What's your view on capitol punishment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

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.

---

The message I want to be sending to the children is that if they kill an innocent person they'll have a shitload of electricity pumped throught their body.

My whole argument for execution is not so much vindication as it is deterence. If it were vindication I could come up with a lot better ways to deal with these criminals. Execution is really the easy way out but the the fear of death is much more powerful psychologically. If we could come up with an alternative punishment that would be as psychologically deterring as execution I'd be all for it. I'm sure all those prisoner rights groups out there would have issue with that as well though.

Hey, i'm not part of those 'prisoner rights groups' if that's what you're suggesting. I'm just a guy who doesn't like the thought of anybody killing anybody. Yes, some people are fucking scumbags who kill people, but that doesn't excuse normal, sane people from allowing other normal, sane people to kill. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

Hey, i'm not part of those 'prisoner rights groups' if that's what you're suggesting. I'm just a guy who doesn't like the thought of anybody killing anybody. Yes, some people are fucking scumbags who kill people, but that doesn't excuse normal, sane people from allowing other normal, sane people to kill. :(

---

No Ghost, I'm not trying to imply that at all. I also totally understand your position. Ideally no one would have to be killed. I just feel that if even one little child's life could be saved, because the sick twisted fuck who was thinking of killing them thought twice about it because they knew they'd face a certain and quick execution if caught, it would be worthwhile.

put them on the north pole. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ermitonto

I don't eat meat either, but I still don't see why murdering murderers is wrong. If somebody stole something from you, you'd steal it back wouldn't you? But that second act of stealing isn't a "second wrong", it is a corrective measure. Murderers need to be treated differently from non-murderers, and frankly I think instant death is more humane (not to mention much less of a burden on society) than sticking them inside a dingy prison for the rest of their lives.

Some people just plain don't deserve to live. For instance, if Hitler had been captured alive, would you suggest life imprisonment or some similar punishment? Me, I think he should have been subjected to a long, painful, torturous death for his crimes.

---

You just contradicted yourself. You think instant death is more humane than sticking someone in prison for the rest of their lives, but you think Hitler should have been put to death instead of being put in prison, or are you saying a long, tortuous death is more humane than a life long prison sentence? Why make a exception in case of Hitler? When does a killer become special enough to be subjected to torture? And if you think the death penalty is more humane than a prison sentence, why not advocate a less harsh prison system?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Az.

yeah thats what i would waNt done....or to be put it to little cells on their own for the rest of their lives.....like that big prison thing that was out at sea.....begins with A....but yeah all alone with no outside contact so they can reflect on what they have done.

---

Alcatraz babe, Alcatraz (sorry if you happen to be a man)

i think that capital punishment is a somewhat-decent record by megadeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fengzi

No Ghost, I'm not trying to imply that at all. I also totally understand your position. Ideally no one would have to be killed. I just feel that if even one little child's life could be saved, because the sick twisted fuck who was thinking of killing them thought twice about it because they knew they'd face a certain and quick execution if caught, it would be worthwhile.

---

Theres no evidence that the death penalty in the US is a deterrent. If we changed the death penalty system so a convicted criminal would be instantly put to death, instead of waiting twenty something years and exhausting all his appeals, more innocent people would be put to death because sometimes a crucial piece of evidence to vindicate a prisoner isnt discovered until years later.

hey NextGen, you live in mandan??? ive been there the last couple of years for Grind Your Face Off

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

Yea, coz lie detecters aren't like 99% accurate are they :rolleyes: Ooh look at me i'm a psychopath, i can EASILY 'Fool' them. It's a machine >_<

---

well gee jiminy wilickers, you sure put me in my place :rolleyes:

yep, 99% accurate, did you get that off the talkshow murray, or perhapse in a crime t.v. show? I mean after all, you can't fool a machine!

now if you actually knew anything about them you'd know that their accuracy is constantly debated by professionsals, the claimed accuracy ranges from 60-90%, and YES, believe it or not you can fool them, especially psychopaths. A "Lie detector" measures physiological responses, which are persperation and heart rate, which are most consistent with deceptive behavior. These responses are the result of a person feeling guilty, or fear of being caught in a lie. Psychopaths are notoriously good at fooling them because they lack the emotional response from lying, and the prisons are full of people who convince themselves of their own bullshit, convincing themselves and others of their innocence. if lie detectors were indeed 99% accurate, we'd be swearing on the holy polygraph, rather than the bible, and lie detectors wouldn't be non-admissable in court as they are today.

perhapse you should do some research before talking to me like a jackass.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mojavpa

Theres no evidence that the death penalty in the US is a deterrent. If we changed the death penalty system so a convicted criminal would be instantly put to death, instead of waiting twenty something years and exhausting all his appeals, more innocent people would be put to death because sometimes a crucial piece of evidence to vindicate a prisoner isnt discovered until years later.

---

I agree that the death penalty in the U.S is not a deterrent. My whole point is that the punishments for any crimes are no longer a deterrent because they are not harsh enough and there are too many loopholes to getting out of them. As I mentioned before, I lived in a country that is always on the shit list of human rights groups becasue of its treatment of convicted criminals but at the same time has incredibly little crime. I'm sure part of it is cultural but I can't believe that knowing what faces you if caught isn't a big factor as well.

I do see your point about innocent people being put to death. But there are a lot of cases where there simply is no doubt about who did it. So maybe the instant death penalty is restricted to those "smoking gun" cases. Also, with some of the advances in DNA testing I would think cases would be a bit more concrete.

There's an old Chinese saying "Kill the snake to startle the monkey" . Well, we've got a lot of naughty monkeys in this country so it's time to kill some snakes.