Capital Punishment Pro Or Con?

[wilko]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.ph...d=6&did=109

After reading from this link if anyone is still for the death penalty they aren't wired right.

One sided, liberal propaganda. How about compiling a guilty list of released killers who have gone on to kill again? How many wrongly executed innocents were criminals in their own right, just not guilty of the charge they were executed for?

Interestingly, Washington DC and Puerto Rico with double figure murder rates per 1,000 don't have the death penalty.

Interesting link but, it's still for the death penalty here.

How does one wrong (releasing known killers; how stupid) make it okay to put to death even one innocent person? How does one wrong execution make it ok to give murderers the right to live? Which is greater, the number of executed innocents or, the number of innocents murdered by released killers? I don't know and neither do you.

Your other argument is just foolish drivel......it's okay to execute an innocent person because he MAYBE committed another crime......perhaps shoplifting......... The fact is that the majority of so called innocents ARE criminals; that's the reason suspicion fell on them in the first place. Although it may be wrong to execute these people, quite frankly, I have no sympathy for them - they've paid the price for being bad people.

I'm against the death penalty until such time as it's a perfect system......until then I say NO to killing innocent people. There'll never be a 100% perfect system so, you'll always say NO. I'm happy to accept a slightly less than perfect system.

Fact. On the subject of the death penalty, it's either black, or white; I'll never accept your argument and you'll never accept mine.

Your arguements are lacking any logic. The number of people murdered by released killers has NOTHING to do with the execution of an innocent person. I'll agree that all convicted of murder should NEVER see the light of day. But just because the justice system DOES release killers back into society (some who kill again) doesn't mean we must "balance the books" and execute some innocent people. You must be a bean counter, you're hung up on the 'number of executed innocents' and the 'number of innocents murdered by released killers' lol.

Fact. Some people can't deal with/understand the complex world we live in. For them everything is black & white, right or wrong. I can understand and accept that.

With the rapid advancements of technology there may very well come the day when we can know 100% if a person is guilty or not of a particular crime. You're WRONG to say there will NEVER be a 100% perfect system; it can happen. I guess your ancestors said there will never be a person to walk on the moon lol.

So, you're happy to incarcerate innocents for the term of their natural life, yet you're unhappy about them being executed?

I'm no bean counter; you're the one who originally posted a link justifying your beliefs. Indeed, why should your link succeed in swaying my mind where the periodical junk mail I receive from Amnesty International fails? I've no need to quote such sources - my mind's made up and so is yours.

Technology is one thing but, what about the humans required to operate it? Humans by nature are both fallible & corruptable.

It was stated by another poster that about 10% of Thai death penalty inmates are innocent, I suspect that the US is even less than that, perhaps you can elaborate? Though I don't know off the top of my head, I'm fairly certain that innocent potential UK death penalty candidates would be far less than 10%. I can live with the error rate, but you cannot, so perhaps we should agree to disagree on this subject.

There's no death penalty in Eu and therefore UK.

Europe civilised...USA not!

[ClaytonSeymour]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.ph...d=6&did=109

After reading from this link if anyone is still for the death penalty they aren't wired right.

One sided, liberal propaganda. How about compiling a guilty list of released killers who have gone on to kill again? How many wrongly executed innocents were criminals in their own right, just not guilty of the charge they were executed for?

Interestingly, Washington DC and Puerto Rico with double figure murder rates per 1,000 don't have the death penalty.

Interesting link but, it's still for the death penalty here.

How does one wrong (releasing known killers; how stupid) make it okay to put to death even one innocent person? How does one wrong execution make it ok to give murderers the right to live? Which is greater, the number of executed innocents or, the number of innocents murdered by released killers? I don't know and neither do you.

Your other argument is just foolish drivel......it's okay to execute an innocent person because he MAYBE committed another crime......perhaps shoplifting......... The fact is that the majority of so called innocents ARE criminals; that's the reason suspicion fell on them in the first place. Although it may be wrong to execute these people, quite frankly, I have no sympathy for them - they've paid the price for being bad people.

I'm against the death penalty until such time as it's a perfect system......until then I say NO to killing innocent people. There'll never be a 100% perfect system so, you'll always say NO. I'm happy to accept a slightly less than perfect system.

Fact. On the subject of the death penalty, it's either black, or white; I'll never accept your argument and you'll never accept mine.

Your arguements are lacking any logic. The number of people murdered by released killers has NOTHING to do with the execution of an innocent person. I'll agree that all convicted of murder should NEVER see the light of day. But just because the justice system DOES release killers back into society (some who kill again) doesn't mean we must "balance the books" and execute some innocent people. You must be a bean counter, you're hung up on the 'number of executed innocents' and the 'number of innocents murdered by released killers' lol.

Fact. Some people can't deal with/understand the complex world we live in. For them everything is black & white, right or wrong. I can understand and accept that.

With the rapid advancements of technology there may very well come the day when we can know 100% if a person is guilty or not of a particular crime. You're WRONG to say there will NEVER be a 100% perfect system; it can happen. I guess your ancestors said there will never be a person to walk on the moon lol.

So, you're happy to incarcerate innocents for the term of their natural life, yet you're unhappy about them being executed?

I'm no bean counter; you're the one who originally posted a link justifying your beliefs. Indeed, why should your link succeed in swaying my mind where the periodical junk mail I receive from Amnesty International fails? I've no need to quote such sources - my mind's made up and so is yours.

Technology is one thing but, what about the humans required to operate it? Humans by nature are both fallible & corruptable.

It was stated by another poster that about 10% of Thai death penalty inmates are innocent, I suspect that the US is even less than that, perhaps you can elaborate? Though I don't know off the top of my head, I'm fairly certain that innocent potential UK death penalty candidates would be far less than 10%. I can live with the error rate, but you cannot, so perhaps we should agree to disagree on this subject.

You said this: So, you're happy to incarcerate innocents for the term of their natural life, yet you're unhappy about them being executed?

My reply: Of course incarceration is better! 100's of people on Death Row have Been Released after DNA or other evidence has proven them innocent! You'd rather execute them and later when it's been proven they didn't commit the crime just say .........Oh well.......I'm still happy with the system...........how pathetic. At least with a life sentence an innocent person still has a hope of somehow proving his innocence someday.

They'd get a posthumous pardon.

There you go again (in red).....prattling on about percentages this and percentages that. You just don't get it; the taking of ONE innocent life is WRONG.

I can live with it - you can't. In an earlier vocation, I was told that sympathy goes with the cradle, I guess it's kind of stuck with me - I'm NOT a sympathetic person, as those who know me would vouch.

Instead of agreeing to disagree I'll settle for you're wrong and I'm right.

And obviously I'll settle for the reverse.

As you've got an aversion to red I used a more subtle shade - I hope it was kinder on your eyes.

[LoveDaBlues]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.ph...d=6&did=109

After reading from this link if anyone is still for the death penalty they aren't wired right.

One sided, liberal propaganda. How about compiling a guilty list of released killers who have gone on to kill again? How many wrongly executed innocents were criminals in their own right, just not guilty of the charge they were executed for?

Interestingly, Washington DC and Puerto Rico with double figure murder rates per 1,000 don't have the death penalty.

Interesting link but, it's still for the death penalty here.

How does one wrong (releasing known killers; how stupid) make it okay to put to death even one innocent person? How does one wrong execution make it ok to give murderers the right to live? Which is greater, the number of executed innocents or, the number of innocents murdered by released killers? I don't know and neither do you.

Your other argument is just foolish drivel......it's okay to execute an innocent person because he MAYBE committed another crime......perhaps shoplifting......... The fact is that the majority of so called innocents ARE criminals; that's the reason suspicion fell on them in the first place. Although it may be wrong to execute these people, quite frankly, I have no sympathy for them - they've paid the price for being bad people.

I'm against the death penalty until such time as it's a perfect system......until then I say NO to killing innocent people. There'll never be a 100% perfect system so, you'll always say NO. I'm happy to accept a slightly less than perfect system.

Fact. On the subject of the death penalty, it's either black, or white; I'll never accept your argument and you'll never accept mine.

Your arguements are lacking any logic. The number of people murdered by released killers has NOTHING to do with the execution of an innocent person. I'll agree that all convicted of murder should NEVER see the light of day. But just because the justice system DOES release killers back into society (some who kill again) doesn't mean we must "balance the books" and execute some innocent people. You must be a bean counter, you're hung up on the 'number of executed innocents' and the 'number of innocents murdered by released killers' lol.

Fact. Some people can't deal with/understand the complex world we live in. For them everything is black & white, right or wrong. I can understand and accept that.

With the rapid advancements of technology there may very well come the day when we can know 100% if a person is guilty or not of a particular crime. You're WRONG to say there will NEVER be a 100% perfect system; it can happen. I guess your ancestors said there will never be a person to walk on the moon lol.

So, you're happy to incarcerate innocents for the term of their natural life, yet you're unhappy about them being executed?

I'm no bean counter; you're the one who originally posted a link justifying your beliefs. Indeed, why should your link succeed in swaying my mind where the periodical junk mail I receive from Amnesty International fails? I've no need to quote such sources - my mind's made up and so is yours.

Technology is one thing but, what about the humans required to operate it? Humans by nature are both fallible & corruptable.

It was stated by another poster that about 10% of Thai death penalty inmates are innocent, I suspect that the US is even less than that, perhaps you can elaborate? Though I don't know off the top of my head, I'm fairly certain that innocent potential UK death penalty candidates would be far less than 10%. I can live with the error rate, but you cannot, so perhaps we should agree to disagree on this subject.

You said this: So, you're happy to incarcerate innocents for the term of their natural life, yet you're unhappy about them being executed?

My reply: Of course incarceration is better! 100's of people on Death Row have Been Released after DNA or other evidence has proven them innocent! You'd rather execute them and later when it's been proven they didn't commit the crime just say .........Oh well.......I'm still happy with the system...........how pathetic. At least with a life sentence an innocent person still has a hope of somehow proving his innocence someday.

They'd get a posthumous pardon.

There you go again (in red).....prattling on about percentages this and percentages that. You just don't get it; the taking of ONE innocent life is WRONG.

I can live with it - you can't. In an earlier vocation, I was told that sympathy goes with the cradle, I guess it's kind of stuck with me - I'm NOT a sympathetic person, as those who know me would vouch.

Instead of agreeing to disagree I'll settle for you're wrong and I'm right.

And obviously I'll settle for the reverse.

As you've got an aversion to red I used a more subtle shade - I hope it was kinder on your eyes.

Yes, thanks for the kinder color.....my eyes thank you to death.

[wilko]

So when should we use capital punishment?

[cm-happy]

So when should we use capital punishment?

NEVER!!

[teatree]

I think that society has the right to punish crimes, but in an 'enlightened' way. Capital punishment is definitely no such way.

Some people think killing out of revenge is acceptable and list various sources to validate their opinion...see Bible quotes. I strongly doubt that any God or any enlightened person would endorse such a barbaric thing.

We don't have the right to take away another persons life, for whatever reason. Revenge for a crime doesn't make the crime go away, it creates another crime.

Solutions to the overpopulated prisons have been found. Stanislav Grof for example adopted the use of LSD in the 60's, before the goverment decided it was too dangerous, not for the physical and mental health of the person involved, but because it represented a thread to the established power. LSD can widen ones perspective enourmously and that is just to dangerous in a society that is based on the herd mentality...just like a lot of sheeps.

This guy gave several inmates of a prison (with their consent obviously) doses of LSD in a safe and controlled environment. Reportedly it helped them find their own place in their life and society, helped them get to the root of their problems and lowered the rate of re-committing other crimes by over 80%. Sadly this experiment has been stopped in its beginnings by the fear of the so-called establishment.

Check out this site for more info

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/lsd/grofhist.htm

Some crimes are very difficult to forgive, but it is possible and we should strive to reach a point where we see that the OTHERS are not different from US, that we are just as prone to make mistakes as everyone else. We should educate people, not kill them. Do you cut off your hand because you have an ingrown nail? The same applies with society I think.

What do you think?

Thanks Mezcal. I think you have hit on a perfect solution. Let's feed the prisoners an unlimited quantity of the drugs of their choice...no need for capital punishment. They'll kill themselves. hel_l, the biggest problem with your scheme is that there will be thousands of Dead Heads trying to break INTO the prisons. Heheheehe. Thank God for Thai Visa. They give crackpots like you an opportunity to keep the rest of us laughing our asses off.

squeedgee your third eye!

LSD can help you see things from a very different perspective. A psychedelic experience can recalibrate your sense of place in the world and enable you to better understand your relationship with other people and society. I can see how the use of LSD could make a criminal understand what he is doing is wrong and not want to re-offend.

The news read by Bill Hicks - "Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather"

[JetsetBkk]

So when should we use capital punishment?

When somebody intentionally kills someone.

There will be exceptions, of course.