Experts Call For End To Death Penalty In Thailand

[Fozfromoz]

<snip>

I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!?

I guess, it is fine with them, because "hey...everybody can make mistakes!"...and THAT is easy to say!

So now it is your turn: what do you do, to prevent "collateral damage"?

And what do you do, when you got the wrong guy?

What do you tell the mother, the wife, the kids of a man you wrongly excecuted?

Or are you telling me, you are willing to take that risk, just to get your "animal" put out of misery?

By the way: your "war analogy" doesn't work, because you are comparing apples and oranges!

"I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!"

I believe the death penalty should be given when there is irrefutable evidence that murder was committed by the accused.

Forget the "But we got the wrong guy!" rubbish.

"Irrefutable" means just that - impossible to deny or disprove.

What do you think, how many guys were convicted for several crimes, because someone thought, they had "irrefutable evidence"?

It happens everyday!

"Luckily" not exclusively with death= penalties!

A few hundred years ago, there was "irrefutable evidence" that the earth was flat and that the sun circled around it!

It's easy: put no one on death row- no need for "irrefutable" evidence.

I reckon Charles Manson would agree with you.

[DocN]

<snip>

I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!?

I guess, it is fine with them, because "hey...everybody can make mistakes!"...and THAT is easy to say!

So now it is your turn: what do you do, to prevent "collateral damage"?

And what do you do, when you got the wrong guy?

What do you tell the mother, the wife, the kids of a man you wrongly excecuted?

Or are you telling me, you are willing to take that risk, just to get your "animal" put out of misery?

By the way: your "war analogy" doesn't work, because you are comparing apples and oranges!

"I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!"

I believe the death penalty should be given when there is irrefutable evidence that murder was committed by the accused.

Forget the "But we got the wrong guy!" rubbish.

"Irrefutable" means just that - impossible to deny or disprove.

What do you think, how many guys were convicted for several crimes, because someone thought, they had "irrefutable evidence"?

It happens everyday!

"Luckily" not exclusively with death= penalties!

A few hundred years ago, there was "irrefutable evidence" that the earth was flat and that the sun circled around it!

It's easy: put no one on death row- no need for "irrefutable" evidence.

I reckon Charles Manson would agree with you.

What is that supposed to mean?

He is behind bar, isn't he?

He was trialed and sentenced, wasn't he?

In his case there was irrefutable evidence....so your conclusion is: we have one down with irrefutable evidence, therefore it will happen every time?

You know, as well as I know, that there have been convictions of all kind, that turned out to wrong.

One of the more famous cases: Box- champion Ruben "Hurricane" Carter- sentenced to life in prison...until it turned out, he didn't do it, YEARS later!

[JetsetBkk]

"I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!"

I believe the death penalty should be given when there is irrefutable evidence that murder was committed by the accused.

Forget the "But we got the wrong guy!" rubbish.

"Irrefutable" means just that - impossible to deny or disprove.

What do you think, how many guys were convicted for several crimes, because someone thought, they had "irrefutable evidence"?

It happens everyday!

"Luckily" not exclusively with death= penalties!

A few hundred years ago, there was "irrefutable evidence" that the earth was flat and that the sun circled around it!

It's easy: put no one on death row- no need for "irrefutable" evidence.

I reckon Charles Manson would agree with you.

What is that supposed to mean?

He is behind bar, isn't he?

He was trialed and sentenced, wasn't he?

In his case there was irrefutable evidence....so your conclusion is: we have one down with irrefutable evidence, therefore it will happen every time?

You know, as well as I know, that there have been convictions of all kind, that turned out to wrong.

One of the more famous cases: Box- champion Ruben "Hurricane" Carter- sentenced to life in prison...until it turned out, he didn't do it, YEARS later!

"Irrefutable" is a word that you don't appear to understand. Sorry about that.

[Fozfromoz]

@DocN

I know this is a bit off topic as its the US, but seems a few comparisons have been drawn in this thread.

What it means is that he was sentenced to death, with the rest of the ferals. By a stroke of luck for him California abolished the death penalty before it was carried out. So he is still there with his colour TV and 3 squares a day. I don't know, probably a few degrees and doctorates as well. Was he guilty, yes. Was he lucky, yes. Should he be landfill, I say yes, you will probably say no.

If there are so many innocents as you say, perhaps take a look at the system, which probably has more holes than a second hand dartboard.

Bottom line, as others have said, and I agree, in cases of some heinous crimes,,and the evidence is irrefutable, then by any normal human decency standards, they forfeit their rights to live also.

[nurofiend]

Death penalty is WRONG!

Period!

Why don't you stop beating around the bush and tell us your opinion?

I think it is wrong in the drug cases here in Thailand or other countries but it is right for other henious crimes.

Sure, no problem!

I think it wrong, because -as a much wiser man than me once said- "An eye for an eye, will leave everybody blind"!

Also: if you wrongly accuse and sentence someone (and that happens once in a while) to death...

If you sentence him to a life in prison and it turned out to be wrong, it is bad enough, but at least you didn't kill him!

Apart from that: I think, taking the life of any human is just not right! And even if that person did something awfully terrible- 2 wrongs doesn't make a right!

And to put someone to death, so that another person is feeling better (eg gets his/her revenge) doesn't make it better either.

I think, there are many good reasons against the death- penalty, but I am still to hear one good reason for it!

I think it wrong, because -as a much wiser man than me once said- "An eye for an eye, will leave everybody blind"!

except for the last guy, he'll be left with one eye cos the other guy can't find him

i agree with your view btw.

[DocN]

@DocN

I know this is a bit off topic as its the US, but seems a few comparisons have been drawn in this thread.

What it means is that he was sentenced to death, with the rest of the ferals. By a stroke of luck for him California abolished the death penalty before it was carried out. So he is still there with his colour TV and 3 squares a day. I don't know, probably a few degrees and doctorates as well. Was he guilty, yes. Was he lucky, yes. Should he be landfill, I say yes, you will probably say no.

If there are so many innocents as you say, perhaps take a look at the system, which probably has more holes than a second hand dartboard.

Bottom line, as others have said, and I agree, in cases of some heinous crimes,,and the evidence is irrefutable, then by any normal human decency standards, they forfeit their rights to live also.

There are enough!

My problem is: if you sentence someone to 10 years and it turns out, you had the wrong guy, you at least can give him back his freedom (plus one or the other million in compensation...maybe).

But if you take A LIFE, that is terminal.

And if it turns out to be wrong? What then?

Don't get me wrong: there are enough people in this world, I wouldn't mind to be dead and gone.

Some of those I wish to die even painfully.

Manson is sure one of the guys, I wouldn't miss a second!

But that is not the point!

Some people I want to be rich and wealthy, but life is no children's birthday party, where you get what you wish for.

[nurofiend]

DocN, thank you for your opinion. I understand now that you do no think that killers should be put to death.

You did not complete the thesis though, and I would like you to elaborate on the following:

Not putting someone to death means doing something with them. What would you propose doing to someone who is a murderer of the lowest. most base type? I am describing an animal in human form who has no remorse or regrets over their deeds, and has no consideration for human life.

Hence...

A. What do you propose doing to them?

B. Who is going to pay for it, because it ain't free?

A. What do you propose doing to them?

I am convinced that those who are against the death penalty are cowards that are out of touch with reality until those cowards come face to face with that reality. Cowards do not want to deal with reality, and would rather have it swept under the rug and for someone else to deal with it at their cost and out of pocket money.

There are two options here: Putting these animals in a place where suffering is drawn out, or putting them in a nice cozy place where idiots think theycan be reformed.

The first option is sick, and makes those against the death penalty more cruel than those who simply want to end the animal's life so decent humans can get on without being collared by keeping unwanted, unproductive animals in a zoo that no one ever visits.

The latter option is also sick, because it is basically a form of funding do-gooders who wish to waste their time helping sick animals get to a point where they are turned back into society in the slim hopes that they do not relapse; ALL at no loss to the do-gooders who waste their time and get paid doing it.

B. Who is going to pay for it, because it ain't free?

So, either of the options above will accrue debt, and that debt is going to be thrown on the back of the public that was terrorized by these debased animals. So, in essense the victims are still paying for the animals to exist, and this adds up as we increase the population of your zoo that contains unwanted animals that are of no use and are non-productive.

My Conclusion:

People who are against ending the existence of animals of the lowest order are either sadisticly cruel to the debased animals because they want the animal to suffer, or they are sadistically cruel to the victims because they expect the victims to fund the existence of these debased creatures.

Incidentally, I think your friend who said, "An eye for an eye, will leave everybody blind", is unrealistic in his or her approach to reality and has never been in a life or death situation.

"Cowards do not want to deal with reality, and would rather have it swept under the rug."

the death penalty is sweeping it under the rug... under the ground to be more precise.

"The first option is sick, and makes those against the death penalty more cruel than those who simply want to end the animal's life so decent humans can get on without being collared by keeping unwanted, unproductive animals in a zoo that no one ever visits."

'more cruel' eh? poor choice of words, freudian slip perhaps.

so basically people against the death penalty are sadistic cruel cowards.....right, gotcha.

what do you say about them getting the wrong guy? this is one that's always avoided by people such as yourself or they give a lame "oh but they have to be 100% sure" answer, as if they didn't think they were 100% sure when they have done it before.

so have you a good answer for that? what do you say about it if it happens and how do you ensure it can't?

[lungmi]

In Island they have more devoted Buddhists. Why?

No capital penalty.

[manarak]

Give brain a chance, guys. Study a little bit this link.

http://www.deathpena...james-s-liebman

This study seems to say that most people in prison are there because of judicial error.

Let them all free, I say!

(but not anywhere near where I live please)

[Bwanatickey]

We are told in the Bible that Lazarus was raised from the dead after his sisters,May and Martha sent word of his death to Jesus.In a bizarre modern day parallel of this Biblical tale,a chap down my road called Layin also recently died.This is where the similiarties end however,as his two sisters failed to report his death to anyone and instead continued to cash his welfare giro for 3 months until neighbours complained about the smell.

Is this a death Penalty or a death Benefit ?

[cup-O-coffee]

Oh, wow...

So let me state the following.

a) a human is never an animal, no matter how cruel the things are, they do!

Never! No Hitler, no Stalin! Humans, not animals! So you may put animals out of their misery, but we are still talking about humans, no matter in- humane their deeds are.

They may be psychopaths or sociopaths, but they are -by definition- no animals.

You are treading on thin ice here, if you are comparing them with animals, because it would be up to you, to define, what makes a human human.

b ) "I am convinced that those who are against the death penalty are cowards..."Okay, so I am a coward? Or am I? I am putting up with the reality, that there are some crazy f@#% out there, that we have to deal with. Dealing with a problem in terms of acknowledging it, analyzing it and trying to solve it, is not cowardly, but responsible! Dragging someone into the open and putting a gun to his head, that is basically NOT doing all of that, but getting the problem out of the way as fast and "easy" as possible.

c) Locking them up costs money. Yes. But as I said elsewhere: we are paying for so much sick [email protected] suddenly keeping a person alive in a prison, is ruining us? Locking them up, offers many more chances. 1) they are "out of the way", according to their crime anywhere between 20 years or...let's see...FOREVER! 2) maybe there ARE chances to "turn them", who knows? and 3) they are NOT DEAD, when the off-chance arrives, you might have to take back your verdict on them!

d) It is almost funny, that you attack "my friend". His name is Dr. Martin Luther King, and to say, he has never been in a "life or death situation" is kind of an understatement, given that he was shot, by a racial- fanatic, a guy who's ideology was very much borderline on the question, if blacks are humans!

See: what I am saying here is, that on the death- penalty, you have to come to a conclusion, where you can say "I can rule out, by 100%, that no innocent being EVER is out to death, may it be by false accusation or the twisting of facts or not enough evidence.

Because IMHO 1 innocently accused and sentenced human being is 1 too many.And no matter how hard you try, you can NEVER guarantee that. So - yes- keep the "lowest animal" alive, in order NEVER to risk an innocent life.

If that makes me a coward, I am guilty as charged!

Well, it's all easy to say, isn't it? I guess we agree to disagree. You remind me of the guy in "Saving Private Ryan"; at the end of the movie. His lack of conscience allowed two good men to die for no reason. He stood there pissing himself while he watched one soldier get bayonetted through the chest. The next one was his captain getting shot by the same man. There is no honor in your life; but you make like you are honorable with empty words; but that doesn't amount to much when the bullets are flying, does it, because where would we expect to find you; standing in front of us, behind us or with us?

Excuse me?

So I pressume, you will be executing all these "animals" in person, yes?!

I don't need to stand anywhere, not with you, behind you or in front of you.

The question is, what kind of values you attach to "being human".

I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!?

I guess, it is fine with them, because "hey...everybody can make mistakes!"...and THAT is easy to say!

So now it is your turn: what do you do, to prevent "collateral damage"?

And what do you do, when you got the wrong guy?

What do you tell the mother, the wife, the kids of a man you wrongly excecuted?

Or are you telling me, you are willing to take that risk, just to get your "animal" put out of misery?

By the way: your "war analogy" doesn't work, because you are comparing apples and oranges!

Good morning DocN

I gave it some thought this morning over my cup of coffee and cigarette, and I have come to the conclusion that you are correct in your views, and I admire them; however those views have a few thousand years before they are realized by the rest of mankind. I believe the word I was looking for to describe your views is "Utopian".

If we lived in a Utopian society, then yes, the death penalty would be a non issue, because humans would be genetically produced without those DNA that cause the kind of mayhem that is unavoidable today.

You speak of Utopian ideals, yet you live in a society of bloodthirsty, not fully evolved human beings. You are the voice of the future; a future that I would welcome, yet will not live to see.

So, I'll wrap my views up by saying this: As long as you live in a human society where the thirst for blood is still in our genetic structure, then you will be nothing more than a voice howling in the wind; and in many cases, people will see you as nothing more than an obstruction to the kind of justice that is needed during this time in our evolution of bloodthirstiness and mayhem. Perhaps justice can evolve to a point where sentences are less severe when we reach the point where there are no humans being bred and indoctrinated with the lust of blood on their minds.

You views are flat out too far evolved to suit what is needed NOW to deter unjust death for ALL..

Edited December 14, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[DocN]

Oh, wow...

So let me state the following.

a) a human is never an animal, no matter how cruel the things are, they do!

Never! No Hitler, no Stalin! Humans, not animals! So you may put animals out of their misery, but we are still talking about humans, no matter in- humane their deeds are.

They may be psychopaths or sociopaths, but they are -by definition- no animals.

You are treading on thin ice here, if you are comparing them with animals, because it would be up to you, to define, what makes a human human.

b ) "I am convinced that those who are against the death penalty are cowards..."Okay, so I am a coward? Or am I? I am putting up with the reality, that there are some crazy f@#% out there, that we have to deal with. Dealing with a problem in terms of acknowledging it, analyzing it and trying to solve it, is not cowardly, but responsible! Dragging someone into the open and putting a gun to his head, that is basically NOT doing all of that, but getting the problem out of the way as fast and "easy" as possible.

c) Locking them up costs money. Yes. But as I said elsewhere: we are paying for so much sick [email protected] suddenly keeping a person alive in a prison, is ruining us? Locking them up, offers many more chances. 1) they are "out of the way", according to their crime anywhere between 20 years or...let's see...FOREVER! 2) maybe there ARE chances to "turn them", who knows? and 3) they are NOT DEAD, when the off-chance arrives, you might have to take back your verdict on them!

d) It is almost funny, that you attack "my friend". His name is Dr. Martin Luther King, and to say, he has never been in a "life or death situation" is kind of an understatement, given that he was shot, by a racial- fanatic, a guy who's ideology was very much borderline on the question, if blacks are humans!

See: what I am saying here is, that on the death- penalty, you have to come to a conclusion, where you can say "I can rule out, by 100%, that no innocent being EVER is out to death, may it be by false accusation or the twisting of facts or not enough evidence.

Because IMHO 1 innocently accused and sentenced human being is 1 too many.And no matter how hard you try, you can NEVER guarantee that. So - yes- keep the "lowest animal" alive, in order NEVER to risk an innocent life.

If that makes me a coward, I am guilty as charged!

Well, it's all easy to say, isn't it? I guess we agree to disagree. You remind me of the guy in "Saving Private Ryan"; at the end of the movie. His lack of conscience allowed two good men to die for no reason. He stood there pissing himself while he watched one soldier get bayonetted through the chest. The next one was his captain getting shot by the same man. There is no honor in your life; but you make like you are honorable with empty words; but that doesn't amount to much when the bullets are flying, does it, because where would we expect to find you; standing in front of us, behind us or with us?

Excuse me?

So I pressume, you will be executing all these "animals" in person, yes?!

I don't need to stand anywhere, not with you, behind you or in front of you.

The question is, what kind of values you attach to "being human".

I don't know, how anyone could sleep, if they gas, shoot, grill or poison a person and find out, that they got the wrong guy!?

I guess, it is fine with them, because "hey...everybody can make mistakes!"...and THAT is easy to say!

So now it is your turn: what do you do, to prevent "collateral damage"?

And what do you do, when you got the wrong guy?

What do you tell the mother, the wife, the kids of a man you wrongly excecuted?

Or are you telling me, you are willing to take that risk, just to get your "animal" put out of misery?

By the way: your "war analogy" doesn't work, because you are comparing apples and oranges!

Good morning DocN

I gave it some thought this morning over my cup of coffee and cigarette, and I have come to the conclusion that you are correct in your views, and I admire them; however those views have a few thousand years before they are realized by the rest of mankind. I believe the word I was looking for to describe your views is "Utopian".

If we lived in a Utopian society, then yes, the death penalty would be a non issue, because humans would be genetically produced without those DNA that cause the kind of mayhem that is unavoidable today.

You speak of Utopian ideals, yet you live in a society of bloodthirsty, not fully evolved human beings. You are the voice of the future; a future that I would welcome, yet will not live to see.

So, I'll wrap my views up by saying this: As long as you live in a human society where the thirst for blood is still in our genetic structure, then you will be nothing more than a voice howling in the wind; and in many cases, people will see you as nothing more than an obstruction to the kind of justice that is needed during this time in our evolution of bloodthirstiness and mayhem. Perhaps justice can evolve to a point where sentences are less severe when we reach the point where there are no humans being bred and indoctrinated with the lust of blood on their minds.

You views are flat out too far evolved to suit what is needed NOW to deter unjust death for ALL..

Thanks for granting me that.

But I don't understand, why it is utopistic of me, to say: judge and sentence criminals...just don't kill them!

I know, that the human- species is bloodthirsty, who wouldn't it?! It's obvious and in your face everyday in the news.

But that has got nothing to do with how you judge and sentence criminals.

Just because THEY may be bloodthirsty...gives ME the right for revenge?

No sir!

[cup-O-coffee]

DocN against the death penalty:

Death penalty is WRONG! Period!

Reasons cited:

Wrongly accusing

Taking the life of any human is just not right! And even if that person did something awfully terrible

Put someone to death, so that another person is feeling better (eg gets his/her revenge) doesn't make it better either.

There is no good reason to kill someone, no matter what he had done!

Falsified evidence, hidden evidence, false accusations, shaky testimonies, DNA-testing became available), that proves, that a convicted murder, rapist or whatever was wrongly accused, imprisoned or put to death

DocN for the death penalty

Don't get me wrong: there are enough people in this world, I wouldn't mind to be dead and gone.

Some of those I wish to die even painfully.

Manson is sure one of the guys, I wouldn't miss a second!

DocN defending his "no death penalty" view in light of his view that Manson deserves it:

But that is not the point!

I reread all of your posts and your answers to my posts. I found that you give yourself a lot of leeway in your responses, and nit-pick at my posts in the literal sense, rather than giving me the same leeway.

You have shown a double standard in your posts, and therefore I can no longer go around with you. I find that people like you are more of a hindrence to making this world a better place to live because you come out with bold standards and then compromise those standards to suit your personal views.

I guess what I mean is you had a small amount of my respect with "Death penalty is WRONG! Period!" because you clearly stood on the other side of the fence; but any respect towards your standards simply went down the shitter with, "there are enough people in this world, I wouldn't mind to be dead and gone. Some of those I wish to die even painfully. Manson is sure one of the guys, I wouldn't miss a second!" followed by, "Just because THEY may be bloodthirsty...gives ME the right for revenge?". You compromised everything that you stand for with that.

You choose the live within the bounds of laws that give the human being a right to defend themselves even unto death, and they can be aquitted. But you are saying that everyone but you must not kill and let themselves be killed when it is premeditated. I think you need to go back to the drawing board and re-prioritize your views and make them all agree on one or the other.

Edited December 14, 2012 by cup-O-coffee

[manarak]

The death penalty should not be a toy in the hands of prosecutors and should not cause huge overhead as mentioned in the study, this is ridiculous.

It should be applied in cases where premeditated evil deeds were committed and the accused is proven guilty beyond any possible doubt. Then the sentence should be carried out at latest one year after the sentence if no appeal was made.

The study mentioned earlier is &lt;deleted&gt;, since they only speak about "errors" - these could be anything from a misplaced stamp on a form to a botched DNA analysis.

Revenge has nothing to do with it.

If someone uses a car to mow down a group of pedestrians, or people like this Anders Breivik should be done away with.

Society has nothing to gain from keeping them alive.

[Mosha]

I wonder how these experts react to dangerous dogs being kept alive? Mass murderers deserve the same treatment those dogs get.

[Skywalker69]

How many innocent peope have been executed? One is one to many.

[manarak]

How many innocent peope have been executed? One is one to many.

This number has to be weighed against the number of innocent people killed by murderers who were set free.

I have no idea about the statistics, but since the number of executions is so low, I guess more people died at the hands of murderers that were let go.

[DocN]

DocN against the death penalty:

Death penalty is WRONG! Period!

Reasons cited:

Wrongly accusing

Taking the life of any human is just not right! And even if that person did something awfully terrible

Put someone to death, so that another person is feeling better (eg gets his/her revenge) doesn't make it better either.

There is no good reason to kill someone, no matter what he had done!

Falsified evidence, hidden evidence, false accusations, shaky testimonies, DNA-testing became available), that proves, that a convicted murder, rapist or whatever was wrongly accused, imprisoned or put to death

DocN for the death penalty

Don't get me wrong: there are enough people in this world, I wouldn't mind to be dead and gone.

Some of those I wish to die even painfully.

Manson is sure one of the guys, I wouldn't miss a second!

DocN defending his "no death penalty" view in light of his view that Manson deserves it:

But that is not the point!

I reread all of your posts and your answers to my posts. I found that you give yourself a lot of leeway in your responses, and nit-pick at my posts in the literal sense, rather than giving me the same leeway.

You have shown a double standard in your posts, and therefore I can no longer go around with you. I find that people like you are more of a hindrence to making this world a better place to live because you come out with bold standards and then compromise those standards to suit your personal views.

I guess what I mean is you had a small amount of my respect with "Death penalty is WRONG! Period!" because you clearly stood on the other side of the fence; but any respect towards your standards simply went down the shitter with, "there are enough people in this world, I wouldn't mind to be dead and gone. Some of those I wish to die even painfully. Manson is sure one of the guys, I wouldn't miss a second!" followed by, "Just because THEY may be bloodthirsty...gives ME the right for revenge?". You compromised everything that you stand for with that.

You choose the live within the bounds of laws that give the human being a right to defend themselves even unto death, and they can be aquitted. But you are saying that everyone but you must not kill and let themselves be killed when it is premeditated. I think you need to go back to the drawing board and re-prioritize your views and make them all agree on one or the other.

Yeah , right!

Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty!

Totally!

By the way: I did not say, Manson deserves "it"!

I said, I wouldn't miss him and wouldn't mind him to be dead

You are aware, that people die of natural causes, sometimes...and then they are DEAD also!

You can no longer go around with me?

If you make up BS like that, I can only say: Thank you!

Edited December 15, 2012 by DocN

[DocN]

The death penalty should not be a toy in the hands of prosecutors and should not cause huge overhead as mentioned in the study, this is ridiculous.

It should be applied in cases where premeditated evil deeds were committed and the accused is proven guilty beyond any possible doubt. Then the sentence should be carried out at latest one year after the sentence if no appeal was made.

The study mentioned earlier is &lt;deleted&gt;, since they only speak about "errors" - these could be anything from a misplaced stamp on a form to a botched DNA analysis.

Revenge has nothing to do with it.

If someone uses a car to mow down a group of pedestrians, or people like this Anders Breivik should be done away with.

Society has nothing to gain from keeping them alive.

..except for...humanity!

[cup-O-coffee]

Yeah , right!

Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty!

Totally!

By the way: I did not say, Manson deserves "it"!

I said, I wouldn't miss him and wouldn't mind him to be dead

You are aware, that people die of natural causes, sometimes...and then they are DEAD also!

You can no longer go around with me?

If you make up BS like that, I can only say: Thank you!

Originally you stated emphatically:

"Death penalty is WRONG! Period!"

Now you are saying:

"Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty! Totally!"

"Some of those I wish to die even painfully."

---------------------------

Your views have reached the point of being ridiculous, in my estimate.

Perhaps it is your clear, illiterate comprehension of the English language and the convoluted syntax and choice of words that result therein, but it is my polite suggestion that you do not carry your argument any further. Your propensity to not respond intelligently to key statements and views, and instead move on to another ridiculous contradictory statement is putting you into a double standard. That was my point prior to this post, and now again here. That you cannot see that and come clean makes me think that this is merely one of the many problems facing the advancement of human society. I think I'll let the others have a poke at you, and leave my responses for other, more consistent views. Thank you, DocN.

[DocN]

Yeah , right!

Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty!

Totally!

By the way: I did not say, Manson deserves "it"!

I said, I wouldn't miss him and wouldn't mind him to be dead

You are aware, that people die of natural causes, sometimes...and then they are DEAD also!

You can no longer go around with me?

If you make up BS like that, I can only say: Thank you!

Originally you stated emphatically:

"Death penalty is WRONG! Period!"

Now you are saying:

"Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty! Totally!"

"Some of those I wish to die even painfully."

---------------------------

Your views have reached the point of being ridiculous, in my estimate.

Perhaps it is your clear, illiterate comprehension of the English language and the convoluted syntax and choice of words that result therein, but it is my polite suggestion that you do not carry your argument any further. Your propensity to not respond intelligently to key statements and views, and instead move on to another ridiculous contradictory statement is putting you into a double standard. That was my point prior to this post, and now again here. That you cannot see that and come clean makes me think that this is merely one of the many problems facing the advancement of human society. I think I'll let the others have a poke at you, and leave my responses for other, more consistent views. Thank you, DocN.

&lt;deleted&gt; is contradictory about stateting that I am 100% opposed to the death penalty, yet would not miss Charles Manson, if he died tomorrow?

I don't want him to be PUT TO DEATH eg have an death penalty executed.

Period!

But I would not cry, if him and people like him, would die tomorrow by...whatever natural course!

Period!

There is nothing contradictory in that at all!

It is two totally different things!

And for the rest of your fantastically arrogant suggestions on my posting behavior: blah blah blah!

[lungmi]

Give brain a chance, guys. Study a little bit this link.

http://www.deathpena...james-s-liebman

This study seems to say that most people in prison are there because of judicial error.

Let them all free, I say!

(but not anywhere near where I live please)

You misunderstood the study or you read it with limited mind.

Every criminal in jail has the chance that his case is revoked if he is innocent.

Reanimation of a proven innocent after he had been executed by error of the jurisdiction is possible for you?

[Pimay1]

Yeah , right!

Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty!

Totally!

By the way: I did not say, Manson deserves "it"!

I said, I wouldn't miss him and wouldn't mind him to be dead

You are aware, that people die of natural causes, sometimes...and then they are DEAD also!

You can no longer go around with me?

If you make up BS like that, I can only say: Thank you!

Originally you stated emphatically:

"Death penalty is WRONG! Period!"

Now you are saying:

"Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty! Totally!"

"Some of those I wish to die even painfully."

---------------------------

Your views have reached the point of being ridiculous, in my estimate.

Perhaps it is your clear, illiterate comprehension of the English language and the convoluted syntax and choice of words that result therein, but it is my polite suggestion that you do not carry your argument any further. Your propensity to not respond intelligently to key statements and views, and instead move on to another ridiculous contradictory statement is putting you into a double standard. That was my point prior to this post, and now again here. That you cannot see that and come clean makes me think that this is merely one of the many problems facing the advancement of human society. I think I'll let the others have a poke at you, and leave my responses for other, more consistent views. Thank you, DocN.

&lt;deleted&gt; is contradictory about stateting that I am 100% opposed to the death penalty, yet would not miss Charles Manson, if he died tomorrow?

I don't want him to be PUT TO DEATH eg have an death penalty executed.

Period!

But I would not cry, if him and people like him, would die tomorrow by...whatever natural course!

Period!

There is nothing contradictory in that at all!

It is two totally different things!

And for the rest of your fantastically arrogant suggestions on my posting behavior: blah blah blah!

DocN do you have a link to any credible stats of the number of innocent people who have been executed worldwide? Please don't post a link from the Amnesty International idiots.

[lungmi]

Fact is, confirmed by international criminologists, jurisprudence experts etc.,

1. Every punishment must be limited to human understanding. NO ONE has the right to punish with "Death", because we don't know what it is.

2.When someone orders the Death Penalty he take over the Right Of Gods - he creates "Terrorism" (fundamentalistic islam, religious sects wordwide etc.)

3. A State using the Capital Penalty can be sure to have more murders. (Texas is an example, and other countries)

Why Norway doesn't execute Breig? ---- One time executed under the hurrah of many people other Breigs will follow.

Edited December 15, 2012 by lungmi

[DocN]

Yeah , right!

Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty!

Totally!

By the way: I did not say, Manson deserves "it"!

I said, I wouldn't miss him and wouldn't mind him to be dead

You are aware, that people die of natural causes, sometimes...and then they are DEAD also!

You can no longer go around with me?

If you make up BS like that, I can only say: Thank you!

Originally you stated emphatically:

"Death penalty is WRONG! Period!"

Now you are saying:

"Me saying, I wouldn't mind some people to be dead and stating that I wouldn't miss Charles Manson, is clearly a statement in favor of the death- penalty! Totally!"

"Some of those I wish to die even painfully."

---------------------------

Your views have reached the point of being ridiculous, in my estimate.

Perhaps it is your clear, illiterate comprehension of the English language and the convoluted syntax and choice of words that result therein, but it is my polite suggestion that you do not carry your argument any further. Your propensity to not respond intelligently to key statements and views, and instead move on to another ridiculous contradictory statement is putting you into a double standard. That was my point prior to this post, and now again here. That you cannot see that and come clean makes me think that this is merely one of the many problems facing the advancement of human society. I think I'll let the others have a poke at you, and leave my responses for other, more consistent views. Thank you, DocN.

&lt;deleted&gt; is contradictory about stateting that I am 100% opposed to the death penalty, yet would not miss Charles Manson, if he died tomorrow?

I don't want him to be PUT TO DEATH eg have an death penalty executed.

Period!

But I would not cry, if him and people like him, would die tomorrow by...whatever natural course!

Period!

There is nothing contradictory in that at all!

It is two totally different things!

And for the rest of your fantastically arrogant suggestions on my posting behavior: blah blah blah!

DocN do you have a link to any credible stats of the number of innocent people who have been executed worldwide? Please don't post a link from the Amnesty International idiots.

1) They are not idiots!

2 ) No, unfortunately not. But given the relativelt high number of people who have been sent wrongly to prison, I guess there are quiet some. But my point earlier was: only ONE is one too many!

I found one wiki- article. I know, Wikipedia...not the best of all sources...but they are talking about 15 executions in the last 10 years in the US alone, where they might have had the wrong guy.

I am treading carefully here. But 15 might have been wrongfully executed...and I guess, they were all sentenced "beyond reasonable doubt"...so...that would be (given the source is correct) 15 dads, sons, brothers, husbands....and I say it again: even if it would have been only one guy...ONE TOO MANY!

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

(edited by me to ad source)

Edited December 15, 2012 by DocN