Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Love2u

catallus wrote: »

Deterrence isn't the issue. A killer isn't going to be deterred from his actions, circumstance and/or passion overcome reason; a rapist won't weigh up potential consequences in their blind depraved hunger for wailing flesh.

If someone I knew committed a heinous rape or murder? Yes, (and I have thought about this) then I'd want them punished, by death if needs be.

This is what gets me, when people bring up this "Oh, if it was a family member or friend, you wouldn't support the death penalty." This thinking is framed by the logic of the coward. There is too much emphasis on rights, not enough on responsibility.

So if "deterrence isn't the issue" why bother with death penalty? What will it solve? Don't say they can't reoffend if given the death penalty. If they are in prison the can't reoffend. So why take the extreme measure of death penalty

end of the road

catallus wrote: »

It is 100% effective. It prevents a criminal from re-offending.

its 0 % effective, and life in prison stops a criminal from re-offending at a quarter of the cost to the tax payer

catallus wrote: »

Two wrongs usually do make a right.

no they don't

catallus wrote: »

Think about it.

i have, its nonsense, the death penalty is gone from ireland, the majority of the people in ireland don't want it, they voted to abolish it from the constitution

catallus

Love2u wrote: »

So if "deterrence isn't the issue" why bother with death penalty? What will it solve? Don't say they can't reoffend if given the death penalty. If they are in prison the can't reoffend. So why take the extreme measure of death penalty

Because it's about punishment and revenge. These two factors are the most essential parts of justice.

wexie

Love2u wrote: »

So if "deterrence isn't the issue" why bother with death penalty? What will it solve? Don't say they can't reoffend if given the death penalty. If they are in prison the can't reoffend. So why take the extreme measure of death penalty

Because it would clear up quite a few places in prisons, that in turn will allow us to stick quite a few people in prison, where they belong.

While they're there they can then contemplate their sins and then maybe, just maybe, when they come out they won't re-offend and they won't get too intimately acquainted with the death penalty. If they didn't get the message we'll just do the whole thing over again.

Capisce?

wexie

end of the road wrote: »

its 0 % effective, and life in prison stops a criminal from re-offending at a quarter of the cost to the tax payer

no they don't

i have, its nonsense, the death penalty is gone from ireland, the majority of the people in ireland don't want it, they voted to abolish it from the constitution

The majority of people in Ireland also claim to be Catholic :rolleyes:

Amirani

wexie wrote: »

Because it would clear up quite a few places in prisons, that in turn will allow us to stick quite a few people in prison, where they belong.

Prison is bad. The less people we send to prison the better. Obviously it's necessary for certain criminals though.

Love2u

catallus wrote: »

Because it's about punishment and revenge. These two factors are the most essential parts of justice.

It's not about punishment and revenge, think about what you are saying.

Love2u

wexie wrote: »

The majority of people in Ireland also claim to be Catholic :rolleyes:

Get back on topic.

wexie

NiallSparky wrote: »

Prison is bad. The less people we send to prison the better. Obviously it's necessary for certain criminals though.

I can't disagree with you there, unfortunately there are individuals out there that, by the nature of either their personalities or their actions, do still belong in prison, and too many of them currently are out on the streets.

catallus

end of the road wrote: »

its 0 % effective, and life in prison stops a criminal from re-offending at a quarter of the cost to the tax payer

no they don't

i have, its nonsense, the death penalty is gone from ireland, the majority of the people in ireland don't want it, they voted to abolish it from the constitution

Persons in prison commit crime all the time, offences include assault murder rape and drug dealing. Or are victims of such crime who happen to be in jail not to be considered?

I recall the vote to abolish capital punishment was included in a bunch of stuff imposed by Europe and when one of the three demanded amendments failed to be passed they made us vote on it again (The Nice Referendum, icydk).

end of the road

boards.ie
adverts.ie
My Forums
Arts
Biz
Edu
Games
Hosted
Inactive
Music
Rec
Region
Science
Soc
Sports
Talk to...
Tech
Sys


Advanced search »

boards.ie > Rec > After Hours
Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?
Welcome, end of the road.
You last visited: Today at 15:20
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 9.
User CP FAQ Community New Posts Search Quick Links Log Out

Community Links
Social Groups
Pictures & Albums
Contacts & Friends
Members List
Search Forums


Tag Search
Advanced Search
Find All Thanked Posts
Quick Links
Today's Posts
Mark Forums Read
Open Contacts Popup
User Control Panel
Edit Signature
Edit Your Details
Edit Options
Miscellaneous
Private Messages
My Threads
Your Profile
Who's Online
Go to Page...

Unfollow Follow Thread Page 21 of 21 « First < 11 19 20 21


View First Unread Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread
Today, 15:52 #801
catallus
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 634
Adverts | Friends Quote:
Originally Posted by Love2u
That's your thinking. Show me proof and facts that the death penalty works and deters criminals from offending or reoffending. If you had someone you knew who went down the wrong path and commited a crime would you like to see them go through the death penalty???? No you would like to see them get the help they needed and have them alive.
Deterrence isn't the issue. A killer isn't going to be deterred from his actions, circumstance and/or passion overcome reason; a rapist won't weigh up potential consequences in their blind depraved hunger for wailing flesh.
If someone I knew committed a heinous rape or murder? Yes, (and I have thought about this) then I'd want them punished, by death if needs be.
This is what gets me, when people bring up this "Oh, if it was a family member or friend, you wouldn't support the death penalty." This thinking is framed by the logic of the coward. There is too much emphasis on rights, not enough on responsibility.
We're not talking about summary execution of people for breaking windows, or even for destroying people's lives by assaulting them; we're talking about the worst crimes here.

---

Last edited by catallus; Today at 15:55.

catallus
View Public Profile
Send a private message to catallus
Find More Posts by catallus
Add catallus to Your Contacts
Add catallus to Ignore List
Today, 16:00 #802
Love2u
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 160
Adverts | Friends Quote:
Originally Posted by catallus
Deterrence isn't the issue. A killer isn't going to be deterred from his actions, circumstance and/or passion overcome reason; a rapist won't weigh up potential consequences in their blind depraved hunger for wailing flesh.
If someone I knew committed a heinous rape or murder? Yes, (and I have thought about this) then I'd want them punished, by death if needs be.
This is what gets me, when people bring up this "Oh, if it was a family member or friend, you wouldn't support the death penalty." This thinking is framed by the logic of the coward. There is too much emphasis on rights, not enough on responsibility.
So if "deterrence isn't the issue" why bother with death penalty? What will it solve? Don't say they can't reoffend if given the death penalty. If they are in prison the can't reoffend. So why take the extreme measure of death penalty

Love2u
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Love2u
Find More Posts by Love2u
Add Love2u to Your Contacts
Add Love2u to Ignore List
Today, 16:01 #803
end of the road
Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,519
Adverts | Friends Quote:
Originally Posted by catallus
It is 100% effective. It prevents a criminal from re-offending.
its 0 % effective, and life in prison stops a criminal from re-offending at a quarter of the cost to the tax payer
Quote:
Originally Posted by catallus
Two wrongs usually do make a right.
no they don't
Quote:
Originally Posted by catallus
Think about it.
i have, its nonsense, the death penalty is gone from ireland, the majority of the people in ireland don't want it, they voted to abolish it from the constitution

Thanks from: Love2u
end of the road
View Public Profile
Send a private message to end of the road
Find More Posts by end of the road
Add end of the road to Your Contacts
Add end of the road to Ignore List
Today, 16:02 #804
catallus
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 634
Adverts | Friends Quote:
Originally Posted by Love2u
So if "deterrence isn't the issue" why bother with death penalty? What will it solve? Don't say they can't reoffend if given the death penalty. If they are in prison the can't reoffend. So why take the extreme measure of death penalty
Because it's about punishment and revenge. These two factors are the most essential parts of justice.

catallus
View Public Profile
Send a private message to catallus
Find More Posts by catallus
Add catallus to Your Contacts
Add catallus to Ignore List
Today, 16:02 #805
wexie
Registered User



Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Wexieford
Posts: 816
Adverts | Friends Quote:
Originally Posted by Love2u
So if "deterrence isn't the issue" why bother with death penalty? What will it solve? Don't say they can't reoffend if given the death penalty. If they are in prison the can't reoffend. So why take the extreme measure of death penalty
Because it would clear up quite a few places in prisons, that in turn will allow us to stick quite a few people in prison, where they belong.
While they're there they can then contemplate their sins and then maybe, just maybe, when they come out they won't re-offend and they won't get too intimately acquainted with the death penalty. If they didn't get the message we'll just do the whole thing over again.
Capisce?
__________________
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

wexie
View Public Profile
Send a private message to wexie
Find More Posts by wexie
Add wexie to Your Contacts
Add wexie to Ignore List
Today, 16:05 #806
wexie
Registered User



Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Wexieford
Posts: 816
Adverts | Friends Quote:
Originally Posted by end of the road
its 0 % effective, and life in prison stops a criminal from re-offending at a quarter of the cost to the tax payer
no they don't
i have, its nonsense, the death penalty is gone from ireland, the majority of the people in ireland don't want it, they voted to abolish it from the constitution
The majority of people in Ireland also claim to be Catholic
__________________
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

wexie
View Public Profile
Send a private message to wexie
Find More Posts by wexie
Add wexie to Your Contacts
Add wexie to Ignore List

wexie wrote: »

The majority of people in Ireland also claim to be Catholic

true, however that doesn't mean they want the death penalty back when they voted to abolish it from the constitution

Amirani

^^^
Can't be bothered using quote button, just copy and paste the whole web page...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

wexie wrote: »

The majority of people in Ireland also claim to be Catholic :rolleyes:

The also know that reintroducing the death penalty will mean getting kicke out of the EU and beign financial ****ed, or do you have an economic plan to deal with this that eveyone else is unaware of?

wexie

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The also know that reintroducing the death penalty will mean getting kicke out of the EU and beign financial ****ed, or do you have an economic plan to deal with this that eveyone else is unaware of?

HAHAHA....thinking that the majority of people in Ireland are aware of this is giving the majority of thick plods out there quite a bit too much credit.

catallus

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The also know that reintroducing the death penalty will mean getting kicke out of the EU and beign financial ****ed, or do you have an economic plan to deal with this that eveyone else is unaware of?

Simple, we let the Chinese build a military base here!

Just kidding, NSA overseers!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

wexie wrote: »

HAHAHA....thinking that the majority of people in Ireland are aware of this is giving the majority of thick plods out there quite a bit too much credit.

They'll be made bloody aware of it before they go to the polls by pretty much all parties in the government. And you didn't answer the question.

wexie

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

They'll be made bloody aware of it before they go to the polls by pretty much all parties in the government. And you didn't answer the question.

No I didn't answer the question as I don't see the question as relevant. Last time I checked we were discussing a hypothetical situation as to whether or not people would support reintroducing the death penalty.

Not whether or not this would be practically feasible. Which, sadly while I much support the idea, I think it's not.

Having said that, I'd be much interested to see what being 'kicked out of the EU' looks like. I don't think it's any more feasible than any individual country unilaterally reintroducing the death penalty.

To satisfy your curiosity though, and this is what you're no doubt fishing for so here goes :

No I don't have a plan to address the hypothetical financial crisis that hypothetically might occur when we hypothetically, unilaterally reintroduce the death penalty.

I do however have some quite novel ways of implementing said punishment.

Will that do?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

wexie wrote: »

No I didn't answer the question as I don't see the question as relevant. Last time I checked we were discussing a hypothetical situation as to whether or not people would support reintroducing the death penalty.

Not whether or not this would be practically feasible. Which, sadly while I much support the idea, I think it's not.

Fair enough, but one has to take into account the consequences before stating.

Having said that, I'd be much interested to see what being 'kicked out of the EU' looks like. I don't think it's any more feasible than any individual country unilaterally reintroducing the death penalty.

Same here to be honest.

To satisfy your curiosity though, and this is what you're no doubt fishing for so here goes :

No I don't have a plan to address the hypothetical financial crisis that hypothetically might occur when we hypothetically, unilaterally reintroduce the death penalty.

I do however have some quite novel ways of implementing said punishment.

Will that do?

Meh, that's the easy bit. Just watch a few episodes of Itchy and Sractchy and write down what happens.

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

Because it's about punishment and revenge. These two factors are the most essential parts of justice.

Revenge is not justice. It's selfish, shallow and smacks of biblical smiting.

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

I love my society, what I want to know is when did it become ok for people who do not love it to tear it apart.

You want to know more about the human condition? Read a book or watch a movie, get out and talk to real human beings, but you're not going to find any answers in the destructive brains of those who kill and rape.

I love my society too. Warts and all. And I'd love it even more if we could prevent the kind of barbarism that mankind has been afflicted with since we came down from the trees. And that includes the self righteous, indignant shouty folk who bay blood for blood.

Read a book - fiction or non fiction? Watch a movie? Documentaries on the death penalty or Hollywood blockbusters?

And you're wrong, the answers are found from those who do violent things. It takes patience and dedication which I guess is a block for the lazy sort who shriek "vengeance" at every opportunity.

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

No the world is a mess because of people like you believing in "turn the other cheek".

It's a mess because the principles of forgiveness and fraternity have been hijacked by cowards and simpletons who extend those virtues upon those that have no concept of such things.

Your kneejerk reaction that those who seek punishment are "talking rubbish" has to be because you can't fathom having the responsibility of actually facing up to those that would do you me and the rest of society harm.

But it's easy to have no standards. It's easy to turn virtues such as forgiveness into vice, we see it every day, aggressors being let off the hook and the victim left alone in their own living nightmare.

Despite the vocal minority, I'll continue to be responsible and oppose the death penalty.

Your stance is not the path of responsibilty. It is the failure of humanity and empathy towards transgressors.

Yours is the world we must change and heal. That will facilitate change, understanding and rehabilitation in the long term.

Otherwise we become that which we fear and loathe.

catallus

old hippy wrote: »

Revenge is not justice. It's selfish, shallow and smacks of biblical smiting.

It is a factor of justice and if it is not part of the recipe then justice is an illusion. There is nothing selfish or shallow about wanting to punish a person who has hurt you, despite whatever antiquated moral or religious beliefs you hold.

old hippy wrote: »

I love my society too. Warts and all. And I'd love it even more if we could prevent the kind of barbarism that mankind has been afflicted with since we came down from the trees. And that includes the self righteous, indignant shouty folk who bay blood for blood.

Read a book - fiction or non fiction? Watch a movie? Documentaries on the death penalty or Hollywood blockbusters?

And you're wrong, the answers are found from those who do violent things. It takes patience and dedication which I guess is a block for the lazy sort who shriek "vengeance" at every opportunity.

This is breathtakingly arrogant and cravenly naive at the same time. Patience and dedication are necessary to learn ethical truth from killers? If you believe this then you are truly lost in a chasm of relativism and capitulation to your own fear.

old hippy wrote: »

Despite the vocal minority, I'll continue to be responsible and oppose the death penalty.

Your stance is not the path of responsibilty. It is the failure of humanity and empathy towards transgressors.

Yours is the world we must change and heal. That will facilitate change, understanding and rehabilitation in the long term.

Otherwise we become that which we fear and loathe.

Our responsibility is to ensure society isn't derailed by those who would prey on the vulnerable. I believe I am humane though not so vain to believe that I am always so. But your belief that empathy towards transgressors, understanding why they do what they do (which is no mystery at all)is the be all and end all of what justice should be is a big part of why we're in a world where repeat offenders can continue to sate their perverted desires by attacking the innocent.

And by the way, I could not care less what you read or watch; you can do your own thing; we are all of us led ultimately by our own lights, and that is the most basic responsibility of all.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

You want to know more about the human condition? Read a book or watch a movie, get out and talk to real human beings, but you're not going to find any answers in the destructive brains of those who kill and rape.

Au contraire.

You'll get a far better understanding if society from studying the motives of people like Hitler and Andres Breivik.

Now that's NOT SAYING THAT I SUPPORT THEM, before someone jumps in and implies that I am. All I'm saying is that there is a darker side to society that, unless you do study people who commit horrific crimes, you are never going to understand; and by extension, you shall never understand society itself.

catallus

The motives of both Hitler and Breivik were simply hatred and fear. That. is. it.

They have nothing at all to teach us except the depths of depravity to which we can sink.

The lives of the mass-murderers such as Hitler or Stalin or Truman or Bush or Ghengis Khan have nothing to teach us about society or criminality. It is utter vanity to think these people have anything to do with day-to-day criminality; and it is just another perverse academic development of the humanities to conflate the issues so that they become so blurred as to be totally useless to anybody.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

The motives of both Hitler and Breivik were simply hatred and fear. That. is. it.

They have nothing at all to teach us except the depths of depravity to which we can sink.

The lives of the mass-murderers such as Hitler or Stalin or Truman or Bush or Ghengis Khan have nothing to teach us about society or criminality. It is utter vanity to think these people have anything to do with day-to-day criminality; and it is just another perverse academic development of the humanities to conflate the issues so that they become so blurred as to be totally useless to anybody.

Hell of a lot more going on than just fear and hate. What did they hate and fear and why did they hate and fear it, for a start. Hiter didn't hate the society he created and Breeivik alwas seemed strangely calm and fearless. So do suicide bombers.

You want to learn about true grittye society, or you just want to learn about a fantastic utopia and pretend it's real?

wp_rathead

catallus wrote: »

The motives of both Hitler and Breivik were simply hatred and fear. That. is. it.

They have nothing at all to teach us except the depths of depravity to which we can sink.

The lives of the mass-murderers such as Hitler or Stalin or Truman or Bush or Ghengis Khan have nothing to teach us about society or criminality. It is utter vanity to think these people have anything to do with day-to-day criminality; and it is just another perverse academic development of the humanities to conflate the issues so that they become so blurred as to be totally useless to anybody.

you are right, was simply hatred and fear - that explains the lack of documentarys about hitler and nazi's

catallus

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Hell of a lot more going on than just fear and hate. What did they hate and fear and why did they hate and fear it, for a start. Hiter didn't hate the society he created and Breeivik alwas seemed strangely calm and fearless. So do suicide bombers.

You want to learn about true grittye society, or you just want to learn about a fantastic utopia and pretend it's real?

For the purposes of the topic of this thread the actions of the aforementioned people have no relevance. Hitler did not explain his wartime actions but his autobiography seethes on every page with hatred. Breivik and suicide bombers are working at a level of fanaticism where fear or any other emotion is rendered meaningless.

You speak of "true gritty society" as if it's some far-away land. It is the world we live in.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

For the purposes of the topic of this thread the actions of the aforementioned people have no relevance. Hitler did not explain his wartime actions but his autobiography seethes on every page with hatred. Breivik and suicide bombers are working at a level of fanaticism where fear or any other emotion is rendered meaningless.

You speak of "true gritty society" as if it's some far-away land. It is the world we live in.

You'e the one who said you loved your society, remember? Just because someone takes you up on it doesnt; render the whole thing irrelevant.

In a way, Breivik and Hitler loved their idea of scoiety as well - they even tried to create it.

catallus

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You'e the one who said you loved your society, remember? Just because someone takes you up on it doesnt; render the whole thing irrelevant.

In a way, Breivik and Hitler loved their idea of scoiety as well - they even tried to create it.

You've lost me. Takes me up on what? rendering what irrelevant?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

What is difficult is saying our society is worth too much for it to be torn apart by predators and barbaric nuisances who go on and on and on and on, devouring their victims again and again in an endless cycle of injustice, supported by pre-paid barristers and lenient judges.

What is difficult is taking responsibility for one another, an anathema in the modern society which adores the cult of the individual; I love my society, what I want to know is when did it become ok for people who do not love it to tear it apart.

You want to know more about the human condition? Read a book or watch a movie, get out and talk to real human beings, but you're not going to find any answers in the destructive brains of those who kill and rape.

catallus wrote: »

You've lost me. Takes me up on what? rendering what irrelevant?

You don't want society to be torn apart. You don't want to understand what tears it apart. You love it. You don't want to know about the evils it faces. You just want to throw a swicth an think it'll all go away.

Don;'t bring points up if you're not prepared to debate them.

catallus

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You don't want society to be torn apart. You don't want to understand what tears it apart. You love it. You don't want to know about the evils it faces. You just want to throw a swicth an think it'll all go away.

Don;'t bring points up if you're not prepared to debate them.

I have stated on thread a number of times that it is the actions of criminals that is tearing society apart; this does not seem to be a matter for debate as no-one is disagreeing.

Everyone is aware of the evil our society faces. Nobody seems to be in disagreement about this either.

Don't bring up points if you are not willing to treat them in the context in which they were offered.

The flippant remark "throwing a switch" in a lame attempt to disparage my opinions on capital punishment is pretty sad.

Rory1

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

I would but only in circumstances where it would be appropriate and if the sentence was carried out quickly (within 12 months). I think the death penalty for some crimes is necessary, eg, premeditated murder, serial rape, child abuse. Who agrees with me?

Yes. It is too expensive to keep these guys in jail.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

I have stated on thread a number of times that it is the actions of criminals that is tearing society apart; this does not seem to be a matter for debate as no-one is disagreeing.


Everyone is aware of the evil our society faces. Nobody seems to be in disagreement about this either.

Me neither.

Don't bring up points if you are not willing to treat them in the context in which they were offered.

The flippant remark "throwing a switch" in a lame attempt to disparage my opinions on capital punishment is pretty sad.

I did. You don't want to deal with the evils a society has. You want to just brush it under the carpet. My point is that this won't work. You'll still have an eil society tearing itself apart.

catallus

We'll always have evil in society: capital punishment, rehabilitation, or the care-bears won't change that. "For the imagination of man is nothing but evil, all the day long."

I do want to deal with the evils in society but I know they can't be eradicated, no more than bad manners can be. But we can punish the people who are evil.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

We'll always have evil in society: capital punishment, rehabilitation, or the care-bears won't change that. "For the imagination of man is nothing but evil, all the day long."

I do want to deal with the evils in society but I know they can't be eradicated, no more than bad manners can be. But we can punish the people who are evil.

No, you don't. Before you can solve any problem (or at least reduce it) you have to understand it, and you have no interest in understanding it. The imagination quote makes no sense, man is not punished for what he imagines.

catallus

There is nothing to understand beyond unlawful killing and raping is wrong: there's no devil, there's no drawing-board, no grand-scheme behind it! What is so hard to get about this? Do we all suddenly think we're television psychiatrists to think that murderers and rapists have some magical secret in their minds that we must discover to solve their crimes and magically absolve ourselves of being of the same species???

It's like asking why does a paedophile do what he does. Who gives a **** why he does it, it's wrong.

The answers we get are only as important as the questions we ask.

catallus

There is nothing to understand beyond unlawful killing and raping is wrong: there's no devil, there's no drawing-board, no grand-scheme behind it! What is so hard to get about this? Do we all suddenly think we're television psychiatrists to think that murderers and rapists have some magical secret in their minds that we must discover to solve their crimes and magically absolve ourselves of being of the same species???

It's like asking why does a paedophile do what he does. Who gives a **** why he does it, it's wrong.

The answers we get are only as important as the questions we ask.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

There is nothing to understand beyond unlawful killing and raping is wrong: there's no devil, there's no drawing-board, no grand-scheme behind it! What is so hard to get about this? Do we all suddenly think we're television psychiatrists to think that murderers and rapists have some magical secret in their minds that we must discover to solve their crimes and magically absolve ourselves of being of the same species???

It's like asking why does a paedophile do what he does. Who gives a **** why he does it, it's wrong.

The answers we get are only as important as the questions we ask.

Wellm I would if it would stop my child being raped by a different pedophile, for a start.

catallus

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Wellm I would if it would stop my child being raped by a different pedophile, for a start.

Jesus, he does it because he's a pervert and enjoys sexually manipulating people smaller and weaker than him. There. Where is the mystery?

And then there's the inevitable follow up: "Yeah, but why ?"

And that's where the nonsense starts.

epluribusunum

osarusan wrote: »

How is it so hard for you to understand why people oppose the death penalty. Your twisted logic tells you that because a person believes Hitler should not be executed, that person believes that Hitler's crimes didn't warrant execution - therefore to some level condoning them. Let me try and explain why this is stupid and wrong.

I don't oppose the death penalty because I want to excuse or condone the behaviour of scumbags, or because I care more about the perpetrator than the victim, or other such nonsense. They deserve to stay in prison for a long time, even until they die if that is necessary for the safety of others.

It's not because I care about the criminal, it's because I care about society. I would hate to think that Irish people, as a society, believed that giving the state the power to end the life of a criminal, was the right thing to do, considering the consequences of any miscarriage of justice, but more importantly, the innate hypocrisy of the concept of capital punishment, and its inhumane treatment of humans.

First, off you are clearly sympathizing with them given that you do not mention the inhumane act that they do in order to be a candidate for the death penalty, but call the penalty itself inhumane.You did not introduce any logic into your argument, it is all opinion-based. You are sympathizing with them otherwise you would not say "even until they die if that is necessary". The word even tells me that it is almost too much for your too put them in prison for life. So someone who is a death penalty candidate may have the right to get out of prison at one point?

It is not my "twisted logic" that tells me that that person does not believe Hitler's crimes did not warrant the death penalty. It is the fact that the person came out and said straight up "he did not deserve it at all." Therefore, he believes his actions did not warrant the death penalty. Were you awake when writing this? I do not believe I ever said it was condoning the actions, but it is sympathizing with the actions and the monster. HUGE DIFFERENCE, AND YOU JUST PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.

[B]More importantly though, how come the criminal has the right to end the life of an innocent human being without any regard or reason but the State which creates, enforces, and interprets the laws does not have the right to kill such a person? You are giving a convicted criminal more power than the State which oversees all of society, for the betterment of society. Makes absolutely no sense.

Justice is the equity of treatment and fairness. We use punishments of justice for all acts, so why does the death penalty differ? Your twisted logic and emotions tell you otherwise I will assume. It is not hypocritical, because then you are saying that only certain crimes of equal punishment are hypocritical. Which in itself, is the definition of hypocrisy.

It is justice though, yes. Our punishments are set up on the basis of the act, -since the beginning of civilization- because humans directly relate the magnitude of a crime with the magnitude of punishment. Because it makes sense. Should you be in prison for a parking citation? No. How about selling heroin? Yes. As a society we create punishments that we deem fair, the parking citation cost is the cost of what society deems fair for illegally parking, the prison term is a time sentence of what society deems fair for illegally selling drugs. Why should death yield a different outcome? You yourself are being hypocritical if you think justice should be sought for only certain crimes. The death penalty is an act of justice, just like any other punishment we enforce. [/B]

Okay, and why did only 1 person who said by the way said "Hitler did not deserve it at all" address the Hitler thing? I well tell you why.

Because everyone in their right mind believes he would have deserved the death penalty. What is the difference between him and another murderer though? This is the question.

At what number did it become awful: 1,2,3,50,000, millionth? Or was it the method he used?

Everyone said "oh, b-b-b-b-b-b but that's different" How?

There is no difference to each individual, which by the way if you truly cared about society then you would care about each innocent individual who make up society. You know, their families and their lives are ruined but somehow they are no longer part of society? Well, at least they were before they were killed. At what number should we have been like "Alright Hitler, now you deserve to die, come on that last one was a bit over the top"? Because if you feel as though it is the sheer quantitative aspect then you are demeaning the life of an innocent individual. So according to your logic, Hitler did not deserve the death penalty if he would have killed 1 Slav, but since he killed millions he does. So when you are murdered in a large group in a chamber you deserve justice, but when you are murdered alone in the street by a rapist you do not? That same sense of fear overcomes you, that seem realization that you are about to die hits you, and you cease to exist in the same way. Makes no sense at all. If you are intentionally murdered you deserve justice no matter what the circumstances are.

At the end of the day, you are taking someone's only guaranteed life that we know of away from them and altering the life of those around them. You say you care about society- well then you would care about the individuals that make up society. You are referring to society as if we are aliens from another planet, we are society - you and I and the others- so if someone on here was a victim then as an individual of society they would deserve justice, that is if you care about society. Just because we do not bat an eyelid when we hear of murder on the news every night around the world, does not make it anymore just. If you take someone's life or do another terrible act just as bad, you do not deserve the right to life. I do not care about vengeance, deterrence, political beliefs, religious beliefs, etc. if someone takes someone else's only life away that we know of then they should not have their right to life. If you cared about society so much then you would look around you and see all of the horrible acts done and realize those victims are a part of society, or at least once were...

epluribusunum

I had to repost it because it logged me out and I copied and pasted it so it didn't bold it I guess, whatever you can still see the points I was trying to focus on. If that essay does not change any of your minds then nothing will. Cheers.

catallus

epluribusunum, you make a very good point about the elements of justice. It's just that the Hitler thing rubs people up the wrong way. A point of fact is that there is no evidence that he ever actually committed the act of murder: he may have given quasi-military orders for people to be executed, but that's about it. But that's me splitting hairs.

wp_rathead

..but a criminal DOESN'T have "right to kill"- that is why they are sent to prison..

catallus

The criminal law allows every citizen of any country to kill anyone. It is a very important legal point. If the killing is UNLAWFUL then a person is guilty of an offence. A nuanced thing, I agree, but it's why so many murderers are convicted of manslaughter.

osarusan

epluribusunum wrote: »

If that essay does not change any of your minds then nothing will. Cheers.

It didn't I'm afraid, because it doesn't counter even one thing I said in my post.

You're still incabable of understanding that people who oppose the death penalty can do so, not because of their concerns for the criminal, but because of their concerns for society.

It's been explained to you, but you either cannot or will not understand.

catallus

osarusan wrote: »

It didn't I'm afraid, because it counter even one thing I said in my post.

You're still incabable of understanding that people who oppose the death penalty can do so, not because of their concerns for the criminal, but because of their concerns for society.

It's been explained to you, but you either cannot or will not understand.

I'm sure that some people have concerns that the death penalty would undermine society in some way; probably the same people who believe that the NSA gives a damn about their texts.

I think most people who are anti-capital punishment take that position because they are so over-come by the idea of equality that they can't get with the idea that there are people out there that deserve to be put down. They never have to be a victim, or never have to see the damage a killer or rapist or even a burglar does.

epluribusunum

osarusan wrote: »

It didn't I'm afraid, because it counter even one thing I said in my post.

You're still incabable of understanding that people who oppose the death penalty can do so, not because of their concerns for the criminal, but because of their concerns for society.

It's been explained to you, but you either cannot or will not understand.

So I'm the one that did.not address the post. Huh? Okay.

Joe10000

I would/do but there would have to be safeguards in place including an appeals process and then a committee of noble men/women with the power to commute.

epluribusunum

This is pathetic. I destroy an argument and the person rebuts by telling me I just don't understand.

Sound logic mate. You could have also used sarcasm which is far more prevalent I have noticed. Nobody rebuts my posts, debate is boring when this is the case.

Good bye and maybe some day something will happen that changes your perception..

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

catallus wrote: »

Jesus, he does it because he's a pervert and enjoys sexually manipulating people smaller and weaker than him. There. Where is the mystery?

Except that's not netirel correct, is it? Lots of people are perverts and enjoy sexually manipulating people smaller and weaker, but they don't actually do it.

For example:
Are people born pedophiles, or is it something they become via their experiences of life?
If the former, what can be done to prevent them from acting? Can it be eradicated while they are still in childhood?
If the later, what are the experiences that triggered these 'needs'?

You seriously telling me that the answers to those questions are of no use to society whatsoever?

epluribusunum wrote: »

This is pathetic. I destroy an argument and the person rebuts by telling me I just don't understand.

Sound logic mate. You could have also used sarcasm which is far more prevalent I have noticed. Nobody rebuts my posts, debate is boring when this is the case.

Good bye and maybe some day something will happen that changes your perception..

After last night, you're not really in a position to claim you destoryed anything. Did you ever read any of the serval replies to our question you pretended to ignore?