Unofficial Debate Team First Debate: Death Penalty

[Soul Of Destiny]

This thread's point is to dispute your views on the Death Penalty. Me and Kryptik both decided on this topic so I'm not sure how much me and her will involved in this. This is ONLY about discussing the death penalty, any other post will be Pmd to a mod and deleted. You must explain your views and why you have them or else we will not consider it in this thread. Any and all posts in here need to be explained in depth why you have these views about this. This thread will be closed after a certain extent, when, I am not exactly sure.

Thank you.

[Kryptik]

Alright well this will be interesting to see how many of you agree or disagree with the Death Penalty. Or whats the worst kind of Death you could have coming out of Prison in your opinion?. Just curious on your opinions and judgements!.

[Tidus dude]

I dont like the death penalty as it is, I feel it coud be dastically changed ((im only 13 so I have not much say))

[Soul Of Destiny]

I'm guessing me and you are starting this one off.

My views on this can go either ways, I agree with the death penalty for few reasons. Any and all people guilty of Murder, Rape or Animal cruelty (such as killing animals of any type) Should be executed. Not in an inhumane way though, Lethal injection would be suitable.

I do not agree with it on these terms: If the person convicted was falsely accused and/or did not have enough evidence against them to prove to me they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Some states deemed the death penalty illegal and that it went against the humans natural rights, which is true to an extent. But if the accused deserve the punishment and the legal system has PROVED to me beyond a reasonable doubt they are guilty, than so be that punishment.

[Kryptik]

I dont like the death penalty as it is, I feel it coud be dastically changed ((im only 13 so I have not much say))

I don't think it matters how old you are, but I think that the Death Penalty has dramatically changed from generation to generation. I mean from the Guillotine,to Poison or Poison Gas, to the Electrical chair. So it could be viewed as Worse to Good or otherway around depending on how you see it. I personally would like to see people who commit crimes go to Habilitation centers to work out there problems. I personally don't agree with killing people who just steal things,but for the more "tremendous" things I believe at least they deserve the Electrical Chair or just Cyanide. One instant kill and the whole thing is over.

[Tidus dude]

you have a point, they should ONLY be put to death if certain Criteria are met, and if anything it shoud be an humane way to kill, not like shooting the person or hanging them or torturing them.

[Soul Of Destiny]

Lethal injection IMO is the best way to do it. It's humane and does not violate human rights. But in special cases, such as serial killers, they deserve The elctric chair.

[Axel_Fire_Wheel]

Things such as execution of guns and electric execution kinda scare me. Other than that, death penaltyt is suitable for people who do such vicous things.

[Tidus dude]

((shouldnt we have cross examination and such?))

Those methods of excution aren't supposed excite people, they are sort of a warning to keep people from causing tremundos problems.

[Shadow of Light]

With lethal injection is just destroy the nervous system,not the organs that prisoner whatever they had did. Organ can useful for a serious organs transplat.

[Axel_Fire_Wheel]

But why would you want someopne who went to deathrow's organs?

[Kryptik]

Lethal injection IMO is the best way to do it. It's humane and does not violate human rights. But in special cases, such as serial killers, they deserve The elctric chair.

I would have to agree with the "humane" approach depending on the crime. However it has to fit into the Humanistic rights section and the deals they have in the court system with the correct court people use. Anyways, Lethal Injection would be the quickest way beside Shooting someone in the middle of the head.

Things such as execution of guns and electric execution kinda scare me. Other than that, death penaltyt is suitable for people who do such vicous things.

Yeah I would agree with you as well. People who do the extrodinary vicious things deserve something more horrendous and painful. They get the time to think about what they did to deserve such a treatment.

you have a point, they should ONLY be put to death if certain Criteria are met, and if anything it shoud be an humane way to kill, not like shooting the person or hanging them or torturing them.

True you also have a valid point, however I think they should stick them in a Rehabiatation center like "The Ripper 2" and try to frighten them into not doing them. Whether or not thats Humane and fits into the criteria is another matter.

[Shadow of Light]

Well, if there no one else would rather use theirs or nothing.

[Axel_Fire_Wheel]

that's still gross....

[unlimited]

I belive that the death penalty is nesasery in some cases,
It is to keep the world in oder, to punish those who need to be punished.
Some people (I belive) need to be punished that way.
Bu then again the bible dose say the God shold be the one to punish people for thier sins and another human should not have the right to take the life of another....
In the end I'm not sure witch way I belive.

[Tidus dude]

((wow this thread is making people debate on, limbs of the topic))

Usually I'd be for that but then again "Seriel Killers", Rapsists and such usually would not be truly valid, for example they couldve been a narcoutic or alchoic on the side

[Kryptik]

I belive that the death penalty is nesasery in some cases,
It is to keep the world in oder, to punish those who need to be punished.
Some people (I belive) need to be punished that way.
Bu then again the bible dose say the God shold be the one to punish people for thier sins and another human should not have the right to take the life of another....
In the end I'm not sure witch way I belive.

I don't think God has control of this part of the Death Cycle. Usually society goes to court to get to the Death Penalty. Or if they come out of jail/prison and commit another crime which was completely worse than the first one. Depending on if the crime was "supreme" or "inhumane" than and only then should they deserve the "Death Penalty". If they have an excuse, for example like a "psychology" problem they may take that route instead of taking the death penalty. I do however believe that if you have certain issues with "Inhumane" techniques in crime than you should recieve the "Cyanide Gas" or "Blown away" by a huge Tank in war. Hm, maybe that would be a better way of Serving "community services".
Serving in the Army as Community Service could be seen as another Part of the "Death Penalty", since you could actually die a certain way in doing so.

[Tidus dude]

I don't think God has control of this part of the Death Cycle. Usually society goes to court to get to the Death Penalty. Or if they come out of jail/prison and commit another crime which was completely worse than the first one. Depending on if the crime was "supreme" or "inhumane" than and only then should they deserve the "Death Penalty". If they have an excuse, for example like a "psychology" problem they may take that route instead of taking the death penalty. I do however believe that if you have certain issues with "Inhumane" techniques in crime than you should recieve the "Cyanide Gas" or "Blown away" by a huge Tank in war. Hm, maybe that would be a better way of Serving "community services".
Serving in the Army as Community Service could be seen as another Part of the "Death Penalty", since you could actually die a certain way in doing so.


Makes alot of sense, and has few people ((including me)) all said in diffrent ways that you only should get the death penalty if YOU ABSOLUTLY DESERVE it and thats not saying that years in prison or therapy cant help you.

[Shadow of Light]

Blown by a Tank in war I say that a little too much there, but I do understand what saying.

[Tidus dude]

Yes that went overboard, failed to see that before........ But going to war in general isn't really an humane thing.

[Kryptik]

Makes alot of sense, and has few people ((including me)) all said in diffrent ways that you only should get the death penalty if YOU ABSOLUTLY DESERVE it and thats not saying that years in prison or therapy cant help you.


Well it makes sense if you are wanting a way out of Prison and the original way you were going to die. So why not make going to the Army or any other place in that category "Community Service". I mean you get a 50/50 chance of living and dying. I mean if they are looking for Hiree's willing to fight I say look to the "Prison Systems" and "Jails" and pull them out of there.
Aside from the original punishment this could be either primary or secondary any way you look at it. Any other ideas about different techniques into Death Penalties?.. Primary or Secondary?..

[Soul Of Destiny]

See, the court system has failed us before. They sent serial killers such as John Wayne Gacey just to jail. They did not execute them, they murdered and some even ate their victims and all they got was a simple slap on the wrist and sent to jail for life. Most, didn't even make it. Jeffrey Dahmer (SP?) was murdered in jail in a horrendous way. Which he didn't deserve to an extent. He had a mod shoved in his colon (gruesome) which poked his brain and killed him. That is one of the most horrendous deaths possible.

[Tidus dude]

Well it makes sense if you are wanting a way out of Prison and the original way you were going to die. So why not make going to the Army or any other place in that category "Community Service". I mean you get a 50/50 chance of living and dying. I mean if they are looking for Hiree's willing to fight I say look to the "Prison Systems" and "Jails" and pull them out of there.
Aside from the original punishment this could be either primary or secondary any way you look at it. Any other ideas about different techniques into Death Penalties?.. Primary or Secondary?..

NO comment

[Kryptik]

NO comment

What do you mean no comment?, did I cover everything in my above post?..lol


See, the court system has failed us before. They sent serial killers such as John Wayne Gacey just to jail. They did not execute them, they murdered and some even ate their victims and all they got was a simple slap on the wrist and sent to jail for life. Most, didn't even make it. Jeffrey Dahmer (SP?) was murdered in jail in a horrendous way. Which he didn't deserve to an extent. He had a mod shoved in his colon (gruesome) which poked his brain and killed him. That is one of the most horrendous deaths possible.

The court system has failed us many times before. Most of them are Egotistical, Power Hungry, or Greedy for money to keep feeding the economy. Thus, this greed leads to stealing from others and therefore back to the jail and prison systems and death.

Most, didn't even make it. Jeffrey Dahmer (SP?) was murdered in jail in a horrendous way. Which he didn't deserve to an extent. He had a mod shoved in his colon (gruesome) which poked his brain and killed him. That is one of the most horrendous deaths possible.

Sometimes, security guards don't care since they have commited more than one crime. In most cases, they let people kill each other for the sentencing instead of doing there job. Sometimes, they do their job like they are supposed to. It seems to me like people will do anything to get out of jail or prison so they try to make an escape route and most fail. Then again, I've never been there and I don't plan on going there anytime soon. Sometimes it makes you wonder if they fight each other, or some one else started the fight leading up to a mis trial or mis-treatment. Jeffrey Dahmer recieved a different kind of death, which I would call a secondary death. In other words, I believe it was uncalled for.

[Tidus dude]

I meant to qoute his post, not yours and no comment means you do not wish to reply to a statement

[Kryptik]

I meant to qoute his post, not yours and no comment means you do not wish to reply to a statement

Alright then, thought it was mine. Nevermind then.

[Tidus dude]

Alright then, thought it was mine. Nevermind then.


Wow this like died..... And if a debate team comes along I so wanna be a member! Im on a debate team at school

[Kryptik]

Wow this like died..... And if a debate team comes along I so wanna be a member! Im on a debate team at school

Yeah more people will get on soon and then it might start up again. Unless you have a comment about whats been said so far.

[Soul Of Destiny]

I'm back and ready to debate ;).

As I've said before: The death penalty is not always necessary but sometimes mandatory in some cases. I feel if we used the death penalty more and more than there would be less and less crime. People would know that the legal system is no longer playing around and is tired of the crimes and violence.

But on the other hand if we did use it more, more and more people would be suing the state/country etc. for invading your born natural human rights. Even though in most cases they do not win, eventually the court system will crack and give in.

[Jess]

See, in England we don't have a Death penalty. But, for the sake of discussion, I will try and join in with the little knowledge I have.

Personally, as has been said, one should only be killed for something like mass murder, or something of that nature. I severely disagree with Death by Firing Squad. That's unbelievably unhumane, in my opinion.

[Soul Of Destiny]

See, in England we don't have a Death penalty. But, for the sake of discussion, I will try and join in with the little knowledge I have.

Personally, as has been said, one should only be killed for something like mass murder, or something of that nature. I severely disagree with Death by Firing Squad. That's unbelievably unhumane, in my opinion.

Yay! Your here! We were waiting for you Ms Jess. LOL

But I do agree, the whole firing squad approach on things, it's very inhumane. As stated before, IMO lethal injection is by far the most humane approach to the death penalty. Of course unless they deserve the pain, then it's the electric chair.

[Tidus dude]

wow your luky not to have one, and I am looking forward to other debate topics!

[Twilight Blade]

I'm guessing me and you are starting this one off.

My views on this can go either ways, I agree with the death penalty for few reasons. Any and all people guilty of Murder, Rape or Animal cruelty (such as killing animals of any type) Should be executed. Not in an inhumane way though, Lethal injection would be suitable.

I do not agree with it on these terms: If the person convicted was falsely accused and/or did not have enough evidence against them to prove to me they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Some states deemed the death penalty illegal and that it went against the humans natural rights, which is true to an extent. But if the accused deserve the punishment and the legal system has PROVED to me beyond a reasonable doubt they are guilty, than so be that punishment.

I wouldn't really go so far as to say animal cruelty, but I believe there are cases in which an adult has raped a child and has been sentenced to death (rightly so). No one is trying to prove to YOU that they are guilty, they are trying to prove it to the jury.

I believe (in some states) that they still use the electric chair. I agree with this in some cases. If someone rapes and murders a 5-year-old child (which is obviously inhumane) and is sentenced to death, then why should the rapist's death be any less painful?.

The whole problem with the jury is system is people being biased. If a Chinese man was convicted of murder and sentenced to death because the majority of the jury hates China, then in that case, I could not justify such a punishment.

[Soul Of Destiny]

I wouldn't really go so far as to say animal cruelty, but I believe there are cases in which an adult has raped a child and has been sentenced to death (rightly so). No one is trying to prove to YOU that they are guilty, they are trying to prove it to the jury.

I believe (in some states) that they still use the electric chair. I agree with this in some cases. If someone rapes and murders a 5-year-old child (which is obviously inhumane) and is sentenced to death, then why should the rapist's death be any less painful?.

The whole problem with the jury is system is people being biased. If a Chinese man was convicted of murder and sentenced to death because the majority of the jury hates China, then in that case, I could not justify such a punishment.



I agree with this, it's pretty much what I stated in my above posts. But I am aware they are not trying to prove to ME, but If they do not give enough evidence or anything of that sort, I will be against the death penalty. Only if they prove they are guilty to me or anyone beyond a reasonable doubt they are guilty, then so be it. And I agree with the last part, Everybody is biased in some way so not just he court is that way. What the world needs, is to stop racism and bigotry completely.

I understand the whole deal with being different but if everyone was the same don't you think the world would be a better place?

[Kryptik]

I wouldn't really go so far as to say animal cruelty, but I believe there are cases in which an adult has raped a child and has been sentenced to death (rightly so). No one is trying to prove to YOU that they are guilty, they are trying to prove it to the jury.

I believe (in some states) that they still use the electric chair. I agree with this in some cases. If someone rapes and murders a 5-year-old child (which is obviously inhumane) and is sentenced to death, then why should the rapist's death be any less painful?.

The whole problem with the jury is system is people being biased. If a Chinese man was convicted of murder and sentenced to death because the majority of the jury hates China, then in that case, I could not justify such a punishment.

Hm, I don't know about Animal Cruelty, but I was going to say something on loose animals who are trained to kill and to attack without warning. I mean there are some cases in which it was the owner or someone else who trained it to do so. If a loose animal gets loose and kills does the kill sentence go to the person who does or doesn't own it?. I mean is it really there responsibility to pay for the damage?. I mean they might of purchased the animal, but it's their responsibility in my eyes to make sure that their animal doesn't Attack or Escape. I don't think it's the owner at the pet store or any other place.

The whole problem with the jury is system is people being biased. If a Chinese man was convicted of murder and sentenced to death because the majority of the jury hates China, then in that case, I could not justify such a punishment.

That's like saying We find the defendant guilty, because we're facist and sexist". Or thats how I see it anyways. I still don't believe that they should sentence someone just because they hate a certain state or country. I also believe that they shouldn't give death sentence to people who steal. I mean it's a really biased court system and it seems really facist to me. They may have convicted a lot of people on Death Sentence to inhumane techniques. I mean I understand those techniques should only be used for violent assults, but I don't believe they should use it for crimes like "Drugs,Stealing, Break In's."

[Twilight Blade]

That's basically what they are saying, but we can do anything about it, and most don't look at it that way.

[Kryptik]

That's basically what they are saying, but we cant do anything about it, and most don't look at it that way.

Well some of them like doing there job well enough to get paid to be biased. Or they aren't used to looking in a different point of perspective. I guess it really depends on which way you're looking at the situation and how to deal with it with what you've got. Maybe thats it, or maybe there are certain things that happen in court that are left out. Who knows what they do. *Shrugs*..

[Soul Of Destiny]

See the thing I don't like about jury duty is when they call somebody in, they have no idea what so ever that they are racist, sexist, or anything of that sort. So no matter which way you look at it, our system has MANY flaws.

[Tidus dude]

See the thing I don't like about jury duty is when they call somebody in, they have no idea what so ever that they are racist, sexist, or anything of that sort. So no matter which way you look at it, our system has MANY flaws.


Glad ya see it that way, our courts have so many flaws the entire System shoud be altered..... wich shud be a new debate topic!

[khfan12345]

whats a Debate team?

[Tidus dude]

whats a Debate team?


wrong place to ask! and what is with your constent questioning?

[khfan12345]

what do you mean?

[Tidus dude]

Nevermind! But seriously a debate team is when people debate on a topic. Usually it is more oganized though

[Shadow of Light]

yeah, that is about what a debate team is.

[khfan12345]

how have you wrote a topic about death pently?

[Leon]

Sure I'm for it. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Don't do the crime if you don't want to die. lol

[Shadow of Light]

Sure I'm for it. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Don't do the crime if you don't want to die. lol

You keep short and simple I like that man:cool:

[Tidus dude]

AMen to that!

[Shadow of Light]

Indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kryptik]

See the thing I don't like about jury duty is when they call somebody in, they have no idea what so ever that they are racist, sexist, or anything of that sort. So no matter which way you look at it, our system has MANY flaws.

I dislike that factor in such things, you never know what they are capable of. In my eyes, the Security, the Judge and the rest of the people there could be rigged as a set-up or trap and you still never know it.


Sure I'm for it. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Don't do the crime if you don't want to die. lol
Thats a great quote, however what if you were framed? How would you like it if the court systems rigged everything just because they were either racist, facist or just flat out don't care whether you live or die?. How would you go about this situation. I'm not saying anything like would happen, but it's likely it could in a 1/10,000 chance.

[K H P]

I think the death penalty is harsh, but then again, it is reasonable...

It's kind of like, "this is what happens if you do this, so don't do it.." It's like training a dog honestly, you let him do the bad thing, then you hit him afterwards to make him stop, making it understand, "Oh, whenever I bite the couch, I get hit, so I'm just gonna stop now.."

Not every jury is going to have like a full room of racists or whatever, it's possible, but not likely, there will always be somone in the jury who wants to reason a bit, give the "criminal" a chance...

But, at the same time I disagree with the Death Penalty because I don't think anyone should have the right to take someone elses life, most "criminals or murderers" grow up in the slums or in a broken home, and it's just the way they have lived all their life, so when you grow up around it, it isn't as big as a deal to kill someone to them..so I don't think they should be killed, just helped

[Twilight Blade]

Pssssht. What about Al Capone, he didn't grow up in the slums? There are plently of criminals who didn't grow up in poor families. I'm a firm believer in an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth; thus, my opinion is as such. :\

[Soul Of Destiny]

Pssssht. What about Al Capone, he didn't grow up in the slums? There are plently of criminals who didn't grow up in poor families. I'm a firm believer in an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth; thus, my opinion is as such. :\

I completely agree with this, but if you think about it. If your killing someone for something they did, does that make you any better? Two wrongs do not make right, even though I am for the death penalty, that statement is quite true.

[Twilight Blade]

Sentencing a man who raped and killed an innocent child would not be a wrong in my book. A right will always outdo a wrong.

[K H P]

well...i still stand by that no one has the right to take away life, but...I rather get the death penalty then spend my whole life in prison

[zeffie]

Sentencing a man who raped and killed an innocent child would not be a wrong in my book. A right will always outdo a wrong.


There is where I cannot come to terms that the Death Penalty is justified. Sure if we accept due process and trust the Government with the current, "system" then of course it is easy to fall into a position that accepts what is being done as correct and justified.

Does such a man that raped and killed innocent children deserve to be free? No, of course not. Nor is he right in his actions. He should be punished. However to justify murder for murder does not make sense.

Let's take one scenario for example... that man is sentenced on death row to be executed.. however he is killed by another convict. Yet that convict will now be held accountable for that murder. However if that man had been executed none would have been held accountable.

YET, if another man had killed him, he would have been punished. Different means, same end. Yet one is justified and acceptable, whilst another is not. It is hypocritical at best to support one method and not the other, when it is in fact still murder/killing.

The premise of the parameters via the method that such an individual is killed does not justify, nor alter the actuality of what is being had. That man is still being killed, ( however deserving or not ) people are still taking his life. And sure within the parameters of our laws and applied due process it is justified, ( as I do not mean to be misunderstood ) however if murder is not justified in one context of circumstance, why then should it be justified in another?

*sigh* Yet I digress.. because we still have the problem of criminals that use deadly force, and our law enforcement is forced to use firearms/deadly force in response. However that is another tangent I won't get into currently, as to avoid going off topic.

In either case, I myself cannot find it acceptable to justify murder however deserving the individual may be according to our laws and standards. It's destructive either way, and does not help change anything.

A person pulling a switch, or pushing the needle in for the Death Penalty is still killing that individual. Semantics of, "killing" vs, "murder" do not change what is in actuality being had. That individual is still being denied life.

[Kryptik]

Sentencing a man who raped and killed an innocent child would not be a wrong in my book. A right will always outdo a wrong.

Yeah but always factor in that "A Right May outdo a Wrong, but then once again another wrong is done because of the rights done before it." So it just loops and this cycle repeats because of "revenge".

well...i still stand by that no one has the right to take away life, but...I rather get the death penalty then spend my whole life in prison

This whole view on killing is not needed but what happened if the USA and the other countries were over-populated, what then? Hire random people to kill to get rid of over-population. Destroy to rebuild?. It's a whole neverending cycle of the universe.

[K H P]

but there is the fact that people are dying ever day, and those numbers aren't small..if its not AIDs, then it's a car accident, if it's not a car accident then it's some other kind of disease, so, it's gonna be hard to get over-populated

[Kryptik]

but there is the fact that people are dying ever day, and those numbers aren't small..if its not AIDs, then it's a car accident, if it's not a car accident then it's some other kind of disease, so, it's gonna be hard to get over-populated

Like I said before, all it is, is another way of killing people. I really believe that there are already diseases in the food/drinks we have every day. Everything we intake that has a good or bad effect in our bodies is a way of destroying our bodies. Too much or not enough of things is another way of death. So by me saying that another Death Penalty would be "Starvation" or Uncured Diseases However to this approach if it went out of controll Extreme bad things happen after a breakout that can't be contained. Rather than all these More Technological Approaches should I say. All they would have to do would starve them and beat them. Rather than all this money wasted on "more" equipment. I mean the more equipment the more they have to clean what they use and throw out what they've already used. (Which by the way causes diseases when it goes to the garbage waste. Or does it go somewhere else where then an insect picks it up and carries it to the rest of society. Then therefore, once again creating "Another" virus?. So besides, Starving them, or without diseases, without Bloodied Battles/Wars, or extreme approaches of Death. I'm curious how would you go about dealing with this?.

[K H P]

Like I said before, all it is, is another way of killing people. I really believe that there are already diseases in the food/drinks we have every day. Everything we intake that has a good or bad effect in our bodies is a way of destroying our bodies. Too much or not enough of things is another way of death. So by me saying that another Death Penalty would be "Starvation" or Uncured Diseases However to this approach if it went out of controll Extreme bad things happen after a breakout that can't be contained. Rather than all these More Technological Approaches should I say. All they would have to do would starve them and beat them. Rather than all this money wasted on "more" equipment. I mean the more equipment the more they have to clean what they use and throw out what they've already used. (Which by the way causes diseases when it goes to the garbage waste. Or does it go somewhere else where then an insect picks it up and carries it to the rest of society. Then therefore, once again creating "Another" virus?. So besides, Starving them, or without diseases, without Bloodied Battles/Wars, or extreme approaches of Death. I'm curious how would you go about dealing with this?.

First, I completely agree with the food and drinks, they are putting so many weird things inside of them, like water isn't even water...

I don't think starving or beating a person is right, I mean that seems a bit cruel and unusual, it also seems very "old times" You might as well say, If you commit murder, then you just get beheaded.

It's the people's fault new virus appear or viruses spread, like when they do heroine, most of the time it's just one needle for the whole group, and if one has this, than this one will get it as well...and when people show no care, then nobody shows care

[Riku-Sora]

All of yall have good viewpoints but I would like to mention whatever sin is committed they are all equal in God's eyes.

Now are system is always flawed and that is not going to change but I agree with the Death Penalty. It is really the only sure way to make sure they never kill again. Why take the risk?

Framing can happen but I find it not to happen as much as yall think. Yall can make the call on that one. Besides keeping a convicted murderer locked up is a waste of money as well.

See thou I believe in the Bible to that Thou Shalt not Kill. Of course when you are trying to defend yourself from getting killed I believe you are not held accountable for that as well as giving the death penalty to someone who as killed other people.

[Tidus dude]

Amen riku-sora, Amen!

[K H P]

Exactly, just like the egyptians...and eye for an eye, you cut off their hand, you get yours cut off too

[Kryptik]

Exactly, just like the egyptians...and eye for an eye, you cut off their hand, you get yours cut off too

That sounds more like the Europeans, Romans and not to mention the Egyptians.


First, I completely agree with the food and drinks, they are putting so many weird things inside of them, like water isn't even water...

I don't think starving or beating a person is right, I mean that seems a bit cruel and unusual, it also seems very "old times" You might as well say, If you commit murder, then you just get beheaded.

It's the people's fault new virus appear or viruses spread, like when they do heroine, most of the time it's just one needle for the whole group, and if one has this, than this one will get it as well...and when people show no care, then nobody shows care.

I mean all the Virus's adding up will most likely become an unknown and unstoppable virus some time in the future. We'll probably never know until the last minute. (Which is completely ironic and stupid.)
Well if you are going to commit murder and then kill yourself. I say just make it a "Double Suicide". In any case, we are just killing are selves slower or faster with everything we intake into our bodies. I should even think Exercise would do it as well. Well I believe that if someone commited a crime they should get a beating or at least a certain amount of "Starvation" period.

See thou I believe in the Bible to that Thou Shalt not Kill.
See, now thats the only problem here. People are killing each other whether or not you want it to happen. Lets not to forget stealing, extreme assults, gang fights and anything else that happens today in the world.

[K H P]

So...instead of giving them the death penalty they should be tortured?

[Kryptik]

So...instead of giving them the death penalty they should be tortured?

That would be an extreme slow way of receiving the "Death Penalty". I mean if they get beaten they learn how to deal with their own problems and toughen them up for whats to come in life. Like the saying says "What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger". Or so thats what everyone here says, but I don't know what they think on Politics or the Parties they like to be categorized in.
Well in any case both ways you are being tortured. One's a slow progressed form of death while the other one is either quick and painless.

[Riku-Sora]

That sounds more like the Europeans, Romans and not to mention the Egyptians.



I mean all the Virus's adding up will most likely become an unknown and unstoppable virus some time in the future. We'll probably never know until the last minute. (Which is completely ironic and stupid.)
Well if you are going to commit murder and then kill yourself. I say just make it a "Double Suicide". In any case, we are just killing are selves slower or faster with everything we intake into our bodies. I should even think Exercise would do it as well. Well I believe that if someone commited a crime they should get a beating or at least a certain amount of "Starvation" period.


See, now thats the only problem here. People are killing each other whether or not you want it to happen. Lets not to forget stealing, extreme assults, gang fights and anything else that happens today in the world.

Sad but true. We are only human. We can't keep track with everyone. That is one more reason why we are an imperfect species.

[Kryptik]

Sad but true. We are only human. We can't keep track with everyone. That is one more reason why we are an imperfect species.

Indeed, thats why I believe that the government is trying to expand with all these hidden camera's in society. I think they want to make sure they know where everyone is incase someone goes missing for whatever reason. I don't know if they are really spying on us un-necessarily, I just believe it's for our own safety.
I think they are trying to cut down on death percentages as well as convicts. I heard that they are running out of room in the prison and jail systems. I think they were planning on building new ones. I heard that on the radio, but I don't know how long it's going to take.

Any species you find in the universe has flaws and not to mention all of them are hard to track. Thats why there are certain jobs for that so they can track people,animals, or any other living thing in the universe. It almost makes me think of what would happen if there weren't any scientist,doctors,nurses,etc. What then we all die from Mother Nature or Weird Virus's Not to mention quite a lot of chaos,confusion and insanity from loose criminals on the street, *Shakes head* That would be a complete bad thing.

[Tidus dude]

Everyone is giving relatively close answers now, so I think its fair to say the Death Penalty should only be used if absolutely necessary and if anything it should be humane.

[Twilight Blade]

Actually, I said, if the murder was inhumane then the murderers death shouldn't be any more or any less inhumane.

[Tidus dude]

Fine then, under those circumstances THEN the death should be inhumane.

-Thank Yoou

[Kryptik]

Fine then, under those circumstances THEN the death should be inhumane.
-Thank You

Actually, I said, if the murder was inhumane then the murderers death shouldn't be any more or any less inhumane.

Everyone is giving relatively close answers now, so I think its fair to say the Death Penalty should only be used if absolutely necessary and if anything it should be humane.

Alright, so as long as we agree on all of those statements above then we can move on from there. Anything that progresses from one punishment to another would increase the rates of another worse punishment. Because we people think that a wrong and another wrong makes a right. Or so where my group of friends and I see it. From right now anyways.

[Luxoran]

The death penalty is dependent on the amount of chaos, carnage, whatever....that he/she performs.

Say, if a person killed around, say...10,000 people, would that be considered a decent enough proof that that person deserves a death penalty.

But if that person killed about 2 people...would that be enough to ensue a death penalty?

[Soul Of Destiny]

See, the death penalty should only be served to those who deserve it. Whether or not the bible says it's right or wrong to do, it should still be used. Under certain circumstances.

I think the flaws with society today are the simple facts we follow whatever religion tells us to do, no matter if it's wrong or not, I think all religions should become null and void, maybe then life wouldn't be so hard on others.

[Kryptik]

The death penalty is dependent on the amount of chaos, carnage, whatever....that he/she performs.

Say, if a person killed around, say...10,000 people, would that be considered a decent enough proof that that person deserves a death penalty.

But if that person killed about 2 people...would that be enough to ensue a death penalty?

So it's alright in the situation that the person killed over 10+ of people and not 2. So if the person killed 2 people so you give him at least 10+ years consider the damage that was done. Not emotionally, but physical damage. I mean if one or your family is killed then fine, cry it's not going to bring them back. But the half of population of people who never knew them shouldn't have sympathy. I mean they are STRANGERS after all.

I would have to think if the person had killed less than 5 people they should at least have 5-10 years in prison and not 25. I mean a MISTAKE is a MISTAKE, people make them because of bad family situations and child hood life.
You can't blame them unless you want to blame the ones before them who started it. Anyways, say 5-10 years for a person or community service maybe would better profit rather then teaching them more violence in life.
I can only see more violence adding up to more and so forth. If you treat them not to do violence and get them some help and work with them on it. Then they might calm down and not try to kill anyone.

[zeffie]

The death penalty is dependent on the amount of chaos, carnage, whatever....that he/she performs.

Say, if a person killed around, say...10,000 people, would that be considered a decent enough proof that that person deserves a death penalty.

But if that person killed about 2 people...would that be enough to ensue a death penalty?

Accordingly yes, because either way life was taken by that individual. However circumstance may support a less than deadly response to that individuals actions. For you cannot value 10,000 lives vs 2 lives as more in the sense of individual right to life. Although in terms of numbers, 10,000 sure does outweigh 2.. it's still as much a wrongful act as killing 10,000 people.

Because according to your statement one could kill twenty people and thus not warrant a death penalty.. or perhaps 100? 300? 500? 1,000? What number do you draw the line on, and what about justice for those people, and family related to them?

Should an individual be allowed to kill one person and not suffer as much a penalty as someone that kills a massive amount of people? Certainly not, it needs to be consistant and without equivocation. So therefore you cannot skew away from an effective determined response for murder that is both destructive and evil to be honest.

It is certainly difficult to have a stance that does not support the death penalty in any response, however if the death penalty is going to be applied, then it must remain consistant within itself, and apply thus accordingly. That is my reasoning behind my statement here.. i.e. not to contradict myself from a previous post in this thread.

It's important to maintain a focus that is rational, and also understanding to what is proper in the most extreme form of punishment there is.

[Kryptik]

Accordingly yes, because either way life was taken by that individual. However circumstance may support a less than deadly response to that individuals actions. For you cannot value 10,000 lives vs 2 lives as more in the sense of individual right to life. Although in terms of numbers, 10,000 sure does outweigh 2.. it's still as much a wrongful act as killing 10,000 people.

Because according to your statement one could kill twenty people and thus not warrant a death penalty.. or perhaps 100? 300? 500? 1,000? What number do you draw the line on, and what about justice for those people, and family related to them?

Should an individual be allowed to kill one person and not suffer as much a penalty as someone that kills a massive amount of people? Certainly not, it needs to be consistant and without equivocation. So therefore you cannot skew away from an effective determined response for murder that is both destructive and evil to be honest.

It is certainly difficult to have a stance that does not support the death penalty in any response, however if the death penalty is going to be applied, then it must remain consistant within itself, and apply thus accordingly. That is my reasoning behind my statement here.. i.e. not to contradict myself from a previous post in this thread.

It's important to maintain a focus that is rational, and also understanding to what is proper in the most extreme form of punishment there is.


Well thats a completely new perspective on how to cover something so fast.
So in going back to your statement about the warrant or the 5000 to life statement. I don't think people live that long. (Or unless that 5000 meant to cash?..) Hmm in any case, it would be warrant for search and arrest, then talking to police or lawyer, or prison for min-max years, or death penalty. So there's basically a whole process in how this "Death Penalty" works. I think that it's difficult and hard to apply the Death Sentence. I mean it is destructive/ and evil like you said. However you still have to look in the other person's perspective as well. You have to think about what happened and how they think about the certain situation. (Depending on what it is at the time.)

[zeffie]

Well thats a completely new perspective on how to cover something so fast.
So in going back to your statement about the warrant or the 5000 to life statement. I don't think people live that long. (Or unless that 5000 meant to cash?..)

Hrmm... Not sure when I spoke about 5000 to life.. or how cash is involved..? Can you elaborate?

Hmm in any case, it would be warrant for search and arrest, then talking to police or lawyer, or prison for min-max years, or death penalty. So there's basically a whole process in how this "Death Penalty" works.

Okay, due process.. that is understood already.


I think that it's difficult and hard to apply the Death Sentence. I mean it is destructive/ and evil like you said. However you still have to look in the other person's perspective as well. You have to think about what happened and how they think about the certain situation. (Depending on what it is at the time.)

That is where ambiguity plays a major role per subjective internal perspective of each individual and how they believe what the outcome should be for someone that either kills someone they love such as a family member, or attempts to etc..

However you cannot base the judgment accordingly so, as it would be biased and unfair overall... Therefore as I have stated, "It is certainly difficult to have a stance that does not support the death penalty in any response, however if the death penalty is going to be applied, then it must remain consistent within itself, and apply thus accordingly."

That would be the most reasonable means to apply such an extreme punishment, in being somewhat fair? Although I don't support that it is fair on any grounds.

[sarahphina]

I am totally for the death penalty, given in circumstances under which the person is tried, and found guilty without a reasonable doubt. The only thing I really object to is the length of time it takes the prison system to carry out such a sentence. A lot of you don't pay taxes yet, but our taxes go to supporting these low lifes for years and years, even though they have been convicted of murder. The average is 10 years before they actually go through with the death penalty. That is thousands and thousands of our tax dollars going to make these people comfortable till they die, that seems unbelieveable to me. If you take someones elses life you should then forfeit yours, and not in 10 years, but immediately, when you are proven guilty.-Sarahphina;)

[TwilightKeeper]

I do not agree with the death sentence, but I guess we have to keep the population under control somehow.......

[Kryptik]

I think that it's difficult and hard to apply the Death Sentence. I mean it is destructive/ and evil like you said. However you still have to look in the other person's perspective as well. You have to think about what happened and how they think about the certain situation. (Depending on what it is at the time.)

That is where ambiguity plays a major role per subjective internal perspective of each individual and how they believe what the outcome should be for someone that either kills someone they love such as a family member, or attempts to etc..

However you cannot base the judgment accordingly so, as it would be biased and unfair overall... Therefore as I have stated, "It is certainly difficult to have a stance that does not support the death penalty in any response, however if the death penalty is going to be applied, then it must remain consistent within itself, and apply thus accordingly."

That would be the most reasonable means to apply such an extreme punishment, in being somewhat fair? Although I don't support that it is fair on any grounds.



So if you are saying that "We do not have the right to judge", then how do we know whats right and whats wrong then?. Are we just second quessing are selves, or do we just want to get it over with so we can move on with the rest of our life. So if we do that are we killing an innocent part of society not able to know if we are doing the right thing. If that is so then why do we even bother to vote on whether or not they or Not Guilty or Guilty?. Do we just vote to cut back on "Over population" or something else?. Now lets ask ourself if it isn't fair then whats fair in this lifetime?.

[zeffie]

So if you are saying that "We do not have the right to judge", then how do we know whats right and whats wrong then?

My point directly was never that we did not have the right to judge..

Does such a man that raped and killed innocent children deserve to be free? No, of course not. Nor is he right in his actions. He should be punished. However to justify murder for murder does not make sense.

For criminal action there is still a need for an effective response accordingly. Otherwise we would be under complete chaos.

Are we just second quessing are selves, or do we just want to get it over with so we can move on with the rest of our life. So if we do that are we killing an innocent part of society not able to know if we are doing the right thing. If that is so then why do we even bother to vote on whether or not they or Not Guilty or Guilty?. Do we just vote to cut back on "Over population" or something else?. Now lets ask ourself if it isn't fair then whats fair in this lifetime?.

The reason I believe is birth out of an understanding per natural parameters in which the understanding is that murder is the most effective way to eliminate the problem, or punish the individual so much so that they are no longer able to live as that would be granting them too much. Which doesn't really make sense, because how enjoyable can a small cell be? And it is clear that it doesn't eliminate the problem, because more people murder everyday. It's a revolving door that doesn't stop.

My point isn't an argument of fairness or non-fairness for any point whatsoever, however I do support consistant action thereof.

And whatever reason society has for it, I cannot make claim for, as I cannot speak for society.. such would be a hasty generalization at best.

I can speak for myself at best and give example per my own understanding of what I support and believe is best for the Death Penalty or lack thereof.

[Soul Of Destiny]

Sheesh guys, going all out I see? Sorry but I haven't really been on, therfor I have no idea what's going on. So I relenquish my position in this thread.

But Kryptik, if you read this. Shall we make another topic? Because The Debate Master is back! :D

[Kryptik]

Sheesh guys, going all out I see? Sorry but I haven't really been on, therfor I have no idea what's going on. So I relenquish my position in this thread.

But Kryptik, if you read this. Shall we make another topic? Because The Debate Master is back! :D


Yeah lets do that, glad you're back though, might want to pick another topic though.


Are we just second quessing are selves, or do we just want to get it over with so we can move on with the rest of our life. So if we do that are we killing an innocent part of society not able to know if we are doing the right thing. If that is so then why do we even bother to vote on whether or not they or Not Guilty or Guilty?. Do we just vote to cut back on "Over population" or something else?. Now lets ask ourself if it isn't fair then whats fair in this lifetime?.


The reason I believe is birth out of an understanding per natural parameters in which the understanding is that murder is the most effective way to eliminate the problem, or punish the individual so much so that they are no longer able to live as that would be granting them too much. Which doesn't really make sense, because how enjoyable can a small cell be? And it is clear that it doesn't eliminate the problem, because more people murder everyday. It's a revolving door that doesn't stop.

I've already said it before so I'll say it again since I'm quoting this. Birth and Death is just a cycle and it balances the Universe and the world. However like most people say "Murdering" people is an unnatural way to die. Or I do anyways, most natural deaths are cause by Old age and only that. I'm wondering if Food Poisoning would be a natural way to die. What if was a complete accident and someone at a restraunt recieved the "Death Penalty" for that? Not saying that would happen anytime soon, but it's quite possible.
Hm, I wouldn't want to know what it's like in a small Cell in Jail/Prison or Down Town police station. So I'll just leave that one alone for now.


My point isn't an argument of fairness or non-fairness for any point whatsoever, however I do support consistant action thereof.
And whatever reason society has for it, I cannot make claim for, as I cannot speak for society.. such would be a hasty generalization at best.
I can speak for myself at best and give example per my own understanding of what I support and believe is best for the Death Penalty or lack thereof.

The point of this whole argument of whether or not Death Penalty is necessary is whether or not people think it's fair or not. Or if they see it differently it could mean that they are to the point of accepting that it is necessary to a certain point.
They also might believe in keeping "overpopulation" down, as well as anything else that catches their eye. Like I said before above in this post, some people think it's necessary because of their belief or certain standards they live by.
Everyone who comes in any one of these Debates and Arguments and post their mind has a understanding of it and has given it thought to about every aspect to it in their own words.

[zeffie]

I've already said it before so I'll say it again since I'm quoting this. Birth and Death is just a cycle and it balances the Universe and the world. However like most people say "Murdering" people is an unnatural way to die. Or I do anyways, most natural deaths are cause by Old age and only that. I'm wondering if Food Poisoning would be a natural way to die. What if was a complete accident and someone at a restraunt recieved the "Death Penalty" for that? Not saying that would happen anytime soon, but it's quite possible.
Hm, I wouldn't want to know what it's like in a small Cell in Jail/Prison or Down Town police station. So I'll just leave that one alone for now.

Certainly, it is accurate to claim that such is unnatural, and unfair at best. However as you have stated, birth and death is a measure of keeping balance in the universe, and balance for humanity. And certainly death is unexpected in which it can come at any moment even when we least expect it. Though one can argue the pre-determination or randomness of death.

Well, we certainly do see our share of people being punished for, "accidental'' death being had, and thus they are held responsible. So again, it is certainly a gray area to be honest.


The point of this whole argument of whether or not Death Penalty is necessary is whether or not people think it's fair or not. Or if they see it differently it could mean that they are to the point of accepting that it is necessary to a certain point.
They also might believe in keeping "overpopulation" down, as well as anything else that catches their eye. Like I said before above in this post, some people think it's necessary because of their belief or certain standards they live by.
Everyone who comes in any one of these Debates and Arguments and post their mind has a understanding of it and has given it thought to about every aspect to it in their own words.

Which I find it unnecessary at best, and without justification. However, again I myself can only make claim for my position at best, I cannot lay claim for anyone else, or society as a whole.. as there is an individualistic perspective per each individual per subjective means, ( however supported by objective parameters at times.. ) which obviously varies greatly.

[Kryptik]

Certainly, it is accurate to claim that such is unnatural, and unfair at best. However as you have stated, birth and death is a measure of keeping balance in the universe, and balance for humanity. And certainly death is unexpected in which it can come at any moment even when we least expect it. Though one can argue the pre-determination or randomness of death.

Well, we certainly do see our share of people being punished for, "accidental'' death being had, and thus they are held responsible. So again, it is certainly a gray area to be honest.

Which I find it unnecessary at best, and without justification. However, again I myself can only make claim for my position at best, I cannot lay claim for anyone else, or society as a whole.. as there is an individualistic perspective per each individual per subjective means, ( however supported by objective parameters at times.. ) which obviously varies greatly.


Well it may be unnecessary but it happens anyways in life because they are "Accidental". To me I see it as a Gray area as well, but sometimes people who are desperate and like to take things for advantage take things up to court to recieve money. I don't know how much proof actually supports that, but that certainly leads up to revenge and that leads to more death. So there are quite a lot of people being punished for the Right or Wrong reasons. Or it's completely unjustified and they are killed without any hesitation or proof. Which in any case is pitiful. I mean do you really not have enough time to sort through all the bad evidence or would you rather go back to lunch break not caring if a kid is charged with 1st degree murder. (Ex.)
That would be completely sad and pitiful to see, not saying it would happen altough it might because I probably jynxed it about 1 minute ago....

[zeffie]

Well it may be unnecessary but it happens anyways in life because they are "Accidental". To me I see it as a Gray area as well, but sometimes people who are desperate and like to take things for advantage take things up to court to recieve money. I don't know how much proof actually supports that, but that certainly leads up to revenge and that leads to more death.

As I am sure to some degree there is support for cases in which people have done so out of revenge, or hatred for the individual that killed someone they loved. Which again, is only going to perpetuate the problem even further, and create more destruction and more evil. Because regardless of how accountable and wrong the individual was.. such does not excuse others to repay evil for evil.

So there are quite a lot of people being punished for the Right or Wrong reasons. Or it's completely unjustified and they are killed without any hesitation or proof. Which in any case is pitiful. I mean do you really not have enough time to sort through all the bad evidence or would you rather go back to lunch break not caring if a kid is charged with 1st degree murder. (Ex.)
That would be completely sad and pitiful to see, not saying it would happen altough it might because I probably jynxed it about 1 minute ago....

Well this we are aware of, as the system is flawed as humanity is flawed being fallible. So again, I find that in either case, to repay murder with murder isn't acceptable in all honesty.

The crux of my entire argument has been two fold.

1. That the Death Penalty is unjustified and as much a crime/sin/evil as what the individual has commited themselves in which the law suggests that they are punishable by death.

The premise of the parameters via the method that such an individual is killed does not justify, nor alter the actuality of what is being had. That man is still being killed, ( however deserving or not ) people are still taking his life. And sure within the parameters of our laws and applied due process it is justified, ( as I do not mean to be misunderstood ) however if murder is not justified in one context of circumstance, why then should it be justified in another?

2. That at best, if we are going to maintain the Death Penalty as a response to criminal action(s) then it needs to remain consistant and unbiased/fair in the determination in which the verdict is thus had. And in which the punishment is carried out.


Should an individual be allowed to kill one person and not suffer as much a penalty as someone that kills a massive amount of people? Certainly not, it needs to be consistant and without equivocation. So therefore you cannot skew away from an effective determined response for murder that is both destructive and evil to be honest.

It is certainly difficult to have a stance that does not support the death penalty in any response, however if the death penalty is going to be applied, then it must remain consistant within itself, and apply thus accordingly. That is my reasoning behind my statement here.. i.e. not to contradict myself from a previous post in this thread.

It's important to maintain a focus that is rational, and also understanding to what is proper in the most extreme form of punishment there is.


This has been the essential position that I have attempted to maintain, and I wanted to recap to ask where you stand overall on this all Kryptik? I certainly find it reasonable to hold my own personal position about the Death Penalty, however on a more objective position of maintaining fairness I find such very reasonable.

After all, equality, fairness, due process, and unbiased ideals would be prefered.

[Zer0]

Nobody deserves to die.

[Kryptik]

As I am sure to some degree there is support for cases in which people have done so out of revenge, or hatred for the individual that killed someone they loved. Which again, is only going to perpetuate the problem even further, and create more destruction and more evil. Because regardless of how accountable and wrong the individual was.. such does not excuse others to repay evil for evil.

Well this we are aware of, as the system is flawed as humanity is flawed being fallible. So again, I find that in either case, to repay murder with murder isn't acceptable in all honesty.

The crux of my entire argument has been two fold.

1. That the Death Penalty is unjustified and as much a crime/sin/evil as what the individual has commited themselves in which the law suggests that they are punishable by death.



2. That at best, if we are going to maintain the Death Penalty as a response to criminal action(s) then it needs to remain consistant and unbiased/fair in the determination in which the verdict is thus had. And in which the punishment is carried out.

This has been the essential position that I have attempted to maintain, and I wanted to recap to ask where you stand overall on this all Kryptik? I certainly find it reasonable to hold my own personal position about the Death Penalty, however on a more objective position of maintaining fairness I find such very reasonable.

After all, equality, fairness, due process, and unbiased ideals would be prefered.


Nobody deserves to die...

There's where I stand right now on my belief.

[TerraT3]

First let me say this is a good choice because this is a real problem in the world that is going to change some people life.I disaqree about this because they say it going to stop people from killing people and it not heard about that cop that was killed by the shot in the head it didn't care the killer no and with death row it cost so much so instead of this whole kiling process just shot them instead of all this electrical chair stuff. and that is murrder and you can say it's not but the defffinsion of merderr is to kill someone. which is what there are doing so i think it wrong

[Kryptik]

First let me say this is a good choice because this is a real problem in the world that is going to change some people life.I disagree about this because they say it going to stop people from killing people and it not heard about that cop that was killed by the shot in the head it didn't care the killer no and with death row it cost so much so instead of this whole killing process just shot them instead of all this electrical chair stuff. and that is murder and you can say it's not but the definition of murder is to kill someone. which is what there are doing so i think it wrong

(OOC: ) Alright now the spelling is correct in the quote I can get down to the conversation..

Anyways, I would have to agree with you on that statement. We all say that it's right and wrong to kill someone and yet we let crimes do the talking so we could get rid of them and keep part of society clean of more deaths. This leads to more chaos and more confusion.

[burntlettuce]

I don't agree in the Death Plenty at all. To me taking a Human Life would be just to hard. I would say if your committed for a crime then at least 25 years in jail, anymore then life in person forever.

I just don't see the need to take a human life. I mean everyone should get at least one second chance. And many people in Jail actually change and repent for what they did. For example Karla Faye (http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/tucker/1.html).

This is basically my views on it.

[Kryptik]

I don't agree in the Death Plenty at all. To me taking a Human Life would be just to hard. I would say if your committed for a crime then at least 25 years in jail, anymore then life in person forever.

I just don't see the need to take a human life. I mean everyone should get at least one second chance. And many people in Jail actually change and repent for what they did. For example Karla Faye (http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/tucker/1.html).

This is basically my views on it.

I guess the decision is up to the judge and how extreme the crime the person has done and their actions before and after. Not to mention whether or not they lie under oath.

[dragonlord562]

Death penalty is not a good thing imo. here is a quote"It takes a strong man to clean up his mess, but a weak man takes the easy way out."
If you kill somebody, they don't suffer. Sure they may face eternal damnation, but we can't be sure of that. Death penalty is a light punishment for somebody. I'd take being killed over being imprisoned for life. When you spend all that time doing things, you learn to repent. When you have a death sentence, you don't care about your crime. you feel no true repentance, only regret that you are going to die. Those who have to sit and suffer, will feel remorse, and may actually get a second lease on life by realizing their mistakes and working to repent for them. Although this is offtopic, in Rurouni Kenshin(ya I know I'm referencing an anime) there are many characters who have done bad deeds like Megumi, Kenshin, Sanosuke, etc. There is a theme of Bushido and comitting suicide. However, a theme is always there that death is the easy way out, and that living every day, and repenting does more. Killing someone for murder, only perpetuates the cycle of death. Its not going to bring the dead back to life.

[Riku-Sora]

Death penalty is not a good thing imo. here is a quote"It takes a strong man to clean up his mess, but a weak man takes the easy way out."
If you kill somebody, they don't suffer. Sure they may face eternal damnation, but we can't be sure of that. Death penalty is a light punishment for somebody. I'd take being killed over being imprisoned for life. When you spend all that time doing things, you learn to repent. When you have a death sentence, you don't care about your crime. you feel no true repentance, only regret that you are going to die. Those who have to sit and suffer, will feel remorse, and may actually get a second lease on life by realizing their mistakes and working to repent for them. Although this is offtopic, in Rurouni Kenshin(ya I know I'm referencing an anime) there are many characters who have done bad deeds like Megumi, Kenshin, Sanosuke, etc. There is a theme of Bushido and comitting suicide. However, a theme is always there that death is the easy way out, and that living every day, and repenting does more. Killing someone for murder, only perpetuates the cycle of death. Its not going to bring the dead back to life.

But it can get rid of the person from one day finding some way out of prison through the legal system bull that happens and then they go out and do it again.

Just making my point. I am not agreeing or disagreeing to what I said but just pointing it out to others that would believe it. I guess you could call it one way of thinking.

[dragonlord562]

That is true, but that is why the legal system needs to be strong, and the corrupt need to be removed from office. As for the go out and do it again part, well there should be significant observations on his behavior, and ensure he is stable before he can be released. Also, death penalty is more useful for like military commanders or people of great political power who comitted crimes, like in the nuremburg(sp?) trials that happened after WWII. A political leader needs to be killed for crimes as they hold power, and if they manage to escape, they will regain their armies of followers and strike again. They deserve death penalty if their crimes were high enough.

[UltimaxWeapon]

Now i am a Democrat and most democrats belive in the Death Penaly.
I am one of them for the following reasons:

1. If the person is another cerial killer why need another one?, ur letting him live the rest of his life still.
2. If the evidence is against them for doing the crime then they desirve it.

[Deadeye]

:mad: I strongly agree with the death penalty whatever they did they'll do it again I'm sorry if you don't agree with me but its just my point of view but what really gets me are the children killers that get off scott free they should be the first ones facing the green mile and yes my state has the death penalty thank god:mad:

[asylum51]

some ppl change. a psycho who is a serial killer and certifiable probably isn't the most likely candidate for Miss America. its a waste of money to keep them alive but death row is expensive too. if u ask me just use a guillotine: quick, easy, painless, and can be used a number of times. all u have to do is sharpen the blade.

[Deadeye]

i got a better one just tie a rope around there neck and drop them it quick and fast and you could reuse the rope

[RXS]

i do not believe in the death sentence
if a murderer kills someone, you lock them up so they cant do it again

what right do we have to take someones life without their consent? I know that sounds stupid, "without their consent," but some people just WANT to die.

if we do this, we're no better than the better who murdered others.

[Kryptik]

;786810']i do not believe in the death sentence
if a murderer kills someone, you lock them up so they cant do it again

what right do we have to take someones life without their consent? I know that sounds stupid, "without their consent," but some people just WANT to die.

if we do this, we're no better than the better who murdered others.

Well I guess for the people who want to die they could always consider "Suicide" although I wouldn't consider that. Anyways, I see ourselves as the "Jury". The anonymous part of society telling others whether or not it is right is like a real jury in the government. So people who do suicide have their own consent without the others opinion?. We need consent from the government to tell us when we die? Not that I would want others to think that people who kill themselves are shortening their lifespan and the government is prolonging their life.

[RXS]

i dont understand..?

[Kryptik]

;786843']i dont understand..?

Well basically what I was saying is that we choose the time we want to die.
We either destroy our body to die or knock ourselves out with weapons,etc.
What I was saying about the government is that they try to prolong our lifestyle by making all these laws and rules.
Does that make sense?!.

[asylum51]

i think the iraqis did it right with hussein, yeah, why don't we just use rope?

besides, its the death penalty, if they're getting it why go out of our way to make it humane? it shouldn't be given out unless its for unhumane actions, i understand about the Constitution and cruel and unusual punishment and all that, we don't have to torture them, just do something quick (like hanging or guillotine) and save some money.

[Kryptik]

i think the iraqis did it right with hussein, yeah, why don't we just use rope?

besides, its the death penalty, if they're getting it why go out of our way to make it humane? it shouldn't be given out unless its for unhumane actions, i understand about the Constitution and cruel and unusual punishment and all that, we don't have to torture them, just do something quick (like hanging or guillotine) and save some money.

Oh my god, thank you for posting that. I believe that man had it coming for a long time for lying to everyone and then tried to hide it by killing everyone else before they had a chance to testify. I wonder do they still use the hanging or guillotine technique to this very day!? Or do they use the same techniques in England that they do here in the USA?..

[asylum51]

I don't really know I'm in the U.S.A. but i think its ridiculous the cost of keeping someone in jail for life, and the fact that they sterilize the needle for lethal injections...?

w/e just make it quick and painless... and cheap.

[Kryptik]

I don't really know I'm in the U.S.A. but i think its ridiculous the cost of keeping someone in jail for life, and the fact that they sterilize the needle for lethal injections...?

w/e just make it quick and painless... and cheap.

Looks like they are just helping the innocent along the way into their eternal sleep. So who are the real crooks here?!..I'm just curious because from what I've heard and seen I haven't seen any Innocent bystanders here.