Prison justice

[Diamond]

And because nobody wants them after these 50 years they start killing/raping/stealing etc. again...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Let's see...

Assuming they do more or less serious crime (that deserves 50 years in prison) in their early twenties, then, when they are out, they are in 70s. Are you seriously suggesting that they are capable of killing/raping(lol)/stealing at that age?

[Rosbjerg]

And because nobody wants them after these 50 years they start killing/raping/stealing etc. again...

 

Might aswell kill them; to prevent folks not even born now to get killed by our stupid decision to keep those criminals alive...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

do you have any concept of Death? do you understand what it is? I sometime get the feeling that people who advocate the death penalty have no idea what they are talking about ..

do you have any idea what consequences your proposal has on the family/friends etc who will be affected directly by it?

 

and just to counter a future argument from you .. yes I fully realize that murderes affect the family of their victims and every possible thing should be done to prevent them from ever killing again .. but ending their lives is not the way to go! violence breeds violence if we don't brake the chain .. can we honestly go to bed with a clean conscience if we kill as well? (and if you can you are no better than the murderer you are trying to save society from, imo)

[taks]

I'm not sure how long inmates typically stay on Death Row.  Timothy McVeigh lasted 4 years, but he only made one appeal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i think 10 years is the average but it varies state-by-state. according to ron white, texas has an express lane. california death penalty is apparently the same thing as a life sentence, but in a smaller cell.

 

taks

[taks]

do you have any idea what consequences your proposal has on the family/friends etc who will be affected directly by it?

 

and just to counter a future argument from you .. yes I fully realize that murderes affect the family of their victims and every possible thing should be done to prevent them from ever killing again ..

nothing personal, but that's not much of a counter. all you did is acknowledge the impact the murderer had in the first place.

 

but ending their lives is not the way to go! violence breeds violence if we don't brake the chain .. can we honestly go to bed with a clean conscience if we kill as well? (and if you can you are no better than the murderer you are trying to save society from, imo)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

certainly a valid opinion, but certainly provable to only those who believe as you.

 

personally, i have no problem with execution but i have yet to see a system that implements it correctly (as i see it). the argument that it prevents crime has never been shown to be true. prison by itself does not prevent crime. crime rates are relatively consistent throughout every society whether they have lax, or draconian punishments. i.e. those that commit crimes, particularly capital crimes, don't worry about prision or death when doing so. IMO death penalty should only be dealt out with irrefutable evidence, not just beyond a reasonable doubt (granted, most US states do have a higher standard for actually getting a death sentence simply by virtue of the juries that view the evidence... but that's not enough IMO).

 

taks

Edited September 29, 2006 by taks

[julianw]

That tattoo did not really belong on his forehead... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

His rear sounds like a more logical choice.

[Judge Hades]

By the way, are any of you who are advocating harsher penalties for criminals, christians?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No.

[Judge Hades]

do you have any concept of Death? do you understand what it is? I sometime get the feeling that people who advocate the death penalty have no idea what they are talking about ..

do you have any idea what consequences your proposal has on the family/friends etc who will be affected directly by it?

 

Why should we be considerate to the family and friends of murderers when the murderer did not care of the family and friends of those he or she killed?

 

and just to counter a future argument from you .. yes I fully realize that murderes affect the family of their victims and every possible thing should be done to prevent them from ever killing again .. but ending their lives is not the way to go!

 

Yes, it is. If the murderers are exectued that in of itself makes sure they will never kill again.

 

violence breeds violence if we don't brake the chain .. can we honestly go to bed with a clean conscience if we kill as well? (and if you can you are no better than the murderer you are trying to save society from, imo)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I obey the law while the murderer did not. That in of itself makes me better than him or her. I have no problem in executing a murderer and a child rapist, under the law.

Edited September 29, 2006 by Judge Hades

[Dark_Raven]

That tattoo did not really belong on his forehead... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

His rear sounds like a more logical choice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That would be used for another "situation".

[Hassat Hunter]

By the way, are any of you who are advocating harsher penalties for criminals, christians?

 

A non-believer here...

 

Let's see...

Assuming they do more or less serious crime (that deserves 50 years in prison) in their early twenties, then, when they are out, they are in 70s. Are you seriously suggesting that they are capable of killing/raping(lol)/stealing at that age?

 

Happened before... will happen again.

Plenty of 65+ murderers wandering about killing folks... unless newspapers make up stuff...

And about the rape part; there are several stories of grandparents abusing their grandchildren... while they are indeed of such an age. Killing them seems like a good thing to me... call it "forced euthanasia (sp?)"

 

do you have any concept of Death? do you understand what it is? I sometime get the feeling that people who advocate the death penalty have no idea what they are talking about ..

do you have any idea what consequences your proposal has on the family/friends etc who will be affected directly by it?

 

How much worse can it be than seeing their loved ones locked up behind bars for 30 years? Might aswell get over them fast; instead of tear on them for so long for no good...

 

violence breeds violence if we don't brake the chain

 

In this case it can; considering it isn't "violence"... it is the chainbreaking disruptor you wish to happen...

Atleast that is how I view it; it is a perfect scaring tool. Cold War could be bloodier without nukes; crimerates could be higher with lower punishments. Criminals here LOVE spending their time in their well-cared for prisons. I doubt they will be so fast to do their mischief if you kill them instead of take care of them the following years...

can we honestly go to bed with a clean conscience if we kill as well? (and if you can you are no better than the murderer you are trying to save society from, imo)

Yes. I can live with knowing I made the world saver from 1 lunatic...

As in this case the "victim" isn't innocent like the victim of him/her likely was...

[Dark_Raven]

A child killer deserves nothing but death. For gods sake we are talking about a killer of children. An innocent who can not defend themselves against an adult. Draw and quartered would be the best thing to ever happen to them.

[alanschu]

I obey the law while the murderer did not

 

So if murder wasn't illegal you'd have no problems with it?

[Judge Hades]

I obey the law while the murderer did not

 

So if murder wasn't illegal you'd have no problems with it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Murder, by its definition being an unlawful killing of a human, can never be legal.

Edited September 30, 2006 by Judge Hades

[alanschu]

Semantics, and dodging the point entirely.

 

You are talking about obeying the Law. So if it wasn't against the law to kill someone, you'd have no problems with it?

 

Besides, if you wanted to play the semantic game, look at my statement:

 

So if murder wasn't illegal you'd have no problems with it?

 

When I say murder, I mean all current actions that we declare to be murder. If we were to talk all the actions that we consider, now, to be murder, and make it no longer illegal.

Edited September 30, 2006 by alanschu

[Judge Hades]

Lawful killing are executions and since I have no problem in executing a murderer and child rapists then I have already answer that question.

Edited September 30, 2006 by Judge Hades

[alanschu]

Stop dodging the question. I don't honestly believe you are daft enough to not know what I meant.

 

So if murder wasn't illegal you'd have no problems with it?

 

As I said in the previous post, we can take a different point at semantics. We know what type of actions constitute murder. Hence, if we take all those actions, and no longer make them illegal (which after the fact would abolish murder from the legal system), you seem to be okay with all those actions. Since they'd no longer be against the Law.

 

 

It turns out it was necessary, because when I mention if it wasn't against the law to kill someone, you somehow figured I was talking specifically about the what we now consider "lawful killing" i.e. executions.

Edited September 30, 2006 by alanschu

[LoneWolf16]

A child killer deserves nothing but death. For gods sake we are talking about a killer of children. An innocent who can not defend themselves against an adult. Draw and quartered would be the best thing to ever happen to them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*Nod*

[Fenghuang]

I obey the law while the murderer did not

 

So if murder wasn't illegal you'd have no problems with it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

There's some people I would have no qualms about killing. "

[Judge Hades]

Stop dodging the question.  I don't honestly believe you are daft enough to not know what I meant.

 

So if murder wasn't illegal you'd have no problems with it?

 

As I said in the previous post, we can take a different point at semantics. We know what type of actions constitute murder. Hence, if we take all those actions, and no longer make them illegal (which after the fact would abolish murder from the legal system), you seem to be okay with all those actions. Since they'd no longer be against the Law.

 

 

It turns out it was necessary, because when I mention if it wasn't against the law to kill someone, you somehow figured I was talking specifically about the what we now consider "lawful killing" i.e. executions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What you fail to understand, and this is not a dodge, that the definition of murder is in fact an unlawful act.

[Volourn]

While the guy is scum this was uncalled. I chuckle when I find CRIMINALS judging CRIMINALS.

 

These CRIMINALS who perpetrated this CRIME should be FRIED!

 

This guy got convicted, and sentenced. That was/is his punishment.

 

Case closed.

[Calax]

A child killer deserves nothing but death. For gods sake we are talking about a killer of children. An innocent who can not defend themselves against an adult. Draw and quartered would be the best thing to ever happen to them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*Nod*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

and the killers of the elderly?

[Krookie]

Lawful killing are executions and since I have no problem in executing a murderer and child rapists then I have already answer that question.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm going with Hades on this one. I mean, why should I be able to take life from someone, and keep mine?

[julianw]

I'm going with Hades on this one. I mean, why should I be able to take life from someone, and keep mine?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So which one is a more cruel punishment: a swift end of your life or having your life confined to a jailcell until the end of your days?

[Diamond]

Let's see...

Assuming they do more or less serious crime (that deserves 50 years in prison) in their early twenties, then, when they are out, they are in 70s. Are you seriously suggesting that they are capable of killing/raping(lol)/stealing at that age?

 

Happened before... will happen again.

Plenty of 65+ murderers wandering about killing folks... unless newspapers make up stuff...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Source? Statistics please. Just throwing a random statement with a vague reference to "newspapers" about hordes of senior citizens killing folks won't do.

 

And about the rape part; there are several stories of grandparents abusing their grandchildren... while they are indeed of such an age. Killing them seems like a good thing to me... call it "forced euthanasia (sp?)"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Same here. It is a rare case, unless you have some statistics to indicate otherwise.

 

Recidivism at this age is uncommon, unless of course this paper (Canadian) "makes stuff up".

[LoneWolf16]

A child killer deserves nothing but death. For gods sake we are talking about a killer of children. An innocent who can not defend themselves against an adult. Draw and quartered would be the best thing to ever happen to them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*Nod*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

and the killers of the elderly?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Same thing.

 

If you brutally murder an old woman, say hello to the horses who like running in opposite ways with parts of you attached.

[Oerwinde]

I disagree with the death penalty simply because of the few cases of people who have proven their innocence like 10 years after they were sentenced. I am for stricter punishments though. Just recently up here there was a guy who beat his 12 year old brother, threw him down some stairs and stabbed him 71 times, then waited for his stepfather to get home so he could kill him too. He's elligible for parole after 7 years. I don't care that he was 17 at the time. You can't tell me a 17 year old doesn't know that stabbing his brother 71 times is a bad thing. ****sucker should be in prison for his entire life with no possibility of parole. Especially when he has no remorse over the ordeal.

 

A while ago some guy beat a 7 year old kid in the head with a cinder block, then left his body on the train tracks. Got 4 years. 4 YEARS. I mean seriously.

Edited September 30, 2006 by Oerwinde