Poll: punishment for murder

[MClardizzle]

Well in that case I would give him a few years that hoe had it coming.

 

[oneniesteledain]

I go for equivelant exchange you kill someone it is only fair that you to should be killed.

Not that it's relevant to this topic, but what if you kill in self-defense?

 

[oneniesteledain]

Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.

How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!

The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D

I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?

 

[Internet Kraken]

An eye for an eye is not a call for vengance it is a call for justice.

Unless the victim is kidnapped jail serves no deterrant, (I know guys who have done crime to get back inside, aint the UK grand)take an equal measure, a true equal measure. Would you rob a bank if your family would be indentured for the next 50 years ?

Accidental manslaughter's punishment is a death sentance but painless would encourage people to drive more carefully & refrain from violence.

But its irrelevant the middleclass hippies will never allow it.

'Hang em all let Dog sort them out'

Nobody commits an act of murder thinking that they will be caught. I doubt the punishment for such a crime prevents people from doing it.

As for this particular incident, it's hard to decide what should be done with so few details. However, I believe that no person deserves to lose their life, so the death penalty is not an option.

 

[MalevolentJim]

Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.

How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!

The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D

I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?

Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.

Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.

 

[Stoic raptor]

i would say tourture him and take all of his money and make him work, but that girl he was with sounded like a *****, so just give him life in prison

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Isolation. How terrifying can it be to stand in a room locked inside by a metal door with no windows whatsoever and barely any light inside, never to socialize with a human again for the next 2 years.

 

[oneniesteledain]

Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.

How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!

The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D

I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?

Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.

Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.

That is utterly ridiculous. The man who works for the state, and is ordered to execute the other, should also die? Well by that argument, so should the jury that condemns the murderer, and the judge who sends them to the Himalayas, and the pilot who flies them there...

 

[MalevolentJim]

Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.

How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!

The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D

I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?

Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.

Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.

That is utterly ridiculous. The man who works for the state, and is ordered to execute the other, should also die? Well by that argument, so should the jury that condemns the murderer, and the judge who sends them to the Himalayas, and the pilot who flies them there...

Of course it is ridiculous.I didn't make it up.
And stop ruining my fun

 

[Soxafloppin]

He should get life in jail.

 

[oneniesteledain]

Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.

How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!

The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D

I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?

Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.

Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.

That is utterly ridiculous. The man who works for the state, and is ordered to execute the other, should also die? Well by that argument, so should the jury that condemns the murderer, and the judge who sends them to the Himalayas, and the pilot who flies them there...

Of course it is ridiculous.I didn't make it up.
And stop ruining my fun

But I don't know of a single precedent for the person doing the shooting, gassing, injecting, or electrocuting being charged with anything.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

Prison in 10 years. Every man deserves a second chance. After that, you go back into that box forever!

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Lets review this logically people. The reason you arent todays jugdes is aparent. Look at this man. Hes a life as much as anyone else is. He was emotionally attacked to a point where he lost control. It happens but thankfully people dont have the means and the oppertunity to do what they imagine doing when incensed in a way i imagine this man was. While this doesnt excuse what he did it doenst make him a cold blooded remorseless killer like someone who did it mearly for the fun of it. He was a man pushed too far by someone he loved who spited him. I think death is too harsh. He made a mistake. You dont think he spends every moment of his life wishing he hadnt done it, killing himself inside for the guilt of murdering someone he used to love? I think 15-25 years in prison will be subtable. He learns the lesson that the system shoudnt be crossed and that he went too far but it doesnt destroy his life.

 

[Borrowed Time]

Of course it is ridiculous.I didn't make it up.
And stop ruining my fun

Fun is not allowed.

That statement literally does not compute. I read it three times and i can't feel anything towards it. I hope to god you are joking because the urges to laugh, be appalled, and be astounded all compete and ultimate leaving me with a serious case of WTF.

http://www.inprisonmywholelife.com/educate_activate.seam

Yup, regularly costs more to execute someone then to lock them away for 40+ years. It's sad really.

 

[asinann]

You're comparing murder to theft. The two crimes are on a completely different scale.

no I'm not comparing murder to theft I'm using a simplified example to demonstrate that "intent" can actually change the entire crime.

He meant to kill the girl, and if we used, "Well she provoked me," as a defense every man that kills a woman would try to use that to get out of their punishment.

there is a difference between "she provoked me at home with no one around" and "she humilated me on pulic radio"

also keep in mind I'm not defending the guy I'm just saying that with my form of analysis the "death penalty" or even "life in prison" might be a little hasty for this case.

Since this was clearly just a one time act, toss him away for 10 years.

ooooor you could give him counciling even get a psycho analysist in to check on his tendencies. maybe house arrest or maybe a short jail sentence with probation. he displayed no criminal activities before hand which is why prison just sounds to much(imo).

OK, you wanted to show intent changes the crime, he intended to kill the girl. You can't strangle someone without meaning to do it, there are too many signs that someone is dying before they die that way.

There is no difference between the provocations in the eyes of the law, the only thing that might get him some mercy from a judge is that she went on the radio. And everything you've said other than "I'm not defending the guy" has been in defense of or trying to justify what he did.

A one time thing like that, there's no need for checking his tendencies. There are none. It was a one time act (crime of passion.) If he had a history of abusing women or violent crimes, THEN you give him counseling, from prison. The point of prison is twofold: the first is to separate from society people who are dangerous. The second is to punish acts that society finds unacceptable. This is a case of the latter, he deserves to be punished. If that woman had been you sister or friend or cousin you would understand that murderers (even the ones that don't mean to do it) deserve some kind of punishment so at the very least they are more careful in the future.

But I don't know of a single precedent for the person doing the shooting, gassing, injecting, or electrocuting being charged with anything.

That's because, in the eyes of the law, the person doing the executing isn't actually the one doing it: the one killing the killer is the state.

 

[Azraellod]

Prison in 10 years. Every man deserves a second chance. After that, you go back into that box forever!

not every man, but in this case i have to agree that he deserves one.

although i was thinking 15 years rather then 10.

 

[Nannernade]

An eye for an eye is the best approach.

 

[Aardvark Soup]

Completely depends on the situation. The death penalty and especially torture can never be justified though and should not exist in a modern democracy.

 

[awesomeemosewa]

Yes, all acts of homicide should be dealt with using extreme force. I don't want to pay for murderers to eat better than bums and get free cable tv.

EDIT: there is one way to appease both crowds. The people who don't want to pay and the people who don't want to kill. And it is this...

Everyone convicted of a serious enough crime should be sent to a large island in the south pacific and dropped off on the beach. All of them on the same island. Fend for themselves, create their own convict laws and do whatever the hell they want. Set a couple coastguard boats to patrol the waters in case they decide to make a raft. That is it. Problem solved.

not to sound pessemistic but man is made for freedome sooner or later there gonna escape(ist) its better to keep them in secure facilitys where they are guarded a cople of costgards wont be able to hold them. that and WHAT THE hell are you thinking if ur gonna punish them why set them on a paradise iland.