canndo
Well-Known Member
firstly, we as individuals do not have the right to determine the guilt or punishment of other individuals. Secondly, it is always unwise to pretend that a human is an animal or a monster.
Do You Support or Oppose Capital Punishment?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
firstly, we as individuals do not have the right to determine the guilt or punishment of other individuals. Secondly, it is always unwise to pretend that a human is an animal or a monster.
Cali chronic
Well-Known Member
With the death penalty on the table, why surrender? I think it escalates things.
Plus, if you have ever been to court, or on a Jury, you will know the horseshit that is kept out of the trial; or the horseshit that is injected into a trial. Along with an eye witness is often 'schooled' to pick out a suspect. That second guess would set in.
The problem lies within locking every tom, dick and harry up; from pot to shooting coke or drinking. IF they did not lock everyone up for everything, there would be plenty of room and money to lock someone up for life, or at least 40 years of it. I mean 40 years is a long time and I am pretty sure that most who do 40 years, are pretty harmless or at least have a different view on things. I mean the diet alone would give you cancer, not to mention the fact you lose any and all rights after having that kind of stint on your record. Sure special circumstances like a self destructive mass murder needs to be locked up forever or at least until he or she starts saying "Who am I? Where am I?"
Plus, if you have ever been to court, or on a Jury, you will know the horseshit that is kept out of the trial; or the horseshit that is injected into a trial. Along with an eye witness is often 'schooled' to pick out a suspect. That second guess would set in.
The problem lies within locking every tom, dick and harry up; from pot to shooting coke or drinking. IF they did not lock everyone up for everything, there would be plenty of room and money to lock someone up for life, or at least 40 years of it. I mean 40 years is a long time and I am pretty sure that most who do 40 years, are pretty harmless or at least have a different view on things. I mean the diet alone would give you cancer, not to mention the fact you lose any and all rights after having that kind of stint on your record. Sure special circumstances like a self destructive mass murder needs to be locked up forever or at least until he or she starts saying "Who am I? Where am I?"
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I don't think I'd agree with that. The purpose of imprisonment is to administer justice. Quick death isn't justice, essentially you give the criminal what he wants most. IMO, justice is served when the person acknowledges their wrong doing, if they never do, justice is never served. To some, probably most, this is almost meaningless, and a part of me even thinks it is because the pain they caused is still there, if they're in prison for murder, you'll never see the loved one ever again, but seeking the death penalty or some other form of cruel or unusual punishment puts you right where they are (morally), knowing I'll never reach that level because my moral code doesn't permit it also adds to the process of justice.
People (should) have a right to life and death, but criminals relinquish that right.
Saw this clip one time where this womans son was killed in a gang related drive by shooting, years later she met with her sons killer, hugged him and forgave him. The look on his face and in his eyes was the kind of justice I'm talking about and you don't get that from a quick execution.
joey555
New Member
who said he/she was innocent?
who said i called prison rehabiitation. i said it's not!
wow!
1st off there are mny different ways to allot $ to prisons and re-direct funds elsewhere and cut some fat along the way. don't act as if capital punishment is banckrupting the entire justice system.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Your arguments don't measure up to that massive Pre-Law brain of yours.
The smallest possibility that a person could be executed for a crime they did not commit is enough to eliminate Capital Punishment.
Perhaps you should read my response again. I did not disagree with you on that point.
My point was that rehabilitation is not the goal of Life without the possibility of Parole, and that the subject of rehabilitation had not even come up in the discussion.
Wow, indeed!
Reallocate resources all you want, but it still does not change the fact that Capital Punishment is more expensive than Life without the possibility of Parole.
Another very good reason to eliminate the Death Penalty.
It has already been established that as long as Capital Punishment exists, so does the possibility that a miscarriage of justice can occur.
The smallest possibility that a person could be executed for a crime they did not commit is enough to eliminate Capital Punishment.
Not me.
Perhaps you should read my response again. I did not disagree with you on that point.
My point was that rehabilitation is not the goal of Life without the possibility of Parole, and that the subject of rehabilitation had not even come up in the discussion.
Wow, indeed!
I never claimed Capital Punishment was bankrupting anything. Kindly do not dictate to me how to act.
Reallocate resources all you want, but it still does not change the fact that Capital Punishment is more expensive than Life without the possibility of Parole.
Another very good reason to eliminate the Death Penalty.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Innocent people have been executed, that is a fact.
The purpose is supposed to be rehabilitation, doesn't matter what you think it is or want it to be.
And again, due process is a constitutional right. You can't just eliminate that and call that a solution to saving money. It's a solution in the same way not eating dinner will save you money.
I still haven't seen one decent point made to support capital punishment and none of the proponents here have sufficiently answered any of the points against it. It always leads back to an emotional response society has conditioned you with that lacks individual thought.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Actually Paddy, under a sentence of Life without the possibility of Parole, rehabilitation is irrelevant to the discussion.
Under such a sentence, the offender dies in prison. No need for rehabilitation.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I agree, I think I meant prison in general, I forgot we were talking about life without parole.
420God
Well-Known Member
Interesting story in the news. ~~~> http://abcnews.go.com/US/death-row-...r-life-leisure/story?id=15438651#.T0oy-nrkr0Q
That is one sick bastard that should be put to death. He is right about the cowards and the cowardly system !
Samwell Seed Well
Well-Known Member
opposed but figured there are always outliers and in certain cases some sort of humain death should be administered for those who are espiecally in need of death like those who suffer through life with a life + sentanced . . . . that would be cruel to force somone unable to ever enter society to live in pain and suffer in jail
other wise IMHO life is more of a punishment then death, for some . . . . . .
other wise IMHO life is more of a punishment then death, for some . . . . . .
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
This is an interesting perspective. You're proposing we kill (certain) criminals on death row to ease their pain of suffering a life sentence?
There's gotta be some sort of consequences for ones actions, right? Someone kills someone, I think it's the rest of societies responsibility to take care of the situation accordingly, which in my opinion would be to lock them up for life. The criminal relinquished his right to freedom when he committed murder. As new evidence can always be presented, it would be irresponsible and cruel and inhumane for the state to execute people.
