You're right and I guess my arguement has a rather large loophole in it, and thats if Extremist Islamists are right. Then my arguement has no standing whatsoever. But if they're WRONG, Thats where my arguement gets the most validation.Antlers said:
Is the death penalty ever justified?
- Thread starter Antlers
- Start date
Recommended Videos
OK... But that's a pretty massive 'if'. There are 3 scenarios. 2 of them make your argument fall. The only one that validates your argument is if their Q'uran is wrong, their god is the right one, and he's pissed off at what they've been doing.Mrsnugglesworth said:
It can also never be found out for sure (even though I'm pretty damn sure about which one is right) so... Is there any point in such an argument?
I have a question for those against the death penalty.
If for some very extreme, unlikely reason, you find yourself with a gun and a criminal broke into your house, would you kill them. You could try to shoot to wound, but then you have to go to court, and no one wants that. Basically killing a criminal to protect your household is the death penalty without a trial.
If for some very extreme, unlikely reason, you find yourself with a gun and a criminal broke into your house, would you kill them. You could try to shoot to wound, but then you have to go to court, and no one wants that. Basically killing a criminal to protect your household is the death penalty without a trial.
I have one question for you: are you a future or alternate universe version of me? That's pretty much my absurdly merciful attitude on crime right there.Yelchor said:
If you can rehabilitate the criminal, you should. It's good for the criminal for obvious reasons and for society because the former criminal can work. The notion of making them suffer for their crimes (aka revenge) is stupid; punishment is a necessary evil, and if it's taken beyond what is necessary, it is merely an evil.
Edit:
1: If you shot someone who broke into your house you'd go to court either way, and it would probably be harsher to you if you shot to kill.Stalias said:
2: The need to kill the criminal would be far less in court than in your home. If you're implying that you should execute the criminal for the same reason you'd shoot him in self defense, the reason you'd kill the criminal (self defense) no longer applies.
3: And if I could stop the criminal without killing him, I would. For practical reasons I'd end up killing him, but if I could avoid killing him I would.
To me, the death penalty is a tool to use for a situation in which:
1. The crimes have been proven (duh)
2. Their crimes are excessively violent and performed on purpose. (torture, murder, etc.)
3. The individual isn't going to learn their lesson, i.e. Repeat Offenders
4. They are too dangerous to be let out into the real world.
5. They are too dangerous even for prison, or the small chance of them escaping is too big a risk to take.
Under any other circumstances, life sentence or less intense punishment are the only acceptable actions.
1. The crimes have been proven (duh)
2. Their crimes are excessively violent and performed on purpose. (torture, murder, etc.)
3. The individual isn't going to learn their lesson, i.e. Repeat Offenders
4. They are too dangerous to be let out into the real world.
5. They are too dangerous even for prison, or the small chance of them escaping is too big a risk to take.
Under any other circumstances, life sentence or less intense punishment are the only acceptable actions.
Well I believe that the death penalty is justified in most murder cases. Sorry, but if you willfully take another living beings life, and have no justifiable reason for taking that life.
Than your life is forfeit.
Why?
Because you knowingly plunged a knife into a strangers heart. You stole his cash, his car, and as his life's blood gushed out of his gaping wound, as the cement became a red tinted death bed, as his screaming mouth feel silent, and as his crying eyes closed, you stole his life...
A life which there is no way of returning.
It is for that heinous act that any man gives up his entitlement to his own life. For once a man gives so far into his own desire that he is willing to erase another existence, than he should not be given life. For he so clearly would not do the same to you or I.
Than your life is forfeit.
Why?
Because you knowingly plunged a knife into a strangers heart. You stole his cash, his car, and as his life's blood gushed out of his gaping wound, as the cement became a red tinted death bed, as his screaming mouth feel silent, and as his crying eyes closed, you stole his life...
A life which there is no way of returning.
It is for that heinous act that any man gives up his entitlement to his own life. For once a man gives so far into his own desire that he is willing to erase another existence, than he should not be given life. For he so clearly would not do the same to you or I.
I say death penalty. why? Because after going through the death penalty, I bet you those SoBs won't be killing again. Have YOU ever heard of someone put to death thats gone on to kill again?
Also, death row inmates live better then most of our lower class citizens here in the states (TV in their cell, a big yard to play in, a warm bed at night, meals every day, ice cream) so why should "I" the tax payer, have to pay to let these murderers live like kings compared to our homeless?
Also, death row inmates live better then most of our lower class citizens here in the states (TV in their cell, a big yard to play in, a warm bed at night, meals every day, ice cream) so why should "I" the tax payer, have to pay to let these murderers live like kings compared to our homeless?
If someone is going around kidnapping women, raping them, torturing them, and then killing them, I do not want to know that said person is still alive out there with a free ticket to room and board.
Should some individual take it upon them self to snipe innocent people at random for kicks, or just to see the drama of the aftermath in the local paper, the world as a whole is probably better without them in it.
When some doctor at your local hospital decides that the world is better without sick and elderly, thus taking it upon his or herself to give tons of patients under their care (including perhaps your friend or close relative) an overdose of medication to cause cardiac arrest or slow, agonizing poisoning (in case they think they can get away with it by letting the death happen 'naturally'), do you want them to stick around breathing for years on end behind bars? Or do you want them to face the ultimate consequence of their actions so they would never get a chance of doing something like that again?
The death penalty is appropriate sometimes.
Should some individual take it upon them self to snipe innocent people at random for kicks, or just to see the drama of the aftermath in the local paper, the world as a whole is probably better without them in it.
When some doctor at your local hospital decides that the world is better without sick and elderly, thus taking it upon his or herself to give tons of patients under their care (including perhaps your friend or close relative) an overdose of medication to cause cardiac arrest or slow, agonizing poisoning (in case they think they can get away with it by letting the death happen 'naturally'), do you want them to stick around breathing for years on end behind bars? Or do you want them to face the ultimate consequence of their actions so they would never get a chance of doing something like that again?
The death penalty is appropriate sometimes.
i think that murders and rapists should be killed and their organs should be used to help dieing people who are good people
Despite being Canadian, I am for the death penalty. With the inmate population surging, it's starting to get pretty pricey for the taxpayers to keep them fed and whatnot. With a death penalty, we will get a one-two punch of less inmates and less crime on the streets for the low low price of a couple of demonstrations and a loss of some morality. But (hopefully) the end will justify the means.
Coming from someone who lives in an area where the death penalty isn't used often and the crime rate is high, I'd say rehabilitation doesn't always work. I'm from around Baltimore, Maryland.
EDIT: that doesn't mean it never works, just that it doesn't work on a lot of people.
EDIT: that doesn't mean it never works, just that it doesn't work on a lot of people.
Ok, several questions for anyone against the death penalty.
1. What would you do if you had a famous criminal, such as Idi Amin or Osama Bin Laden? (I'm wary of Godwin's Law)
2. What do you think we should have done during the Civil war or World War 2 to solve the problems these wars solved?
3. What is your stance on abortion? (I'm pro-choice)
4. Do you really see no difference in killing an innocent person and a murderer?
1. What would you do if you had a famous criminal, such as Idi Amin or Osama Bin Laden? (I'm wary of Godwin's Law)
2. What do you think we should have done during the Civil war or World War 2 to solve the problems these wars solved?
3. What is your stance on abortion? (I'm pro-choice)
4. Do you really see no difference in killing an innocent person and a murderer?
If the person wants to be put down, then more power to them. After all, if you were suffering of something terminal and you could not leave your hospital bed or you are writhing in agony over something that they cannot fix, you should have a right to make that call.Antlers said:
Should you go under some horrible accident where three-fourths of your brain is mush, your entire lower half is missing, and you will never awaken from a coma, then it should be right for your loved ones/family to make that choice. If there is a chance you would make it, however, and/or recover, then the choice to euthanize you should be revoked until either you wake up or it is later proven than you will not.
One thing I absolutely hate about letting people legally die in hospital situations, though, is taking them off of their feeding tubes and allowing them to waste away. If someone wants to die or is going to die, then damned be it all let them die quickly and mercifully. Don't starve them to death or let them suffocate to death. A cousin of mine went under that torture when he would not recover from meningitis.
My original example was in the case of a doctor who killed many patients, some who had no reason to die, over his own sick belief.
edit - I found a source of a similar crime, though not the one I was thinking of. Serial killer doctors, while uncommon, are not unheard of: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2135604.stm