What's your view on capitol punishment?

"I still don't see why murdering murderers is wrong"

Because you are committing the act you are punishing them for. No matter how much you bureaucratize and sterilise it you are still committing murder. A government can not prophess a certain act to be the worst act one can commit, and then punish that act with the same act. It is hypocritical and, well, just plain stupid.

If government and society wants it's citizens to believe that murder is wrong then fair enough, you won't get any objections here. But executing somebody for murder is as ridiculous as a parent who spanks their children for fighting, and tells them that violence is wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ermitonto

I think he should have been subjected to a long, painful, torturous death for his crimes.

---

Well there you go, my friend. This is where our difference of opinion lies. I would never and will never wish death upon anybody or anything, no matter what their crime. To punish somebody for murder or something equally disgusting by means of murder or something equally as disgusting is disgusting. Those are the simplest terms I can put it in.

Certainly the ability to kill should not be entrusted to governments. I agree with you there. Power corrupts, and when people in power are given the means to kill they abuse it.

But the way I see it, a community killing a killer is a collective act of self-defense. If I had to kill somebody to keep them from killing me, I would do it.

Obviously something has to be done about the murderers. No matter what you decide to do to them, be it killing them or confining them in a small and unpleasant place, it would be a "crime" to commit that act upon an innocent person. But murderers are different and need to be held up to different standards.

england is a flop

shame on us

Let me put it this way:

Say you are in a room with four other people. One person takes out a knife and stabs another one to death, then starts approaching you and the other two. Now say you have a gun, and the three of you have to decide before he gets there whether you're going to shoot him or let him stab you all. Is it wrong to shoot him to protect the three of you?

If governments were to grow the fuck up and stop punishing and inprisoning people for consensual crimes, then it we could free up something like %80 of all jails in the world. Then we could afford to jail every rapist and murderer in the world. The way we're going though, we're releasing rapists and murderers early so that we can through a few extra stoners in jail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

"I still don't see why murdering murderers is wrong"

Because you are committing the act you are punishing them for. .

---

No, no,no, no. Execution is the punishment for commiting a horrific crime against an innocent person. The killers are not innocent and that is the fundemantal difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

If governments were to grow the fuck up and stop punishing and inprisoning people for consensual crimes, then it we could free up something like %80 of all jails in the world. Then we could afford to jail every rapist and murderer in the world. The way we're going though, we're releasing rapists and murderers early so that we can through a few extra stoners in jail.

---

Gotta agree with you on this one Ghost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ermitonto

Let me put it this way:

Say you are in a room with four other people. One person takes out a knife and stabs another one to death, then starts approaching you and the other two. Now say you have a gun, and the three of you have to decide before he gets there whether you're going to shoot him or let him stab you all. Is it wrong to shoot him to protect the three of you?

---

well thatd be perfect self defence..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ermitonto

Let me put it this way:

Say you are in a room with four other people. One person takes out a knife and stabs another one to death, then starts approaching you and the other two. Now say you have a gun, and the three of you have to decide before he gets there whether you're going to shoot him or let him stab you all. Is it wrong to shoot him to protect the three of you?

---

No, it's not. In fact it would be the logical course of action to take, and I would take it myself. As much as I would never wish to kill anybody, in that situation, yes, I would do it.

However, if we take that same situation with a different conclusion;

In a room with three other people. One murders another. You have a gun but the murderer does not attempt to harm anybody else, is restrained and no longer poses a threat to any of you. Would you still shoot him?

If your answer is yes than you'll see why execution in todays society is wrong. We have the means to punish these people without resorting to murder ourselves. Execution these days is NOT for our protection. Executions are solely for vindication of the victims.. in other words, to satisfy the victims or relatives thirst for this person's blood. How is society and humanity ever going to improve in any positive way when we are still quenching this thirst for blood that seems to lie dormant within so many of us?

Surely we should be teaching children that killing another human is wrong and then setting a good example. It sends mixed messages when a government murders a murderer and even more mixed messages when normal, every day kinda people are cheering and jeering for somebody to be executed.

Yes, murderers should be removed from society so that they can no longer harm anybody else, but to murder them would serve absolutely no purpose other than to satisfy some sick, barbaric desire. THAT is what we need to kill.