|
Post by Zach on Oct 24, 2007 6:45:25 GMT -6
Hey Guys,
I know we addressed this issue in the Sadam Hussein thread a while back, but I think we need to bring the issue back up.
What do you think of it?
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 24, 2007 9:41:25 GMT -6
The Death Penalty or how it applied to Sadam?
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 24, 2007 11:51:40 GMT -6
The Death Penalty in general. Sorry for the confusion.
|
|
|
Post by harisstavr on Oct 24, 2007 13:13:28 GMT -6
I think it should be banned. You don't have the right to take sb's life! It's illegal. I believe that God gave life and only God can take it.
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 24, 2007 14:04:18 GMT -6
I'll take that on. If someone infringes on the rights of others (namely the right of life), they have shown that they don't hold that right in high regards, ergo, they don't deserve that right. If you don't think that others should have the right to free speech, you don't deserve free speech. The same goes with other rights.
Plus, the Death Penalty does deter murder rates in the USA.
|
|
|
Post by ViCtoria* on Oct 24, 2007 15:29:17 GMT -6
Ok, so you believe in the Hannibal rule? "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"? Like a hit you and, consequently, you hit me?
Sooo Pope Jean Paul II's almost-near-to-be assassin deserved to be almost-killed by the Pope? Or don't you think it was waaay waaay much better that the Pope accepted his apologies and respected his rights?
I am personally against the death penalty. You are not only affecting that individual, but the individual's family. A person could be unfairly treated, like we were talking in the other thread about homosexuals that receive the death penalty just because they ARE homosexuals... And that's not right at all.
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 24, 2007 16:05:46 GMT -6
Ok, so you believe in the Hannibal rule? "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth"? Like a hit you and, consequently, you hit me? Sooo Pope Jean Paul II's almost-near-to-be assassin deserved to be almost-killed by the Pope? Or don't you think it was waaay waaay much better that the Pope accepted his apologies and respected his rights? I am personally against the death penalty. You are not only affecting that individual, but the individual's family. A person could be unfairly treated, like we were talking in the other thread about homosexuals that receive the death penalty just because they ARE homosexuals... And that's not right at all. No, the eye for an eye is not what I think directly. If you flick me in the nose, I don't get to flick you in the nose. I only view it that way regarding personal rights protected by the constitution. And I don't support it against homosexuals, that's a strawman. The goal is for justice and to reduce crime. By having the death penalty in the USA, murder rates have gone down. Living on a "forgive and forget" policy like the pope did (even though that was only an attempt) will not change the criminals, and they will continue to commit crimes, namely murder and other horrible crimes.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 24, 2007 16:08:28 GMT -6
What ever happened to "Thou shal not Kill" ?
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 24, 2007 16:15:10 GMT -6
What ever happened to "Thou shal not Kill" ? "Thou shal not kill" is to individuals not the justice system. Just like "thou shal not steal" doesn't apply to say you shouldn't pay your taxes to the government or that they can't fine you.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 24, 2007 16:16:26 GMT -6
So? It still applies to the government too. The people who run the government are individuals too!
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 24, 2007 17:20:57 GMT -6
So? It still applies to the government too. The people who run the government are individuals too! It doesn't apply to justice. Justice has to be served in a way that is fair. The amendment of seperation of church and state keeps the christian rules out of the Judicial system and government. Justice is allowed to have criminals pay a fair and just penalty for their actions. Thou shal not kill doesn't apply in all situations, like self defence or war.
|
|
|
Post by harisstavr on Oct 25, 2007 6:35:47 GMT -6
oregonelephant please think about those people who are now in jail and is not proved that they have done the murder. Think that they are gonna die becuase of a mistake!
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 25, 2007 8:28:14 GMT -6
Doesn't everyone deserve a second chance?
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 25, 2007 9:58:34 GMT -6
Doesn't everyone deserve a second chance? That is a hard question, because if they deserve a 2nd chance, do they get a 3rd or 4th? If the Murderer is a mentally disabled person who is unable to know what he did, how will he know not to do it again? (not taking a side, just stating) If the Murderer is completely mentally stable, than they show that they used logic to justify to themselves that it was worth it, so whats to stop them from doing it again? I believe that, in the case of the logical person, if the person shows to be genuinely sorry (not just saying "I'm sorry") and there is strong evidence that they won't do it again, then time served is okay. In the case of the metally disabled person, they should be put under some kind of watch (either a facility or family members), but they shouldn't be living on their own unsupervised. But even if you don't like the DP, they still lose that 2nd chance with a life sentence.
|
|
|
Post by darkme on Oct 25, 2007 14:36:15 GMT -6
I do think the death penalty should be applied in certain cases, like in Saddam's case. I understand that some might say, he'd have been better off in jail for the rest of his life, maybe then he'd think of what he had done and learn to regret but with some criminals that's not the case at all. It should be only applied in "SOME" cases not all, like everyone, ok not everyone but most people knew that Saddam was a criminal and that was that. But killing people because they oppose the gov or such is just outta the question. Many death penalties have been issued for people because they opposed their govs and came out with it.
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 25, 2007 15:36:17 GMT -6
oregonelephant please think about those people who are now in jail and is not proved that they have done the murder. Think that they are gonna die becuase of a mistake! There is only an estimated 23 people in the USA that have been wrongfully executed since 1900. I believe that is horrible and we should strive to make sure that no more innocent die, but to just tare down the system is wrong. We need to strive for better judicial systems that work more on evidence and less on emotion. The DP has shown here in the USA to deter murder rates. In the 1960's, when the USA removed the DP, the murder rate jumped over 100% in just a few years, when we brought it back in 1976, the murder rate began droping by about 10% a year to back where it was, and now the murder rate in the US is slowly dropping still.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 25, 2007 20:22:40 GMT -6
Doesn't everyone deserve a second chance? But even if you don't like the DP, they still lose that 2nd chance with a life sentence. But people can change, and turn their lives around!
|
|
|
Post by ViCtoria* on Oct 25, 2007 22:27:37 GMT -6
Anyone ever heard about the first right of all human beings? The right to LIVE? Even if you have disrespected other people? I agree with Zach, people do deserve a second chance. And as a plus, if you condemn the person to be put off in jail for the rest of her/his life instead of killing her/him, you would be gaining one more labourer in prison. As far as I am concerned, prisons in the US are highly organized and there is forced labour they have to do, and the prisoners are not paid back. It almost resembles slavery. Though it's wrong, it's the way it works nowadays, and I'd prefer the judicial system to do this instead of killing the person...
|
|
|
Post by harisstavr on Oct 26, 2007 4:23:10 GMT -6
I agree with Vic and karma for her! EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO LIVE
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 9:45:16 GMT -6
Anyone ever heard about the first right of all human beings? The right to LIVE? Even if you have disrespected other people? By putting them in jail forever, you are still taking away the other two rights in the 1st amendment, liberty and persuit of happiness. Nearly all people in jail for life don't do any manual labour. Those that will be released, usually do it to hopefully get out a few months or years early (it's part of the good behavior). Those that don't have a hope of getting out aren't going to do work, why should they? Community put them in their for the rest of their lives, why should they work their bums off to make the community better if they get absolutly nothing in return?
|
|