What if it's later revealed that mistakes were made in jury or judge selection, or with the handling of evidence, or with any of the other things that could easily go wrong?
You don't care at all for the potentially perfectly innocent person you've just had murdered?
No system is perfect, never will be. Like I said, look at how many people rot in prison for how many years, tell me is that any better in the end?
When it comes down to it everyone has their own view and it's why there is always such strong debate about it. I'm not fond of the thought of innocent people being executed, such a thing is never a good thing, but again how many are imprisoned wrongfully to begin with and never get proven innocent?
Compared to how many are truly guilty I'm going to say that it's much less. When it comes down to it though my thoughts still stand that if your guilty then you deserve to pay the ultimate cost.
However you cannot say who is guilty because the system that determines who is guilty is flawed and cannot be fully trusted. So how do you decide who is executed? You can't. You must place your trust in a flawed system, but instead of changing the system so that innocent people are less likely to be executed you would rather change it so that innocent people are more likely to be executed.
Damn Cade, I gave your first post the benefit of the doubt. I used to voice theories like that, but when I put some actual thought into it, I realized how fucked up they were. But you are pretty much confirming yourself to be an ignorant sociopath with every post.
Kamar on
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
edited May 2009
You know what? Let's just bring back the ordeal.
If they drown they were innocent, if they float they're guilty and should be executed.
You don't care at all for the potentially perfectly innocent person you've just had murdered?
No system is perfect, never will be. Like I said, look at how many people rot in prison for how many years, tell me is that any better in the end?
Yes, because at least that way you'll live.
Of course American prisons being the cruel joke that they are I guess being alive and in prison for something you didn't do instead of being murdered by the state for something you didn't do is only marginally better. I guess someone should do something about that.
Or do insults register with you better as you seem to toss them out easily enough without being able to see either view point. I can easily see where you and others here equally view things as you do, I can understand what everyone is saying here and I think it's logical for everyone to think what they do. Hell I applaud that. I can appreciate that, doesn't mean I agree but that's the beautiful thing, none of us will always agree with everyone on everything.
And yes this is one reason why this very topic is always a big issue, where do criminals rights stand, do they deserve them? Should they be treated as human beings or treated like animals.
It goes without saying that my opinion on such matters like this is more on the extreme side and I easily admit that but I've never had pity for those that would do horrible acts in society and I have zero pity or mercy for such people. We all have a chance to do what is right in life or do what is wrong, to be good people or not. I rather not tolerate those that kill or harm or molest, why do they deserve to be treated as any other human when they do such wrongs? In my opinion it's absurd.
But hey I know others think differently and that's understandable, everyone's got different thoughts on such matters.
What is a human life worth? Honestly I don't know. Is it worth protecting many that would easily go out to commit crime after crime, rape after rape, mugging after mugging, killing after killing or such things? Again I don't see the point.
The law as it stands is nearly a joke, it's imperfect at best and how much good it does is highly questionable otherwise this debate wouldn't exist now would it.
I don't expect anyone to change their mind here, nor am I here to try. We all got our view points, and when it comes down to it as horrifying as it might be for some to comprehend I got little problem to say those locked up largely deserve to be wiped off the face of the earth for their crimes. To shelter them, feed them, and for so many to only go out and re do their crimes, I see no point in it.
But hey that's just me and that's obviously not how things are done, like I said, imperfect world.
It is my opinion that your viewpoint is abhorrent and reprehensible, because you seem to have no idea of what human rights are and how to consider your fellow human being's rights in an imperfect system, but rather you choose to shrug your shoulders and say "execute em all" as some sort of solution.
Medopine on
0
Options
SarksusATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered Userregular
edited May 2009
Instead of simply repeating your stance I would like for you to challenge what I've said to you. Your stance is unworkable and immoral and I have demonstrated why I think such. Additionally, do not simplify this matter to a difference of opinions, as though each side has its merits and can go on co-existing. That is incorrect. One side is right and one side is wrong in this case.
I would also like to address what you said regarding the chance that everyone has to do good rather than evil. What of the people who are born in areas that influence them to be more likely to commit crimes? Socioeconomic factors are relevant in how you treat these cases. This is not justification of crime, but rather understanding it better so that you may treat it and eventually reduce or eradicate it. You have thus far demonstrated no interest in understanding why crime occurs. You would rather just kill anyone who happens to commit a crime according to a system you admit is flawed. I find that ridiculous.
It is my opinion that your viewpoint is abhorrent and reprehensible, because you seem to have no idea of what human rights are and how to consider your fellow human being's rights in an imperfect system, but rather you choose to shrug your shoulders and say "execute em all" as some sort of solution.
That's fair enough.
I admire your compassion on the subject even if I don't agree with it.
It is my opinion that your viewpoint is abhorrent and reprehensible, because you seem to have no idea of what human rights are and how to consider your fellow human being's rights in an imperfect system, but rather you choose to shrug your shoulders and say "execute em all" as some sort of solution.
That's fair enough.
I admire your compassion on the subject even if I don't agree with it.
Go figure huh?
Also, waving the "it's just a difference of opinion" flag is a huge copout. You don't get to casually suggest the execution of innocents and the treatment of human beings as irredeemable animals and just call that a difference of opinion, ignoring every challenge to the basis of your opinon (which you seem to be doing right now).
Not when those beliefs are fundamentally stupid, unsupported by logic or any kind of rationale.
But then, you should know this by now. Your beliefs are not deserving of any kind of respect just because the thing you call a brain regurgitated them onto the internet.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
That they do is a ridiculous concept that is disturbingly common among otherwise intellectual people.
There are no bad opinions.
There are snide insults often wrapped in the guise of an "opinion", but all true opinions deserve respect.
Why? Because they're yours? Does that make them precious somehow? You want your opinions respected, put them in your journal and put them back under your bed.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Instead of simply repeating your stance I would like for you to challenge what I've said to you. Your stance is unworkable and immoral and I have demonstrated why I think such. Additionally, do not simplify this matter to a difference of opinions, as though each side has its merits and can go on co-existing. That is incorrect. One side is right and one side is wrong in this case.
I would also like to address what you said regarding the chance that everyone has to do good rather than evil. What of the people who are born in areas that influence them to be more likely to commit crimes? Socioeconomic factors are relevant in how you treat these cases. This is not justification of crime, but rather understanding it better so that you may treat it and eventually reduce or eradicate it. You have thus far demonstrated no interest in understanding why crime occurs. You would rather just kill anyone who happens to commit a crime according to a system you admit is flawed. I find that ridiculous.
What's wrong and right?
Is it right to lock up people in stone and metal structures for decades? Is that the so called moral high ground? To surround them with barb wire, men with dogs and guns ready to shoot those that try to break out and keep them inside against their will? Is that really the definite solution? Is that any more civilized in the end. Tell me, how much good do these prisons do hmm? How many come out reformed and willing to be good members of society again.
Ah, see, your argument there in the second part shows that what you said about there being one side that is right and one that is wrong simply does not work. Because there are too many factors in place, too many that view things differently be it from the region they grow up in, religious, culture, you name it.
You do touch on something worthy though of saying, that why these crimes happen does need to be looked at and studied so as much as possible we can prevent them from happening again and repeatedly at that. But again when it comes to those that do these crimes I see no pity at all. For them they should pay the cost of their actions.
It is my opinion that your viewpoint is abhorrent and reprehensible, because you seem to have no idea of what human rights are and how to consider your fellow human being's rights in an imperfect system, but rather you choose to shrug your shoulders and say "execute em all" as some sort of solution.
That's fair enough.
I admire your compassion on the subject even if I don't agree with it.
Go figure huh?
Also, waving the "it's just a difference of opinion" flag is a huge copout. You don't get to casually suggest the execution of innocents and the treatment of human beings as irredeemable animals and just call that a difference of opinion, ignoring every challenge to the basis of your opinon (which you seem to be doing right now).
I see myself able to understand and willing to looking at both sides equally, where as you seem unable to do so at all and unwilling to look at any view other than your own.
Where I"m concerned all rapist and murderers should be outright executed. Yes I know mistakes happen but still I'm sure that would cause more than some to not act out their crimes for fear of punishment and lets face it, going to jail is a joke and just cost tax payers money.
Studies have shown that capital punishment is not an effect deterrent to violent crime (as much of it is perpetrated by folks who are mentally not all there, are acting in the irrational heat of the moment, and/or think of themselves as somehow being outside of the law.)
Also, killing some one actually costs more than life imprisonment, because if you want to avoid executing innocent people, you MUST have some manner of an appeals system.
It is my opinion that your viewpoint is abhorrent and reprehensible, because you seem to have no idea of what human rights are and how to consider your fellow human being's rights in an imperfect system, but rather you choose to shrug your shoulders and say "execute em all" as some sort of solution.
That's fair enough.
I admire your compassion on the subject even if I don't agree with it.
Go figure huh?
Also, waving the "it's just a difference of opinion" flag is a huge copout. You don't get to casually suggest the execution of innocents and the treatment of human beings as irredeemable animals and just call that a difference of opinion, ignoring every challenge to the basis of your opinon (which you seem to be doing right now).
I see myself able to understand and willing to looking at both sides equally, where as you seem unable to do so at all and unwilling to look at any view other than your own.
I find that most disturbing.
If you wanted to use any sort of I don't know, actual logic, or research, or anything at all to back up your claims that we need to execute innocent people and treat criminals like animals and ignore their human rights then I would be willing to engage in discourse with you perhaps.
Crying about persecution for your views is bullshit. Back up your opinion about how the criminal justice system should operate in your view or shut up.
Where I"m concerned all rapist and murderers should be outright executed. Yes I know mistakes happen but still I'm sure that would cause more than some to not act out their crimes for fear of punishment and lets face it, going to jail is a joke and just cost tax payers money.
Studies have shown that capital punishment is not an effect deterrent to violent crime (as much of it is perpetrated by folks who are mentally not all there, are acting in the irrational heat of the moment, and/or think of themselves as somehow being outside of the law.)
Also, killing some one actually costs more than life imprisonment, because if you want to avoid executing innocent people, you MUST have some manner of an appeals system.
Which leads to nothing happening, everything getting dragged out. More cost to the common person, a broken system. Hence the problem.
I got to ask, is there any good true alternative to any of this? Not taking the moral high ground but one that brings about results in decreasing criminal activity and helping to bring about change that could actually please everyone.
Meaning that executing innocent people in order to reduce costs has ONLY one benefit, and that is monetary.
So, are you saying that we should kill innocent people off in order to save money? Why stop at the wrongfully accused. Why not kill off everyone on wellfare?
It is my opinion that your viewpoint is abhorrent and reprehensible, because you seem to have no idea of what human rights are and how to consider your fellow human being's rights in an imperfect system, but rather you choose to shrug your shoulders and say "execute em all" as some sort of solution.
That's fair enough.
I admire your compassion on the subject even if I don't agree with it.
Go figure huh?
Also, waving the "it's just a difference of opinion" flag is a huge copout. You don't get to casually suggest the execution of innocents and the treatment of human beings as irredeemable animals and just call that a difference of opinion, ignoring every challenge to the basis of your opinon (which you seem to be doing right now).
I see myself able to understand and willing to looking at both sides equally, where as you seem unable to do so at all and unwilling to look at any view other than your own.
I find that most disturbing.
If you wanted to use any sort of I don't know, actual logic, or research, or anything at all to back up your claims that we need to execute innocent people and treat criminals like animals and ignore their human rights then I would be willing to engage in discourse with you perhaps.
Crying about persecution for your views is bullshit. Back up your opinion about how the criminal justice system should operate in your view or shut up.
In other words I should act like you do by being insulting while doing everything other than what he preaches.
Indeed, if that is the moral high ground I'm glad not to be part of it.
Meaning that executing innocent people in order to reduce costs has ONLY one benefit, and that is monetary.
So, are you saying that we should kill innocent people off in order to save money? Why stop at the wrongfully accused. Why not kill off everyone on wellfare?
Oh come on now, you might as well say why not kill the poor, the homeless, the sick, the blacks, the jews and everything else. That's the crux of your argument there isn't it. Rather poor don't you think and just as crazy.
Again, what is your idea of solving those that do the wrongs of the world?
Where I"m concerned all rapist and murderers should be outright executed. Yes I know mistakes happen but still I'm sure that would cause more than some to not act out their crimes for fear of punishment and lets face it, going to jail is a joke and just cost tax payers money.
Studies have shown that capital punishment is not an effect deterrent to violent crime (as much of it is perpetrated by folks who are mentally not all there, are acting in the irrational heat of the moment, and/or think of themselves as somehow being outside of the law.)
Also, killing some one actually costs more than life imprisonment, because if you want to avoid executing innocent people, you MUST have some manner of an appeals system.
Which leads to nothing happening, everything getting dragged out. More cost to the common person, a broken system. Hence the problem.
I got to ask, is there any good true alternative to any of this? Not taking the moral high ground but one that brings about results in decreasing criminal activity and helping to bring about change that could actually please everyone.
Is there an actual answer to that?
Or is it impossible.
Personally, I believe that when we kill a criminal, we are reducing ourselves to their own level.
Capital punishment should be reserved ONLY for those criminals who would continue to pose a serious threat to society, even after being locked up. That is an EXTREMELY select few, if any.
We are better than the criminals. We should not behave like them.
Meaning that executing innocent people in order to reduce costs has ONLY one benefit, and that is monetary.
So, are you saying that we should kill innocent people off in order to save money? Why stop at the wrongfully accused. Why not kill off everyone on wellfare?
Oh come on now, you might as well say why not kill the poor
I believe I just did.
You are ignoring what I have said about capital punishment not acting as a detterent.
Truthfully, I don't really buy that capital punishment isn't a deterrent if put into full swing, I've read the studies and reports myself but considering how bad most nations are for executing criminals it's no wonder that criminals have no fear of it. In the end what are the odds any are going to be executed, again most cases get dragged out over the years, dismissed or otherwise, they get tossed out of jail back into the streets to repeat the circle repeatedly. There is no reason to fear capital punishment when it's hardly ever put into action.
Put it into greater use and I'm sure crime would decrease, no half measure though. Let's see if it would really make an impact or not and see who would be right or wrong on the matter.
Truthfully, I don't really buy that capital punishment isn't a deterrent if put into full swing, I've read the studies and reports myself but considering how bad most nations are for executing criminals it's no wonder that criminals have no fear of it. In the end what are the odds any are going to be executed, again most cases get dragged out over the years, dismissed or otherwise, they get tossed out of jail back into the streets to repeat the circle repeatedly. There is no reason to fear capital punishment when it's hardly ever put into action.
Put it into greater use and I'm sure crime would decrease, no half measure though. Let's see if it would really make an impact or not and see who would be right or wrong on the matter.
How many innocent deaths are an acceptable price to pay to kill one guilty person?
Truthfully, I don't really buy that capital punishment isn't a deterrent if put into full swing, I've read the studies and reports myself but considering how bad most nations are for executing criminals it's no wonder that criminals have no fear of it. In the end what are the odds any are going to be executed, again most cases get dragged out over the years, dismissed or otherwise, they get tossed out of jail back into the streets to repeat the circle repeatedly. There is no reason to fear capital punishment when it's hardly ever put into action.
Put it into greater use and I'm sure crime would decrease, no half measure though. Let's see if it would really make an impact or not and see who would be right or wrong on the matter.
How many innocent deaths are an acceptable price to pay to kill one guilty person?
How many innocent people are already rotting in prison and will do so for the rest of their lives?
It's an unfortunate situation either way don't you think.
In the end though I stand by my opinion on the matter and I don't think I need to repeat it again do I.
Posts
However you cannot say who is guilty because the system that determines who is guilty is flawed and cannot be fully trusted. So how do you decide who is executed? You can't. You must place your trust in a flawed system, but instead of changing the system so that innocent people are less likely to be executed you would rather change it so that innocent people are more likely to be executed.
How many innocent deaths are an acceptable price to pay to kill one guilty person?
If they drown they were innocent, if they float they're guilty and should be executed.
Yes, because at least that way you'll live.
Of course American prisons being the cruel joke that they are I guess being alive and in prison for something you didn't do instead of being murdered by the state for something you didn't do is only marginally better. I guess someone should do something about that.
That you have an opinion?
Or do insults register with you better as you seem to toss them out easily enough without being able to see either view point. I can easily see where you and others here equally view things as you do, I can understand what everyone is saying here and I think it's logical for everyone to think what they do. Hell I applaud that. I can appreciate that, doesn't mean I agree but that's the beautiful thing, none of us will always agree with everyone on everything.
And yes this is one reason why this very topic is always a big issue, where do criminals rights stand, do they deserve them? Should they be treated as human beings or treated like animals.
It goes without saying that my opinion on such matters like this is more on the extreme side and I easily admit that but I've never had pity for those that would do horrible acts in society and I have zero pity or mercy for such people. We all have a chance to do what is right in life or do what is wrong, to be good people or not. I rather not tolerate those that kill or harm or molest, why do they deserve to be treated as any other human when they do such wrongs? In my opinion it's absurd.
But hey I know others think differently and that's understandable, everyone's got different thoughts on such matters.
What is a human life worth? Honestly I don't know. Is it worth protecting many that would easily go out to commit crime after crime, rape after rape, mugging after mugging, killing after killing or such things? Again I don't see the point.
The law as it stands is nearly a joke, it's imperfect at best and how much good it does is highly questionable otherwise this debate wouldn't exist now would it.
I don't expect anyone to change their mind here, nor am I here to try. We all got our view points, and when it comes down to it as horrifying as it might be for some to comprehend I got little problem to say those locked up largely deserve to be wiped off the face of the earth for their crimes. To shelter them, feed them, and for so many to only go out and re do their crimes, I see no point in it.
But hey that's just me and that's obviously not how things are done, like I said, imperfect world.
I would also like to address what you said regarding the chance that everyone has to do good rather than evil. What of the people who are born in areas that influence them to be more likely to commit crimes? Socioeconomic factors are relevant in how you treat these cases. This is not justification of crime, but rather understanding it better so that you may treat it and eventually reduce or eradicate it. You have thus far demonstrated no interest in understanding why crime occurs. You would rather just kill anyone who happens to commit a crime according to a system you admit is flawed. I find that ridiculous.
You make it seem like we either have to kill every murderer and rapist as soon as they are "found" to be guilty, or we're "cuddling" them?
Why is careless reactionary murder the only way to "fix" the problem of murder and rape?
That's fair enough.
I admire your compassion on the subject even if I don't agree with it.
Go figure huh?
Cade, I respect your opinion, and I hope these others will learn to do respect it as being different as well.
Also, waving the "it's just a difference of opinion" flag is a huge copout. You don't get to casually suggest the execution of innocents and the treatment of human beings as irredeemable animals and just call that a difference of opinion, ignoring every challenge to the basis of your opinon (which you seem to be doing right now).
That they do is a ridiculous concept that is disturbingly common among otherwise intellectual people.
Not when those beliefs are fundamentally stupid, unsupported by logic or any kind of rationale.
But then, you should know this by now. Your beliefs are not deserving of any kind of respect just because the thing you call a brain regurgitated them onto the internet.
There are no bad opinions.
There are snide insults often wrapped in the guise of an "opinion", but all true opinions deserve respect.
Why? Because they're yours? Does that make them precious somehow? You want your opinions respected, put them in your journal and put them back under your bed.
What's wrong and right?
Is it right to lock up people in stone and metal structures for decades? Is that the so called moral high ground? To surround them with barb wire, men with dogs and guns ready to shoot those that try to break out and keep them inside against their will? Is that really the definite solution? Is that any more civilized in the end. Tell me, how much good do these prisons do hmm? How many come out reformed and willing to be good members of society again.
Ah, see, your argument there in the second part shows that what you said about there being one side that is right and one that is wrong simply does not work. Because there are too many factors in place, too many that view things differently be it from the region they grow up in, religious, culture, you name it.
You do touch on something worthy though of saying, that why these crimes happen does need to be looked at and studied so as much as possible we can prevent them from happening again and repeatedly at that. But again when it comes to those that do these crimes I see no pity at all. For them they should pay the cost of their actions.
I see myself able to understand and willing to looking at both sides equally, where as you seem unable to do so at all and unwilling to look at any view other than your own.
I find that most disturbing.
Studies have shown that capital punishment is not an effect deterrent to violent crime (as much of it is perpetrated by folks who are mentally not all there, are acting in the irrational heat of the moment, and/or think of themselves as somehow being outside of the law.)
Also, killing some one actually costs more than life imprisonment, because if you want to avoid executing innocent people, you MUST have some manner of an appeals system.
If you wanted to use any sort of I don't know, actual logic, or research, or anything at all to back up your claims that we need to execute innocent people and treat criminals like animals and ignore their human rights then I would be willing to engage in discourse with you perhaps.
Crying about persecution for your views is bullshit. Back up your opinion about how the criminal justice system should operate in your view or shut up.
No they don't. That's just a load of bull that they tell you in kindergarten. Like the idea that anyone can be president (they can't.)
A misinformed or malformed opinion deserves no respect.
Killing people is bad, so if you do it I'll kill you!! what, no I don't care if you're actually guilty why would I
Which leads to nothing happening, everything getting dragged out. More cost to the common person, a broken system. Hence the problem.
I got to ask, is there any good true alternative to any of this? Not taking the moral high ground but one that brings about results in decreasing criminal activity and helping to bring about change that could actually please everyone.
Is there an actual answer to that?
Or is it impossible.
Meaning that executing innocent people in order to reduce costs has ONLY one benefit, and that is monetary.
So, are you saying that we should kill innocent people off in order to save money? Why stop at the wrongfully accused. Why not kill off everyone on wellfare?
In other words I should act like you do by being insulting while doing everything other than what he preaches.
Indeed, if that is the moral high ground I'm glad not to be part of it.
Oh come on now, you might as well say why not kill the poor, the homeless, the sick, the blacks, the jews and everything else. That's the crux of your argument there isn't it. Rather poor don't you think and just as crazy.
Again, what is your idea of solving those that do the wrongs of the world?
Personally, I believe that when we kill a criminal, we are reducing ourselves to their own level.
Capital punishment should be reserved ONLY for those criminals who would continue to pose a serious threat to society, even after being locked up. That is an EXTREMELY select few, if any.
We are better than the criminals. We should not behave like them.
I believe I just did.
You are ignoring what I have said about capital punishment not acting as a detterent.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates#stateswithvwithout
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/law-enforcement-views-deterrence
As you can see, it's possible that the death penalty actually INCREASES violent crime rates, because it cheapens the perceived value of human life.
If human life is the most valuable thing, then we should avoid ending it at all costs. If it is not the most valuable thing, then what is?
Put it into greater use and I'm sure crime would decrease, no half measure though. Let's see if it would really make an impact or not and see who would be right or wrong on the matter.
How many innocent deaths are an acceptable price to pay to kill one guilty person?
How many innocent people are already rotting in prison and will do so for the rest of their lives?
It's an unfortunate situation either way don't you think.
In the end though I stand by my opinion on the matter and I don't think I need to repeat it again do I.