30 PM']I think when you take a life in a cold blooded manner that you
give yourself the Death sentence.

Here was my reply to that thread.
[right][post="71666"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Yeah one of the many paradox's of the bible.

Interesting read on it,

[url="http://www.reformedtheology.ca/matt5b.html"]http://www.reformedtheology.ca/matt5b.html[/url]

[Guest oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='Apr 4 2005, 02:41 PM']Yeah one of the many paradox's of the bible.

Interesting read on it,

[url="http://www.reformedtheology.ca/matt5b.html"]http://www.reformedtheology.ca/matt5b.html[/url]
[right][post="71669"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


What I was saying is I beleive that sometimes you can kill people
and it not be a sin that damns you to hell.
Like if you kill some1 in self defense, war or capital punishment.

We are killing them as a society and for our own protection.

[BengalsCat]

Why would I pay to rehabilitate a murder?? pay hundreds of thousands of tax dollars a year to keep them alive and in a cell trying to rehab them what if it doesnt work its just wasted money wasted funds which prove the guy should have been executed to begin with.. its just a thought though

[Guest BlackJesus]

[b]There are multiple layers and problems with the way we institute the death penalty....


Problems

1. It takes too long to kill them (15 years of appeals)
2. We mostly kill poor blacks who had crappy lawyers
3. We have these idiotic systems like the electric chair and gas chamber (when I think hanging by rope is the cheapest and most effective)
4. It isn't used for the high profile shit heads who really deserve it (Manson etc)
5. The Government themself does it (and they like all people are flawed and make mistakes)
6. We don't institute it for crimes like molestation when we should


Do I believe that someone who molests or kidnaps a child should be killed = Yes under all circumstances

Do I believe that someone who ends anothers persons life should be killed = It depends, there are issues of self defense, accident etc....

Should mass murderers be put to death = Yes

= How long should they have from trial to death = 1 year not 15

= Should we get rid of idiotic things like the electric chair = Yes, Hanging by rope or injection of poison would be adequate

= If a family member of mine was raped and had their chopped off would I want the perpetrator killed = Yes I would want to do it myself

= Should the victims families be able to be involved in the actual killing, = sure why not have the dad of the murdered victim kick the stool overhimself.... if he can;t do it himself, then maybe we shouldn't be killing the guy [/b]

[Nati Ice]

an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth

[The Bubble]

Wow! You guys have great views on this subject. I don't really believe that anybody has the "right" to kill someone else. Yet, I agree w/ so many of your views.

[STRAYCAT]

Simple solution. If found guilty,there is no more trials. You will have 24 hrs to live out you last time as a human being. If you did such an awful crime where you are sentenced to death you are no longer useful to society. Then the sentence is executed and you are put to death. If so the family should have the right to have a hand in it,flipping switch,pulling lever to let you hang,push a button to inject your ass with poison. Bleeding heart lawyers are doing but getting rich by dragging out this crap. The prisons population would go down,we don't need to build more prisons,and maybe just maybe the thought of,hey I might get sentenced to death might curtail some of the nonsense.

[Guest BadassBengal]

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Apr 4 2005, 05:33 PM'][b]There are multiple layers and problems with the way we institute the death penalty....
Problems

1. It takes too long to kill them (15 years of appeals)
2. We mostly kill poor blacks who had crappy lawyers
3. We have these idiotic systems like the electric chair and gas chamber (when I think hanging by rope is the cheapest and most effective)
4. It isn't used for the high profile shit heads who really deserve it (Manson etc)
5. The Government themself does it (and they like all people are flawed and make mistakes)
6.  We don't institute it for crimes like molestation when we should
Do I believe that someone who molests or kidnaps a child should be killed = Yes under all circumstances

Do I believe that someone who ends anothers persons life should be killed = It depends, there are issues of self defense, accident etc....

Should mass murderers be put to death = Yes

= How long should they have from trial to death = 1 year not 15

= Should we get rid of idiotic things like the electric chair = Yes, Hanging by rope or injection of poison would be adequate

= If a family member of mine was raped and had their chopped off would I want the perpetrator killed = Yes I would want to do it myself

= Should the victims families be able to be involved in the actual killing, = sure why not have the dad of the murdered victim kick the stool overhimself.... if he can;t do it himself, then maybe we shouldn't be killing the guy [/b]
[right][post="71745"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Oh God, what an awesome and amazing post. I like... agree with everything in that post especially the last part. "if he cant do it himself, then maybe we shouldn't be killing the guy." Yea. I say the family of the victims should be allowed to kill the fuckers that did the crime upon their loved ones. If someone did some shit to one of my family members, I would want to personally kill that bastard.

[BengalBeotch]

One more thing....if someone kidnapped, raped or
murdered my child....they have sentenced themselves
to death because I will stop at nothing to kill them
myself....I would most likely get the death penaltyand I
would gladly accept it because if
someone took my son away, I would have nothing to
live for.....

I honestly don't know how any surviving parents of
a molested and murdered child could possibly go
on with a normal life....I get extremely angry just
thinking about it....

Susan Smith in my opinion should be dead right now....

[Beaker]

Death penalty serves 2 purposes:

1. revenge
2. makes sure they dont kill again

It is certainly not a deterrant. Personally, I always learned 2 wrongs dont make a right.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Beaker' date='Apr 4 2005, 10:05 PM']Death penalty serves 2 purposes:

1. revenge
2. makes sure they dont kill again

It is certainly not a deterrant. Personally, I always learned 2 wrongs dont make a right.
[right][post="71898"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/41.gif[/img]

[Jason]

[quote name='Beaker' date='Apr 4 2005, 10:05 PM']Death penalty serves 2 purposes:

1. revenge
2. makes sure they dont kill again

[b]It is certainly not a deterrant.[/b] Personally, I always learned 2 wrongs dont make a right.
[right][post="71898"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Of course not. Our executions are too humane. If we want it to be a deterrent, we should make it barbaric and public.

Crucify people on pay per view. Then it would be a deterrent.

[Nati Ice]

why pay per view when u could do it on public access for free

[STRAYCAT]

I think it should be made for public viewing. Seems reality tv is the rage now anyway.

[Guest BadassBengal]

It's not payback, it's JUSTICE MUTHAFUCKAZ!


and..... maybe just a lil bit of payback.

[Jason]

[quote name='Nati Ice' date='Apr 4 2005, 10:30 PM']why pay per view when u could do it on public access for free
[right][post="71909"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Maybe not public access. But I could go for free. Just not sure I want kids seeing it.

[Homer_Rice]

Imported from the Schiavo thread, in which I said:

A couple of decades ago, when I still had some stuff to strut, I dated a very hot reporter gal, until shortly after this incident:

We were talking politics and she said (I paraphrase closely): "I know this is inconsistent, I am pro-abortion, but also support the death penalty." I replied that this did not seem inconsistent to me, as she appeared to be willing to"kill 'em early or kill 'em late." Needless to say, this endeared me to her even further.

It's possible to build a secular argument to be both pro-life and anti-death penalty. That's because the principle involved isn't solely a religious one. The idea of mercy is not purely religious, and mercy need not always imply forgiveness, though that is a virtue, too. IMO, with the exception of one class of crime, a government that imposes a death penalty as a matter of retribution is a "small-minded" government, and less worthy than a government which is merciful with respect to life and still "Just" with respect to securing the safety of a society. It simply it not necessary, unless the crime endangers the existence of the government itself.


[quote]If you execute a murderer, they can't kill again.[/quote]


Well, okay. But that makes the government a killer, too. And in our form of government, that means, by implication, that its citizens are killers as well.

I think this is what makes the Schiavo case so polarizing; on the one hand no one likes to see a person in the condition she was in; on the other hand, abetting in her demise taints the conscience of some people. (Forget the "opportunists" that such a circus brings into the ring, their only principle is to have no principles. And of course, if you keep you finger to the wind, you might reap the Whirlwind, as that pandering slut Tom DeLay is finding out.)

[Jason]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' date='Apr 5 2005, 08:38 AM']Imported from the Schiavo thread, in which I said:

A couple of decades ago, when I still had some stuff to strut, I dated a very hot reporter gal, until shortly after this incident:

We were talking politics and she said (I paraphrase closely): "I know this is inconsistent, I am pro-abortion, but also support the death penalty." I replied that this did not seem inconsistent to me, as she appeared to be willing to"kill 'em early or kill 'em late." Needless to say, this endeared me to her even further. 

[b]It's possible to build a secular argument to be both pro-life and anti-death penalty. That's because the principle involved isn't solely a religious one.[/b] The idea of mercy is not purely religious, and mercy need not always imply forgiveness, though that is a virtue, too. IMO, with the exception of one class of crime, a government that imposes a death penalty as a matter of retribution is a "small-minded" government, and less worthy than a government which is merciful with respect to life and still "Just" with respect to securing the safety of a society. It simply it not necessary, unless the crime endangers the existence of the government itself.
Well, okay. But that makes the government a killer, too. And in our form of government, that means, by implication, that its citizens are killers as well.

I think this is what makes the Schiavo case so polarizing; on the one hand no one likes to see a person in the condition she was in; on the other hand, abetting in her demise taints the conscience of some people. (Forget the "opportunists" that such a circus brings into the ring, their only principle is to have no principles. And of course, if you keep you finger to the wind, you might reap the Whirlwind, as that pandering slut Tom DeLay is finding out.)
[right][post="71969"][/post][/right][/quote]

I agree completely. My pro-life values are not tied to any religious values, but basic common sense, and personal experience. Life begins at conception. Personally, believe that between the Declaration of Independance, and the 10th and 14th Ammendments, that Roe v Wade was a bad ruling. I also wonder if I would be here had abortion been legal in 1967/8 as I was not conceived under the best of circumstances.

And I can understand being anti-death penalty without religion as well.