The Declaration of Independence of the US clearly indicates that state sanctioned killing of criminals is a violation of rights that are bestowed by the creator...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's fair enough Chownah. The US has a law but what is your view? Or are US citizens not allowed to have one? This Declaration also seems to be a bit confused with itself, as mentioned earlier, some states allow the death penalty.

Additionally, the US Declaration of Independance (as confused as it is) means not a jot to anybody outside of the US. And why should anybody, outside of the US, even bother to take it seriously, when your own country's leaders can't even decide to implement the same law in every state?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Declaration of Independence of the US is not a law. It is a philosophical and practical document discussing the legitimecy of governments....when is it legitimate for a group of people to form a gov't.....and on what some of the limits of government should be. You are correct that it 'means not a jot' to most people outside of the US' and infact it don't mean sh1t to most people inside the US....this is because of ignorance...the Dec of Ind is not confused....you are confused. The issues addressed in the Dec of Ind are the same issues that have been causing international and intranational wars since politics began....the issue in a nutshell is 'who can legitimately form a gov't and what are the limits that all gov'ts should be held to'. This has been and still is the problem in Iraq, Afghanistan, Ireland, Vietnam, Timor, Cuba, Russia, Iran, Algeria, Quebec, Kashmir, Korea,.....and more. The rulers of the world will not take up a discussion of the legitimacy of gov't because virtually all of them would loose their power base. Most people in the world seem too carried away by their own passion and blood lust to be able to rationally consider these sorts of issues....so the killing continues.....kill for peace...kill for revenge...kill for cultural purity...kill for revenge of revenge of revenge of revenge....brutal, barbaric, pointless self indulgence.

I have no moral problem with someone who took another's life being forced to forfiet their own. My faith in any justice system to get it right 100% of the time however, is zero, and I've seen too many wrongful convictions to want to see it restored in my own country, or used anywhere else.

What happend to that wonderful phrase used at the end of sentences in the old days "...at hard labour"?

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely agree.

The death penalty is directly tied to deterrence.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, this has already been proven wrong by numerous studies in the U.S.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY.  This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator.  Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Society would benefit more by locking up killers for life and studying them than by killing them.

Most mureders in the US are crimes of passion and the death penalty is not a deterent to these.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY.  This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator.  Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Many of them are "studied", however, all that seems to come from those studies is another book (with movie rights soon to follow). These people are kept on death row for over 20 years in most cases before they are finally put to death.

I believe it is true that most people murdered in the U.S. are killed by someone they know. More and more murders seem to be random acts of violence (drive-by shootings, etc.) and many are never solved.

True that the Declaration of Independence states that, however, the Bill of Rights clearly states that the Government may deprive one of life, liberty, etc with due process of the law:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It further states in Amendment X that some issues are left to the various States or to the People. Thus we have some states that do not have a death penalty and some that do.

I have no pity for murderers. They showed no pity or mercy for their victims, so why should they receive mercy at the hands of other people. Murderers sit on death row for years, decades even, while their lawyers go through one appeal after another. Their victims are dead though and the families of the victims have to deal with the loss of a loved one and, often, have to suffer through a trial which outlines the grisly details of how their loved one died at the hands of the murderer. Pity I save for those who deserve it.

mandl

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Declaration of Independence of the US clearly indicates that state sanctioned killing of criminals is a violation of rights that are bestowed by the creator...its as simple as that.....killing criminals is murder....and is a violation of their creator given human rights....it is barbaric....it calls on the basest animal instincts still active in some humans. Just because the constitution of the US allows murder of criminals does not make it right. The Dec of Ind says that the right to life is 'inalienable'....that means it can not be taken away....that means that convicted killers have the right to life and this right can not be taken away from them....this also means that killing them is a violation of their rights....rights that can not be taken away.....regardless of what your personal feelings are about criminals.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with your arguments Chownah, but I think there is an oversight in the interpretation of the Declaration of Independence. It says " .... should not be deprived of life, liberty, or justice, without the due process of law .... "

That's different than saying they should not be deprived of life. It's like someone stated many moons ago on this forum ".... the yanks will give them a fair trial, and then kill him." Funny, but very true.

It's a known fact that many death row inmates have been proven innocent with the availability of DNA testing. That alone, should be a deterrent to state-sponsored killing. It is inaccurate to an alarming degree, and it is NOT a deterrent. So why do we do it? To feel better or safer? This is "eye for an eye" and barbaric. Even more so: the new modern cost/benefit analysis of killing death row inmates.

Que dit la loi? Tu ne tueras pas! Comment le dit-elle? En tuant..!

"What does the Law say? You will not kill! How does she say it? By Killing!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly.

Enlightened /Civilized Countries or societys dont advocate or NEED the Death Penalty...hence their Well Deserved Superior Status.

Enlightened /Civilized Countries or societys dont advocate or NEED the Death Penalty...hence their Well Deserved Superior Status.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I wouldn't go that far!

Too many governments use "freedom" and "justice" as a means to justify killing innocents, lessening "burdens on society" and silencing those who oppose the agenda of the current powers-who-be.

How many injustices have occurred in human history? "God only knows.............. "

While we sit here, sharing our views, how many people are dying and suffering for the cause of freedom, justice ..... and the "name of god'? Do you really think that state execution is an answer to our erring human woes?

While we sit here, sharing our views, how many people are dying and suffering for the cause of freedom, justice ..... and the "name of god'?    Do you really think that state execution is an answer to our erring human woes?

Yep, because all of them people and money, it takes, to look after murderers (keeping them out of the reach of innocent civilians) could be used for better causes.

I would sooner see, say for arguments sake, the £10m we spend per annum on looking after "Lifers" who are never to be parolled, being spent saving lives of innocent children who have done no harm to anyone.

While we sit here, sharing our views, how many people are dying and suffering for the cause of freedom, justice ..... and the "name of god'?    Do you really think that state execution is an answer to our erring human woes?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep, because all of them people and money, it takes, to look after murderers (keeping them out of the reach of innocent civilians) could be used for better causes.

I would sooner see, say for arguments sake, the £10m we spend per annum on looking after "Lifers" who are never to be parolled, being spent saving lives of innocent children who have done no harm to anyone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And will it ever be? I doubt it! The "legal" murder count - in the name of freedom and justice wrought by elected representatives of society - is by far higher than any civilian criminal acts brought before the courts!

While we sit here, sharing our views, how many people are dying and suffering for the cause of freedom, justice ..... and the "name of god'?    Do you really think that state execution is an answer to our erring human woes?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep, because all of them people and money, it takes, to look after murderers (keeping them out of the reach of innocent civilians) could be used for better causes.

I would sooner see, say for arguments sake, the £10m we spend per annum on looking after "Lifers" who are never to be parolled, being spent saving lives of innocent children who have done no harm to anyone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And will it ever be? I doubt it! The "legal" justice count - in the name of freedom and justice wrought by elected representatives of society - is by far less than any civilian criminal acts brought before the courts!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While we sit here, sharing our views, how many people are dying and suffering for the cause of freedom, justice ..... and the "name of god'?    Do you really think that state execution is an answer to our erring human woes?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep, because all of them people and money, it takes, to look after murderers (keeping them out of the reach of innocent civilians) could be used for better causes.

I would sooner see, say for arguments sake, the £10m we spend per annum on looking after "Lifers" who are never to be parolled, being spent saving lives of innocent children who have done no harm to anyone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very few lifers are never paroled (in the UK). Most come out on licence after they've served their tariff.

While we sit here, sharing our views, how many people are dying and suffering for the cause of freedom, justice ..... and the "name of god'?    Do you really think that state execution is an answer to our erring human woes?

Yep, because all of them people and money, it takes, to look after murderers (keeping them out of the reach of innocent civilians) could be used for better causes.

I would sooner see, say for arguments sake, the £10m we spend per annum on looking after "Lifers" who are never to be parolled, being spent saving lives of innocent children who have done no harm to anyone.

Very few lifers are never paroled (in the UK). Most come out on licence after they've served their tariff.

It's these "Very few lifers" who i am on about. They are the one's who are probably the serial killers (the one's who i believe should be executed) and the one's who cost the most to keep detained

I would have to say depends...

Hypothetical 1: My stupid offspring makes a dumb descision to try to smuggle drugs through a country such as LOS or Singapore and gets caught. (I know that this would never happen as I have brought her up to be an inteligent law abiding individual, could it?)

Hypothetical 2: Some moron rapes and/or murders my above said offspring.

My answer to the question unfortunately would be different for each scenario and I doubt any advocate of CP would be able to say "Well, I support CP, so I know that my daughter/son deserves to die, so yeah, off with their head"

I have no moral problem with someone who took another's life being forced to forfiet their own. My faith in any justice system to get it right 100% of the time however, is zero, and I've seen too many wrongful convictions to want to see it restored in my own country, or used anywhere else.

What happend to that wonderful phrase used at the end of sentences in the old days "...at hard labour"?

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Absolutely agree.

The death penalty is directly tied to deterrence.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, this has already been proven wrong by numerous studies in the U.S.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY.  This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator.  Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Society would benefit more by locking up killers for life and studying them than by killing them.

Most mureders in the US are crimes of passion and the death penalty is not a deterent to these.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY.  This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator.  Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Many of them are "studied", however, all that seems to come from those studies is another book (with movie rights soon to follow). These people are kept on death row for over 20 years in most cases before they are finally put to death.

I believe it is true that most people murdered in the U.S. are killed by someone they know. More and more murders seem to be random acts of violence (drive-by shootings, etc.) and many are never solved.

True that the Declaration of Independence states that, however, the Bill of Rights clearly states that the Government may deprive one of life, liberty, etc with due process of the law:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It further states in Amendment X that some issues are left to the various States or to the People. Thus we have some states that do not have a death penalty and some that do.

I have no pity for murderers. They showed no pity or mercy for their victims, so why should they receive mercy at the hands of other people. Murderers sit on death row for years, decades even, while their lawyers go through one appeal after another. Their victims are dead though and the families of the victims have to deal with the loss of a loved one and, often, have to suffer through a trial which outlines the grisly details of how their loved one died at the hands of the murderer. Pity I save for those who deserve it.

mandl

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Declaration of Independence of the US clearly indicates that state sanctioned killing of criminals is a violation of rights that are bestowed by the creator...its as simple as that.....killing criminals is murder....and is a violation of their creator given human rights....it is barbaric....it calls on the basest animal instincts still active in some humans. Just because the constitution of the US allows murder of criminals does not make it right. The Dec of Ind says that the right to life is 'inalienable'....that means it can not be taken away....that means that convicted killers have the right to life and this right can not be taken away from them....this also means that killing them is a violation of their rights....rights that can not be taken away.....regardless of what your personal feelings are about criminals.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with your arguments Chownah, but I think there is an oversight in the interpretation of the Declaration of Independence. It says " .... should not be deprived of life, liberty, or justice, without the due process of law .... "

That's different than saying they should not be deprived of life. It's like someone stated many moons ago on this forum ".... the yanks will give them a fair trial, and then kill him." Funny, but very true.

It's a known fact that many death row inmates have been proven innocent with the availability of DNA testing. That alone, should be a deterrent to state-sponsored killing. It is inaccurate to an alarming degree, and it is NOT a deterrent. So why do we do it? To feel better or safer? This is "eye for an eye" and barbaric. Even more so: the new modern cost/benefit analysis of killing death row inmates.

Que dit la loi? Tu ne tueras pas! Comment le dit-elle? En tuant..!

"What does the Law say? You will not kill! How does she say it? By Killing!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was surprised when you claimed that the Declaration of Independence contained the words "" .... should not be deprived of life, liberty, or justice, without the due process of law .... "".......so I went out and read it.....twice......and could not find the wording that you indicated....at least in the copy which I read which is located here: http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/

The copy of the Dec of Ind clearly states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It then goes on to indicate that to secure these 'inalienable' rights is the reason for creating government and that the legitimacy of the government comes from the consent of the governed. I do hope that you will find and read a copy of the Dec of Ind and report back as to whether I am correct here or not. To me this is a very important document not only for the US but for all governed people everywhere....you will notice that the document says that all men (and I think all of us would enclude women in this term "men") are created equal and that they are all endowed by the creator...it is not just talking about US citizens...its talking about everyone everywhere.

Sorry - you're right - I was talking about ammendments to the Constitution. The Bill or Rights and the Constitution are much more applicable to the rights of citizens than the Declaration of Independence .

But to restate my comment: these ammendments say far more about the "due process of the law" when it comes to the "rights" accorded to individuals under the Constitution.

For example Chownah, you quote this from the D of I:

"The copy of the Dec of Ind clearly states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It then goes on to indicate that to secure these 'inalienable' rights is the reason for creating government and that the legitimacy of the government comes from the consent of the governed."

At the time, these unalienable rights only applied to rich, white men, who ended up owning and trading slaves, as well as defining women as the property of men.

That's a nice, neat way to get around "unalienable rights"

I don't believe a life of another person should be taken under any circumstances - be it by a murderer or an executioner, regardless of the crime committed or the country in which a crime is committed.

One way of looking at it is that the criminal gets the easy way out by being killed. Compare that to the effect he/she has had on the victim and the victim's family and friends and the suffering they have/had to endure. The criminal at the very most should be kept in jail for the remainder of his/her life.

I don't believe a life of another person should be taken under any circumstances - be it by a murderer or an executioner, regardless of the crime committed or the country in which a crime is committed.

One way of looking at it is that the criminal gets the easy way out by being killed.  Compare that to the effect he/she has had on the victim and the victim's family and friends and the suffering they have/had to endure.  The criminal at the very most should be kept in jail for the remainder of his/her life.

Maybe the victim's family should have the final word then????

I don't believe a life of another person should be taken under any circumstances - be it by a murderer or an executioner, regardless of the crime committed or the country in which a crime is committed.

One way of looking at it is that the criminal gets the easy way out by being killed.  Compare that to the effect he/she has had on the victim and the victim's family and friends and the suffering they have/had to endure.  The criminal at the very most should be kept in jail for the remainder of his/her life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hallejujah!!! The perpetrators of serious crimes against humanity -once brought to justice -may perhaps reflect on their action/s) (?) and come to be better humans before their end? Maybe then justice will be served. If the jailers were humanly trained to deal with the world's criminals, our society's could be a better place!

What goes around, comes around............. again and again and again!!!

What goes around, comes around............. again and again and again!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly we finally agree the lads who get the death penalty - get whats coming to them!!!

If the jailers were humanly trained to deal with the world's criminals, our society's could be a better place!

Come on Khall, that's PC gone nuts. The criminals get treated very well in the majority of the world's prison's. 3 square meals a day and satellite TV. Better off than than alot of the worlds unfortunates, who still have more self respect than to go out and commit crime.

As for reform, the one's we're talking about here are people who would otherwise be executed and so, if serving jail time, they would not be released anyways. Why try to reform them? They're going to be put back into society.

They should at the very least be treated like the &lt;deleted&gt; way in which they treated their victims. By the sounds of it, you would like them to be tucked up every night, with a hot cup of Cocoa and put to sleep after singing them a lullaby

My choice is really somewhere in between the first two options. I think the crime would have to be really, really bad and to define that would be circumstanial. Death is a release, thus a persons suffering will be had here in this life.

So whats your prefered fun way of doing it....

Methods of Execution..... :

Electric chair as used for electrocutions.

The electric chair was developed in the late 1880s with support from Thomas Edison (who had a financial interest in having direct current used in providing electricity, whereas the electric chair uses alternating current) and is still in use today.Methods of execution have varied over time, and include:

Asphyxiation (or strangulation), such as by Garrotte

Blood eagle (possibly a myth)

Boiling to death

Burning, especially for religious heretics and witches on the stake

Brazen bull

Breaking on the Wheel

Burial (alive, also known as the pit)

Crucifixion

Crushing by a weight, abruptly or as a slow ordeal - see also animals

Decapitation, or beheading (as by sword, axe or guillotine)

Disembowelment

Dismemberment

Disruption (a form of dismemberment)

Drawing and quartering (Considered by many to be the most "cruel" of punishments)

Drowning

Electric chair

Explosives

Exsanguination

Flaying = skinning

Fustuarium - see also for not always lethal successors

Gassing

Hanging

Impalement

Lethal injection

Iron Maiden

Keelhauling (not always lethal) and walking the plank (if not mythical)

Pressing

Poisoning

Sawing

Scaphism and similar methods mentioned there

Shooting can be performed either

by Firing squad

by a single shooter (such as the neck shot, often performed on a kneeling prisoner, as in present PR China in significant numbers)

(especially collectively) by cannon or machine gun

Snake pit

Starvation and Dehydration

Stoning

Various animal-related methods

Tearing apart by horses, e.g. Ancient China (using five horses) or "quartering," with four horses, and in The Song of Roland

Attack/devouring by animals, such as dogs or wolves, as in Ancient Rome and the Biblical lion's den, by rodents (such as rats), by carnivorous fish (such as sharks), by crabs or by insects (such as ants)

Poisonous bites from scorpions, snakes, spiders etcetera

Crushing by elephant or trampling by a herd or by horsemen, as practiced by the Mongolian hordes

all been used ...and in many cases......still in ......

If the jailers were humanly trained to deal with the world's criminals, our society's could be a better place!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Come on Khall, that's PC gone nuts. The criminals get treated very well in the majority of the world's prison's. 3 square meals a day and satellite TV. Better off than than alot of the worlds unfortunates, who still have more self respect than to go out and commit crime.

As for reform, the one's we're talking about here are people who would otherwise be executed and so, if serving jail time, they would not be released anyways. Why try to reform them? They're going to be put back into society.

They should at the very least be treated like the &lt;deleted&gt; way in which they treated their victims. By the sounds of it, you would like them to be tucked up every night, with a hot cup of Cocoa and put to sleep after singing them a lullaby

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't forget the marsh mellows for the hot coco!!

So whats your prefered fun way of doing it....

For me, even though they had not given their victim's much of a choice. I would still like to think that we would use the most Humane method, probably Lethal Injection.

There are some pretty tasty methods in your post that some deserve though

If the jailers were humanly trained to deal with the world's criminals, our society's could be a better place!

Come on Khall, that's PC gone nuts. The criminals get treated very well in the majority of the world's prison's. 3 square meals a day and satellite TV. Better off than than alot of the worlds unfortunates, who still have more self respect than to go out and commit crime.

As for reform, the one's we're talking about here are people who would otherwise be executed and so, if serving jail time, they would not be released anyways. Why try to reform them? They're going to be put back into society.

They should at the very least be treated like the &lt;deleted&gt; way in which they treated their victims. By the sounds of it, you would like them to be tucked up every night, with a hot cup of Cocoa and put to sleep after singing them a lullaby

Don't forget the marsh mellows for the hot coco!!

And Electric Blankets if it gets a tad chilly at night

So whats your prefered fun way of doing it....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For me, even though they had not given their victim's much of a choice. I would still like to think that we would use the most Humane method, probably Lethal Injection.

There are some pretty tasty methods in your post that some deserve though

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

guillotine for moi - sharp blade recommended.

On a tangent -

How many of you death penalty supporters feel that executions should be done in public, as they once were?

Show of hands?

On a tangent -

How many of you death penalty supporters feel that executions should be done in public, as they once were?

Show of hands? 

What, as in Pay-Per-View, on Sky satellite

No, don't think it should be done in that manner

On a tangent -

How many of you death penalty supporters feel that executions should be done in public, as they once were?

Show of hands? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd support that - I think seeing a gruesome death would certainly give second thoughts to those out there considering a crime that mandates a death penalty.

If the jailers were humanly trained to deal with the world's criminals, our society's could be a better place!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Come on Khall, that's PC gone nuts. The criminals get treated very well in the majority of the world's prison's. 3 square meals a day and satellite TV. Better off than than alot of the worlds unfortunates, who still have more self respect than to go out and commit crime.

As for reform, the one's we're talking about here are people who would otherwise be executed and so, if serving jail time, they would not be released anyways. Why try to reform them? They're going to be put back into society.

They should at the very least be treated like the &lt;deleted&gt; way in which they treated their victims. By the sounds of it, you would like them to be tucked up every night, with a hot cup of Cocoa and put to sleep after singing them a lullaby

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr Bj............. I expected alot more from you........... too bad! I didn't think we'd come to this! I'd like to express myself in a forum that revealed more in life. You caught me by surprise. I didn't think we'd come to this........!! sorry!

khall64au - No worries we all have differing opinions on issues such as the death penalty, politics, religion. I still think you are lovely person even though I disagree with you.

If everyone agreed on everything what a boring place the world would be.