Random argument man said:
lwm3398 said:
Sorry about that! I tend to be a little confusing sometimes. No, I don't support the death penalty. I would like to beleive that humanity can evolve from this old way of thinking.
On clarifications:I was just talking about the executionner's point of view. The one that throws the axe and doesn't give a shit. (He probably will when the family of the punished will knock at his door).
I understand your point of view. I just wanted to explain that there's two sides on this matter.
I like you. You don't start flame wars over different views.
Wait.
My... my god... don't tell me... You're... RATIONAL!?!?!?!
Here's a new idea: If the rapist or murderer is alone and has no living family (Or is estranged) give him the shock. If he or she has caring family, or if it was only manslaughter (I shouldn't say only, and by manslaughter I mean accidental killing) he or she gets 40-90, as no one with a loving family should have to die, and those convicted of manslaughter should have a fighting chance to get out on good behavior.
The way I from my opinion on the death penalty is simple: An eye for an eye. Exchange one murderer for other deaths of equal or greater value. A killer deserves to be killed. I try to see it from the view of the victim's family. I mean, I'd want the killer dead if he attacked one of my family members. And no one wants to die, I know, but if you killed and expected not to be caught and perhaps shocked, then you don't deserve to live. No one should kill. So to me killers must be killed.
But that's it for the derailing, no?
Edit: And you called mine "a big fucking snip"? Did you happen to see your post before that?