Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Death penalty for terrorists?

#21
RainbowUnicorn Offline
(Nov 10, 2017 09:54 PM)Leigha Wrote: I don't believe in the DP for any reason, really. Then we become no better than them...right? After all, every murderer has his/her reasons for why he/she takes the life/lives of others. To ''legally'' murder someone else, whether you talk yourself into believing it's for the better of society, or lessens the burden upon tax payers, or that person ''deserves it'' ...it's probably not much different than when a terrorist convinces him/herself that killing others for their religion is necessary. I don't wish to be like them.

look at how US politics is mirroring pre world war 2 germany with nazi sympathisers & pro nazi political partys.

legalising state murder is simply justifying genocide by political opinion.

as soon as the politics change they start murdering different people for what ever reason suites them.

you do not teach solid moral foundation to a child by undermining the very principal that murder is wrong.


no wonder the US is breeding such a terrible epidemic of serial killers in its society.

pro life = anti life ?
anti abortion = death penalty teaching to ignore "thou shalt not kill" ?

its soo messed up for a message for developing morality yet soo many claim to be christians yet espouse state sanctioned murder. quite bizar interpretation of the biblical principals.

(Nov 11, 2017 01:28 AM)Leigha Wrote: You equate the death penalty with self defense? Then where do you draw that line? There are a TON of murderers in prison, do you just kill them all, because they took a life or several lives? Where do you draw the line as to who ''deserves'' the death penalty and who doesn't? Do we get to play 'god' and decide who deserves to live and who doesn't?

I believe in self defense, but I don't equate the death penalty with self defense. Not when we have prisons that can safely remove violent offenders/murderers off the streets forever, out of the general public's way.

I could have sworn that you mentioned in another thread that you're pro-life...does that only mean you're pro ''innocent'' life? If the person has done bad things, then off with their head! lol Of course I'm being facetious, but you can see how the whole pro-life argument loses credibility, when basically people cherry pick who they feel deserve their 'pro-life' stance.

US prisons is another issue also.
they make it possible for prisoners to attack & murder others and then use that as a form of punishment on prisoners.
AND the society seem to think this is ok.
its very sadistic and breeds psychopaths then puts them back into society.
very messed up.
Reply
#22
Syne Offline
(Nov 11, 2017 01:28 AM)Leigha Wrote: You equate the death penalty with self defense? Then where do you draw that line? There are a TON of murderers in prison, do you just kill them all, because they took a life or several lives? Where do you draw the line as to who ''deserves'' the death penalty and who doesn't? Do we get to play 'god' and decide who deserves to live and who doesn't?

I believe in self defense, but I don't equate the death penalty with self defense. Not when we have prisons that can safely remove violent offenders/murderers off the streets forever, out of the general public's way.

I don't equate the two, I just realize that we empower others to act, with potentially lethal force, on our behalf routinely. Just like you would likely kill to save your family, you also empower the police to kill in an effort to save you, and you empower the military to kill in an effort to keep the country as a whole safe. You may not agree with every use of that empowerment, but do you equate them as "no better than" murderers?

You didn't answer my question. If killing a killer makes you "no better than them", what does killing someone only attempting to kill you or others make you? You may have saved your life, but you killed someone who wasn't even guilty of murder. Isn't that worse than killing a convicted murderer? It's equivalent to Minority Report, where you sentence them to death simply because you predicted they would do something they never had the chance to prove they would actually do. Or would you wait for them to kill at least one person before acting?

The death penalty is typically used in especially heinous murders, but if I had my way, rapist would be eligible. I can't even imagine how a victim feels, knowing that one day their rapist could go free. I can only imagine that is torture for the innocent victim.

Killing a convicted murder isn't playing god. They are the ones who played god, without anything like a jury or due process. But how would you feel if your family were tortured and killed and then your taxes went to care for (feed and shelter) their killer for the rest of his life? You, personally, subsidizing his care. And for what? A sentence of death in prison?

If you've seen the movie Passengers, would you disagree with Lawrence's character that waking her was a death sentence?

Quote:I could have sworn that you mentioned in another thread that you're pro-life...does that only mean you're pro ''innocent'' life? If the person has done bad things, then off with their head! lol Of course I'm being facetious, but you can see how the whole pro-life argument loses credibility, when basically people cherry pick who they feel deserve their 'pro-life' stance.

How is defending innocent life inconsistent with being pro-life? Murderers are quite literally anti-life. By their own expressed estimation, life, which includes their own, has little value. How is killing a murder to save lives morally different from killing a murder to deter further murder?

"According to roughly a dozen recent studies, executions save lives. For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented.

The effect is most pronounced, according to some studies, in Texas and other states that execute condemned inmates relatively often and relatively quickly." - http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html

But if you really want to talk about inconsistency, what about someone who defends the lives of killers but thinks people should be allowed to kill human life in the womb? That is quite a twisted morality, where you defend the guilty and condemn the innocent.
Reply
#23
Leigha Offline
I don't believe those studies. No one could ever predict that. I'm against the death penalty and also not pro-abortion, but believe abortion could be necessary in certain cases. That said, I don't think that prison life is humane either, in many cases. But, I believe that many times, people can change. And they should be given the opportunity to change. I just don't believe in 'eye for an eye,' I'm sorry, I just don't. If you do Syne, that's on you.

My right to defend my life, my home, etc...that probably is instinctive in a ''fight or flight'' type of response. I don't believe that self defense is murder, and I also don't believe that the death penalty is legally sanctioned ''murder,'' but it's just unethical to me.

I'm not defending murderers, I'm just against killing criminals as a form of punishment in our justice system.
Reply
#24
Syne Offline
LOL! You don't believe those studies.

"One influential study looked at 3,054 counties over two decades.

“I personally am opposed to the death penalty,” said H. Naci Mocan, an economist at Louisiana State University and an author of a study finding that each execution saves five lives. “But my research shows that there is a deterrent effect.”" - http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html


Why don't you ever seem to specify in which cases abortion could be necessary? Do you even have a clear cut line?


"Within five years of release, 82 percent of property offenders were arrested for a new crime, compared to 77 percent of drug offenders, 74 percent of public order offenders and 71 percent of violent offenders, the report found.

Public order offenses include weapons offenses, driving under the influence and other miscellaneous or unspecified crimes.." - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/once-a-crim...-criminal/

So given the opportunity to change or opportunity to offend again?

I don't believe in an eye for an eye either, and your recidivist offenders are on you.
A SHORT LIST OF MURDERERS RELEASED TO MURDER AGAIN
10 twisted murderers who were freed then killed again
The five murderers freed from life sentences to kill AGAIN


What about the police or military? Are they generally murderers?
Reply
#25
Leigha Offline
I don't disagree with some of those stats, but that's because our prison system is designed to contain and punish people, only. It isn't designed to rehabilitate offenders, so if it were set up to be more of a rehabilitative type of system, for those who are going to be paroled anyway, then we would see a decrease in those people being repeat offenders. Not all, but many have the potential to stop committing crimes if they have other avenues to pursue when they get paroled. Killing them all doesn't seem to be the solution, if anything, it's a lazy solution. The prison system as it's set up is also a lazy solution. It's not really even a solution, to be honest. It's more of a holding playpen for all of the criminals, where they can rape and often times still commit crimes inside of those institutions, until they are paroled...having learned no new skills or ways to cope with stress. I don't believe in the death penalty because in my mind, it doesn't really deter crime, and it's inhumane. Yes, the murderer who took a life is perhaps inhumane, but that doesn't mean we should be inhumane in return. This is just how I view it.

Now, in the middle east for example, there are executions that definitely deter crime, but do we wish to become like some of those barbaric countries? The death penalty in those cases only instills fear, and doesn't teach anyone a new way of life. I don't believe in controlling the masses through fear.
Reply
#26
Syne Offline
Where's you evidence that rehabilitation decreases repeat offenders.

"In short, the average offender today leaves prison at a greater disadvantage (and more primed for trouble) than his predecessors did. Yet fewer participate in prison rehabilitation and work programs than a decade ago. When I was cochair of California's Expert Panel on Rehabilitation in 2007, the panel found that California spent less than $3,000 per year, per inmate, on rehabilitation programs, and that 50 percent of all prisoners released the year before had not participated in a single program." - https://www.nij.gov/journals/268/pages/p...ubble.aspx

Who said anything about "killing them all"?

Inhumane? Are you opposed to putting a dog, that has attacked a small child, down? Certainly dogs are more amiable to retraining that humans, since they have very simple reward mechanisms. Skills alone do not change a lifetime of bad thinking. And too much support can very often just enable the continued bad patterns of thinking and behavior. Unless, of course, you what to care for them for life...even after they leave prison. Then it just becomes a welfare state as solution...which incentivizes bad behavior.


And you STILL keep avoiding simple questions.

Which abortion cases are necessary?
Are police and military murderers?
Are you a murderer for killing someone never found guilty in self-defense?
Reply
#27
C C Offline
(Nov 10, 2017 09:54 PM)Leigha Wrote: I don't believe in the DP for any reason, really. Then we become no better than them...right? After all, every murderer has his/her reasons for why he/she takes the life/lives of others.

Many if not most murders are committed in anger / passion and other states of unreasoning (drunkenness or substance abuse, mental illness episodes, temporary pathological mind-sets, etc). Where consequences would be disabled as a deterring influence on action, anyway. In addition murder can be a contingent and unprepared event happening in connection with other types of crime gone wrong or turning desperate in terms of escape.

But terrorism, assassination, organized crime response to shopkeeper / citizen defiance slash interference, and street gang trespassing violations and pay-back... do involve planned homicides. Thus capital punishment may provide closure for some families of victims, and execution of blatant evildoers like terrorists may provide satisfaction for segments of the public. But that's about as far as any function or service capital punishment serves, IMO.

Edit Note: Didn't clarify very well the first time around what I was addressing in the quote or adding to. Sorry about that.

- - -
Reply
#28
confused2 Offline
In the UK our strongest deterrent is a 'Life sentence'. In reality the main factor influencing the length of a 'Life sentence' is the the cost of keeping a person in prison. The result is that a murderer can be back in the community where he (or she) killed within ten years or less. Unless you are prepared to bump into the guy that has (for instance) killed your sister while you are on your way to the shops you have no reasonable alternative but to leave the area, your job and your friends and seek anonymity.
Edit - I think the US may be better at this where 'Life in prison without hope of parole' does mean exactly that.
Reply
#29
C C Offline
(Nov 12, 2017 01:44 AM)confused2 Wrote: Edit - I think the US may be better at this where 'Life in prison without hope of parole' does mean exactly that.


Doubtless a larger percentage of the population circulating through the various facets of its incarceration system during a period, anyway. Also one deep or inefficient abyss where the taxpayers seem content to contribute -- if the seeming silence about it in data-junkie territory could actually reflect such.

According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2,220,300 adults were incarcerated in US federal and state prisons, and county jails in 2013 – about 0.91% of adults (1 in 110) in the U.S. resident population. Additionally, 4,751,400 adults in 2013 (1 in 51) were on probation or on parole. In total, 6,899,000 adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, or prison) in 2013 – about 2.8% of adults (1 in 35) in the U.S. resident population. In 2014, the total number of persons in the adult correctional systems had fallen to 6,851,000 persons, approximately 52,200 fewer offenders than at the year end of 2013 as reported by the BJS. About 1 in 36 adults (or 2.8% of adults in the US) was under some form of correctional supervision – the lowest rate since 1996. On average, the correctional population has declined by 1.0% since 2007; while this continued to stay true in 2014 the number of incarcerated adults slightly increased in 2014. In addition, there were 54,148 juveniles in juvenile detention in 2013.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarcer...ted_States


- - -
Reply
#30
RainbowUnicorn Offline
(Nov 12, 2017 02:15 AM)C C Wrote:
(Nov 12, 2017 01:44 AM)confused2 Wrote: Edit - I think the US may be better at this where 'Life in prison without hope of parole' does mean exactly that.


Doubtless a larger percentage of the population circulating through the various facets of its incarceration system during a period, anyway. Also one deep or inefficient abyss where the taxpayers seem content to contribute -- if the seeming silence about it in data-junkie territory could actually reflect such.    

According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), 2,220,300 adults were incarcerated in US federal and state prisons, and county jails in 2013 – about 0.91% of adults (1 in 110) in the U.S. resident population. Additionally, 4,751,400 adults in 2013 (1 in 51) were on probation or on parole. In total, 6,899,000 adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, or prison) in 2013 – about 2.8% of adults (1 in 35) in the U.S. resident population. In 2014, the total number of persons in the adult correctional systems had fallen to 6,851,000 persons, approximately 52,200 fewer offenders than at the year end of 2013 as reported by the BJS. About 1 in 36 adults (or 2.8% of adults in the US) was under some form of correctional supervision – the lowest rate since 1996. On average, the correctional population has declined by 1.0% since 2007; while this continued to stay true in 2014 the number of incarcerated adults slightly increased in 2014. In addition, there were 54,148 juveniles in juvenile detention in 2013.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarcer...ted_States


- - -

Quote:2,220,300 adults were incarcerated in US federal and state prisons, and county jails in 2013


Quote:52,200 fewer offenders than at the year end of 2013 as reported by the BJS.


Quote:there were 54,148 juveniles in juvenile detention in 2013

Quote:In 2014, the total number of persons in the adult correctional systems had fallen to 6,851,000

broken windows (+)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
Barak Obama instructing the courts to not inprison drug addicts for personal pessesion (-)
https://news.vice.com/article/president-...-addiction
Quote:Crime & Drugs
Obama Wants to Spend More Than $1 Billion to Fight Opioid Addiction in the US
By Tess Owen
March 29, 2016 |


ironically, the prison system is run deliberately over budget to make profit when it doesnt need to be.
it could be run as state owned and save billions of dollars.
but the american population do not want to. is that because they do not wish to be held accountable for all the rape that they condone in prisons as part of the punishment ?
culture of sexual predators sanctioned by US familys...

why is that ?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Jurors recommend death penalty based on looks; new training can correct the bias C C 0 60 Dec 15, 2023 04:57 PM
Last Post: C C
  Death penalty for all gay people! Magical Realist 2 749 Nov 9, 2015 07:06 PM
Last Post: elte



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)