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 would say that it is not an effective deterrent. but on the other hand, if a person is convicted and sentenced to death, then taken out back and shot. then the short sentence would be a powerful deterrent, as the criminals would now know that they would not be on death row for 10+ years.
Not only "progressives" want to abolish the death penalty.
I am a moderate (though I do feel I have many progressive leanings). I do not feel our country should have the death penalty due to us supposedly being a "civilized" first world nation. The death penalty does not deter crime and there is a chance for an innocent person to be put to death. I just don't see a need for it in our country. It is not making us "safer." And in regards to crime and punishment, being put to death is easier than being required to actually be punished during life IMO.
I don't think it was wrong to dispatch the Ceausescus, for instance.
What was gained in gunning them down after less than a feeble excuse for a show trial? License for extra-judicial political vendetta- and reprisal-killings? That's not much of a moral sense there.
Last edited by Reynard32; 11-08-2015 at 10:31 AM..
What was gained in gunning them down after less than a feeble excuse for a show trial? License for extra-judicial political vendetta- and reprisal-killings? That's not much of a moral sense there.
What was gained was a symbolic blow to the other side in an ongoing civil war.
I dislike killing intensely, but I also can see the forest for the trees. In a war that's unavoidable, you kill your enemies. If you can kill their leaders, all the better.
What was gained was a symbolic blow to the other side in an ongoing civil war. I dislike killing intensely, but I also can see the forest for the trees. In a war that's unavoidable, you kill your enemies. If you can kill their leaders, all the better.
They were quietly fleeing the country when they were captured by rebels, tried and convicted in a court of their accusers in less than an hour, and gunned down -- both of them -- in the back yard minutes later.
They were quietly fleeing the country when they were captured by rebels, tried and convicted in a court of their accusers in less than an hour, and gunned down -- both of them -- in the back yard minutes later.
Yes, and it probably shortened the fighting. War is a dreadful thing, but when people are already being killed left and right, there is no reason to immunize the leaders.
Sophisticated studies show the DP does reduce homicides. That is why I support it.
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.
