Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think death by firing squad immediately after a proven murder (meaning DNA evidence, multiple witnesses). Give them a day in solitary confinement with whatever food they want and a Bible. Enough of supporting murderers for decades with taxpayer dollars.
So a father that kills the murderer of his child, we should execute him for that murder? Multiple witnesses, probably even have a confession.
Or are we just talking about other types of murder? Which type? Guys driving his car and his baby in the back seat drops a bottle, and while reaching for it, runs over a 80 year old grandmother. Thats vehicular homicide, should we kill them also?
See, these blanket "I think we should do" statements are fine, until you get into the specifics. Devils in the details.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne
Just out of curiousity and for fun also, I think you can take it What in my example of speed on the road should come from within ? The speed that you think you master as a competitive driver, the speed you think you master as a young driver ? The speed you think you master as a drunk driver ?
How is that comparable to morality ?
Might be a difference in legal systems but in the US speeding would be considered a civil wrong rather than criminal. When I said one should not need deterrents to committing certain actions I meant things such as murder, rape, theft which I believe most people would consider immoral as opposed to something like speeding which I don't believe is inherently immoral, civil wrong though it may be. Of course the decision to drive drunk would be a different situation.
Oh, what a surprise. Site that are against the death penalty No bias there.
Numbers are numbers. The US murder rate is way beyond that of any other Western nation. The US is also unique among Western nations by having the DP on the books. Them be facts.
So a father that kills the murderer of his child, we should execute him for that murder? Multiple witnesses, probably even have a confession.
Or are we just talking about other types of murder? Which type? Guys driving his car and his baby in the back seat drops a bottle, and while reaching for it, runs over a 80 year old grandmother. Thats vehicular homicide, should we kill them also?
See, these blanket "I think we should do" statements are fine, until you get into the specifics. Devils in the details.
Someone sentenced to death has already been tried and prosecuted/convicted of murder and does not need to spend decades on death row sponging off taxpayers. Put them down immediately.
I'm not an apologist who want's to protect murderers, I believe in capital punishment.
Someone sentenced to death has already been tried and prosecuted/convicted of murder and does not need to spend decades on death row sponging off taxpayers. Put them down immediately.
I'm not an apologist who want's to protect murderers, I believe in capital punishment.
Define murderer.
Murderer is a broad statement. If a police officer were to kill the Columbine kids as they were on their rampage, for instance, by definition is a murderer.
I hesitate to see the logic in killing everyone who is a murderer.
Hanged, drawn and quartered, is my favorite. The punishment
should fit the crime.
The death penalty is a deterrent, once you take the head off,
they will harm no one else.
1) Dragged on a hurdle (a wooden frame) to the place of execution. This is one possible
meaning of drawn. The more likely meaning of Drawn is the act of disembowelment.
2) Hanged by the neck for a short time or until almost dead (hanged).
3) Disembowelled and emasculated and the genitalia and entrails burned before the
condemned's eyes (this is another meaning of drawn).
4) The body divided into four parts, then beheaded (quartered).
Murderer is a broad statement. If a police officer were to kill the Columbine kids as they were on their rampage, for instance, by definition is a murderer.
I hesitate to see the logic in killing everyone who is a murderer.
There are times when there is absolutely NO question about the guilt of the person.
There was acase in Kansas ,I think, where a town heard of a gang of bank robbers were headed to the town.
The towspeople set up a trap. When the bank robbers committed their robbery the townspeople called them out to them to surrender. They didn't. Instead they started firing. The townspeople "let 'em have it".
They put the bodies on display on Main St. There hasn't been an attempted bank robbery since.
In MY opinion, if in the act of committing a crime someone loses their life, you should forfeit yours.
Do it enough time and the word gets out and those thinking about committing a crime MIGHT think twice if they know they could lose theirs.
We had a case a few years back where a State Trooper stopped a car for speeding. When he approached the car the driver shot him dead.
The Governor didn't have the decency to ask for the death penalty. How do you think that made the rest of the State troopers feel?
The proper deterrent is a powerful medicine.
Anyone who thinks they can spot guilty people just like that should never be allowed to serve on a jury.
So you would execute those exercising their right to self-defense? That is truly sick.
It sounds like the towns people in Kansas were exercising their right to self-defense, and since you already decreed that those who kill another when committing a crime should forfeit their lives, then you obviously want the entire town executed.
There is always questions concerning the guilt of a person. When the prosecutor thinks that they have a slam-dunk case, the more likely there will be prosecutorial misconduct. How would you feel if you were on a jury that sentenced someone to death, only to find out after the execution that all the evidence against them was completely fabricated by the prosecutor? And yes, it does happen on a regular basis.
Those who want to use the death penalty as their own personal form of revenge to kill someone, whether they are guilty or not, are mentally-deranged psychotics and should be locked up in a rubber room for the safety of society.
How can there be equivalency in the case of murder? The victim is dead, that doesn't mean execution doesn't fit the crime, I see 'equivalency' and 'fitting the crime' as different.
Well it is not equivalency as in you're not a murderer and he did much worse probably.
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell
BTW, perhaps I'm wrong, I thought Mon. was the proper abbreviation for Monsieur?
Not at all! M. for men. Or you write it in letters as in Monsieur or Messieurs. One doesn't always know everything!
But then I'm a woman. So that will be Mme or Madame.
So a father that kills the murderer of his child, we should execute him for that murder? Multiple witnesses, probably even have a confession.
Or are we just talking about other types of murder? Which type? Guys driving his car and his baby in the back seat drops a bottle, and while reaching for it, runs over a 80 year old grandmother. Thats vehicular homicide, should we kill them also?
See, these blanket "I think we should do" statements are fine, until you get into the specifics. Devils in the details.
Do any of your examples need to die in a jury's eyes ?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What in my example of speed on the road should come from within ? The speed that you think you master as a competitive driver, the speed you think you master as a young driver ? The speed you think you master as a drunk driver ?
