:praying:wow that will work lol.i'll go and rob a bank and then go to church and then do the same thing next week. we need you in Australia Trish to make the laws ,every con in the land would vote for you
Printable View
:praying:wow that will work lol.i'll go and rob a bank and then go to church and then do the same thing next week. we need you in Australia Trish to make the laws ,every con in the land would vote for you
I thought they made them Pope?Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I thought Joshua "fit" the battle of Jericho __ Jericho...in 1400 BCE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Faldur
I believe you have that about right. The passages to look at would be Joshua 5:10-15. I'm really not trying to hijack this thread with biblical debate, only point I was trying to make was IMO religion should be outside of the death penalty discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I take it you're claiming Jesus is the Captain of the Lord as well as His Son, kind of a time-lord appearing fourteen hundred years before he was born?
I'll let you formulate your own opinion on that one, pretty sure you could guess mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Well I just tried to guess yours and I'm not sure I got it right. Enlighten us, so that we might know the true nature of Jesus.
This thread had a good discussion going and I've taken it a direction I am sure no one wanted to go. Im going to shut up now.. I feel a Christian can be either for the death penalty or against it, and find adequate literature in the Bible to back themselves up.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
But a link just for you Trish
so what is to be done with repeat violent offenders? i am all for putting them out the middle of nowhere and leaving them there and in Australia we have a lot of the middle of nowhere
Until Peter Falconio and his girlfriend show up..the 'middle of nowhere' is one of the most lawless and roughest parts of the world...
Any sort of retribution (from vandalism to murder) carried out by individuals, families, tribes and clans can lead to an "endless cycle" of escalating crimes.
As I tried to point in an earlier post citing 'blood revenge' among the Bedouin, I don't think this is true -I don't know enough about the Jewish tribes of ancient 'Israel' to know if the problem of endless revenge also caused them to find ways out of this; I doubt that it exists. I believe in Papua New Guinea, some tribes will end a violent feud by slicing off the top of their finger, a visible sign that the dispute has ended. The point would be that societies, ancient and modern, try to find a way of de-escalating personal conflicts that threaten the wider peace of the group(s).
Trish, I asked you if you think Freedom is more important than Life
I meant, not what does a murderer think, but you –your judgement on capital punishment is the issue.
I brought up freedom all the way back on the first page post #3 as a side issue. Here how it came about. I was reading some years an account of the Lewis & Clark expedition. On several occasions they resorted to flogging soldiers for relatively minor breaches like falling asleep on guard duty, drinking on duty, theft etc. Judging by the account no one questioned the practice, thought it abnormal or undue. Now flash forward to modern times. It got me to thinking that were I given the choice between getting five lashes or being sent to jail for a couple of years for three strikes of possession of marijuana, I’d choose the flogging.
Ask almost any person in the western world to list the political ideals they value the most and freedom is on the list. Yet freedom is the first thing we think to take away from a person when they commit a crime. To me that seems a bit ironic.
When trying to balance accounts with a murderer, I think the value the murderer places on freedom and the value the murderer places on life that is most relevant. But you ask me which is more important to me. It’s a tough call and of course depends on a number of things__like “Just what sort of restriction of freedom are we talking about and for how long?” Would I choose death over life long incarceration in a Federal penitentiary? I’d probably say yes. But I realize that most people who have actually had to make that choice chose life long incarceration. So I really can’t say with certainty what my answer would be were I really to find myself in the dire circumstance having to make that choice.
Regardless of how I feel about the relative merits of freedom vs life, my judgment on capital punishment is, “I’m against it.” It’s only the different arguments that have led various of us to that same conclusion that I’ve been questioning.
Yet freedom is the first thing we think to take away from a person when they commit a crime. To me that seems a bit ironic.
I think the reasoning contrasts individual freedom with the freedom of society as a whole -the classic liberal definition is that one should be free to act as long as those acts do not harm or cause harm to others. Withdrawing freedom -of movement, for example, through imprisonment - is supposed to enhance the felon's appreciation of what freedom is compared to his/her selfish actions, so he/she won't do it again. Anyway this is way off the original thread, and it seems most people are opposed to the death penalty, as I am.
i thought imprisonment was also to protect the victim or potential victims
Australian law is reactive not proactive so it is always after the fact
It was just a general point, Russtafa I can't cover all the angles all the time.
At the risk of gettin' all Zenned up: Freedom is a state of mind. Life isn't an abstract at all. Take that away & freedom is a moot issue.
I've come to the conclusion that the discussion over capital punishment is really never about the person being executed. It's about the comfort level of the individuals who make up the society that's contemplating that action. Conscience is a funny thing. Good to have around though. My Question: When someone continuously goes out of their way to violate the moral code, how much of an expectation should they have of being covered by that same code?
No shit???!!! Damn! Another illusion dashed...Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
When someone continuously goes out of their way to violate the moral code, how much of an expectation should they have of being covered by that same code?
The answer is none at all, they dont have a moral code, and don't know what morals are in any social sense. A lot of criminals, including pyschotics and psychopaths, as well as people like Mao Zedong, are so completely self-centred they only act on their own impulses and desires -leaving it to others to make judgements of them. That is also why the death penalty for them is meaningless, they always know they are going to die, how is of no importance; and yes, all these processes of judgement, of punishment, are for us: to allow us to confirm to each other that our values are worth something, that pure anarchy is both impracticable, and dangerous.
i thought in locking someone up or executing someone was more about protecting society than punishment
Death penalty FTW.
You support the death penalty for touring Wisconsin? Or is it for torturing Welshmen? Either way, harsh, dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by bte
Welshmen used to be great at rugby and coal mines but i would not kill them.Shakin Stevens is a Welshman
And Bonnie Tyler.Crazy Cavan and the Rythym Rockers
Russtafa....been otherwise occupied for several days, so I missed this.Quote:
Originally Posted by russtafa
I'm moderated my position on this for pragmatic reasons....not that the most vile among us shouldn't be extinguished. When they prove they have surrendered their right to walk among us...they should receive the Osama treatment. In fact, I would gladly be the hang man in certain situations, and never give it a second thought. But the reality is this....feckless politicians in almost every state with a death penalty law refuse to enforce the laws their predecessors have passed. Similar to the immigration situation. So if it's going to be applied randomly, or not at all.........why bother? Secondly, prosecutors routinely over reach in it's application. Witness Casey Anthony. Every rational thinker knew that no jury was going to put her to death. We should not burden our fellow citizens (jurors) with life and death decisions...that should be reserved for trained soldiers, trained police, and for judges.
Additionally, it takes almost 15 years from the day of the verdict to exact the final punishment. Appeal after endless appeal...and all have to be answered by the State ( the tax payer). If only anti death penalty zealots put as much effort into supplying poor and working folks with legal representation as they do the army of scum bags convicted of heinous crimes.
In the end, it's simply not worth the time, effort, money and misery needed to execute a killer. I say throw them in with the other murderers and let them sort it out.....Jeffery Dohmer style !
If Charlie Masion is still allowed to breath air and not dirt.........why should anyone be executed ? In fact...I've got a better idea to resolve both the southern border problem, and the death penalty question. I'm sure there's several thousand death row inmates rotting away in 5' cells. Round them up.....bus them to Nogolos Arizona in August, and get them start digging by hand for the foundation to erect a new borderfence. They'll be allowed some crackers, and a cup or water per day. And the ones that don't make it?? Roll them right in the hole and make them part of the foundation. There ya go...2 birds with one stone. Next problem?
Wow you don't muck around
Nope...when you've served notice on society, that you're unfit to live amoung us ( and murder would be an indication of that !) The chain gang on the Mexican border would be a good start at reperation..
tough to the end .i like the idea that outlaws are outside of the law so they do not have that protection.these people that kill or hurt members of the public should be cast out of society never to re-enter society without food or cover or protection
I think maybe our politicians are to gutless to flick the switch because they don't want blood on their hands like the cowards they are and that go's for right or left.i would happily flick the switch on any kiddy killer or granny basher and laugh about it .after thinking about this issue these people don't deserve oxygen
Emotionally, I'm often for it. But my emotions are invalid, ultimately. Intellectually, I'm against it. The justice system is far too flawed. Rotting in prison is good enough.
I'm for the Death Penalty as long as death is the penalty. Why is he still alive? Pretty much the worst of the worst.
http://feastofhateandfear.com/images/Ramirez.gif
In California, right is wrong and wrong is right. Here's a picture of The Night Stalker with his lovely bride.
http://midnightsunastrology.files.wo...pg?w=300&h=261
Here's what he did over and over again.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kp...1dwco1_500.jpg
Speaking of murder, what do you all think about the West Memphis Three taking a plea bargain? Personally, I think they did it. I don't give a crap what little pet causes people like Henry Rollins and Johnny Depp want to run with. The one kid confessed, and they were already found guilty. (I believe he actually confessed twice, if memory serves me correctly.) Damien Nichols was busted for torturing and killing a dog, and drinking it's blood, only months before the crime. He's a pretentious goth loser, who was very much into the left hand path magic. They caught him lying on the witness stand about being a Crowleyite. (Rollins and Depp are too, whether they'll talk about it or not.)
Johnny Depp must've made a deal with Lucifer or somebody. I remember him on 21 Jump Street and thought his spectacular death in Nightmare On Elm Street would be the highlight of his career.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicole Dupre
i never knew that they believe in dark religion.not good at all ,that stuff puts people in mental hospitals
Damien was in a mental hospital shortly before the murders.Quote:
Originally Posted by russtafa
Obviously I don't know what happened, but aside from the confession of a mentally retarded kid, wasn't all the evidence against them circumstantial?
If the whole thing happened somewhere other than bumfuck, and the parents of the victims weren't sketchy white trash, there would have been less speculation on it being anyone other than the three in question. But that's bumfuck for you. The cops are morons, and the courts are a good ol' boy network. And together, they fucked up everything from the start. So they're left with three dead 8 yr olds, and 3 metalhead rednecks back out on the streets; one of whom spilled his guts in graphic detail, until a few celebs make a big enough stink.
Yes, but he isn't retarded. He's stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by BluegrassCat
And he asked, after the first confession he gave, to make another one, and said the same thing, if I remember correctly. You can look into it, and let me know for sure. But that's what I remember reading and seeing on television
Emotionally, I'm often for it. But my emotions are invalid, ultimately. Intellectually, I'm against it. The justice system is far too flawed. Rotting in prison is good enough.
Nicole, your intellectual argument is at the core of this debate. People are convicted on the evidence presented in court, not necessarily on ALL the available evidence. On the one hand, not all of the evidence against OJ Simpson was presented in Court; on the other hand, how many semi-literate Black men have been sent to death row on unreliable evidence their lousy lawyer failed to challenge?
What happens if the emotional need to hang/inject/electrify the convicted turns out to have gone before reason and 'new' evidence shows he/she would have been found not guilty in a different trial?
I dont know much about the West Memphis case: had all three been executed would this have been a just punishment?
I cannot accept that if society condemns murder, it should then do it. Once is enough.
Of course not. I don't want them to get the death penalty. I don't want ANYONE to get the death penalty. But I also don't believe that the WM3 are innocent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
Damien Echols blew kisses to the victims' parent the first time he appeared in court. He tortured a dog to death and drank it's blood. He was put in a psych ward, before the murders were committed, for threatening other teenagers' lives. He practiced black magick, and subscribed to a belief system that involves the ritual sacrifice of children. This was not simply a kid who went through a "goth phase", and who "dressed weird".
He was, and may very well still be, a grandiose sociopath imo. Sociopaths are known to be manipulative liars. I'm sure he regrets getting caught, but I doubt he regrets the murders if he committed them.
he should be killed
Its really difficult to say because people have gotten the death penalty for a number of reasons.. In cases when there is not a doubt the individual committed the murder, etc I beleive they shoudl get the death penalty.. But I also beleive the death penalty should be extended to lesser crimes besides murder.. In cases where a person has committed multiple violent crimes and there is no rehabilitation or change in behaviour..
Also death by dissection has to be the most horrible way to die omg.. :o