Death Penalty? What's your opinion?

VManso, as I previously mentioned, opinions are allowed here on everything. As long as you're not attacking people personally, or being offensive, you can state your opinions freely on all aspects of the issue at hand. You are not limited by country.

And I would argue that this is a very personal choice, and therefore has very little to do with whether your country allows it or not. Regardless, all opinions are welcome.
 
I'm glad Karla Homolka was brought up. That woman really did pull a fast one over the Crown Attorney-Canada's version of District Attorney-eyes.

What bugs me is that us average joes shell out thousands for our education, go into spiraling debt for it while she gets one for free.

FYI-George Eads made a point years ago about his father's advocacy for the death penalty. He's also for it because he and his mother were almost murdered by someone who was connected to someone being tried by his father. GE was only fourteen at the time and chased the guy out of the house with a gun.

Back on topic.
 
NOPE it should be banned all over the world- it is a barbaric and hypocritical punishment and doesn´t belong in a civilized society.

1)By killing someone who´s killed someone you are just as bad.

2)Who has the right to decide who should be killed and who shouldn´t?

3)Considering the number of ppl that have been innocently executed it´s just not worth the risk.

4)It will never be possible to completely put yourself in the position of the person who committed the crime so it will never be possible to give a just death sentence.

5)The death penalty has no deterring effect what so ever- it only increases violence in society. Does anyone really believe that a person driven as far as murder will be thinking of the consequences of his actions? Most murderers have biological and/or psychological damages.

6) Death p. gives no closure for victim or perp families. Imprisonment is both a punishment and a chance for treatment closure and mediation. The perp should be forced to face the victims family as a part of the punishment/ treatment and acknowledge and take responsibility for the actions.
Click to expand...

You say the death penalty gives no closure, but how do you know that? Have you lost someone to murder? Have you felt the pain of the victim's family? Have you had to bury someone you loved because someone decided to take thier life? If you haven't, you are in NO position to comment on whether or not it gives closure. No position at all. You have no right to say that the death penalty is hypocritical until you have felt the pain of losing someone, and have been able to decide firsthand whether it would give you closure. If you have lost someone, and have made the decision that the death penalty would not give you closure, then you are at liberty to say something like that, otherwise, you are every single bit as hypocritical as you think the penalty you criticise is.
 
VManso, as I previously mentioned, opinions are allowed here on everything. As long as you're not attacking people personally, or being offensive, you can state your opinions freely on all aspects of the issue at hand. You are not limited by country.

And I would argue that this is a very personal choice, and therefore has very little to do with whether your country allows it or not. Regardless, all opinions are welcome.
Click to expand...
Kismet was making a blanket statement when she said that the death penalty should be banished world-wide which ,I feel, is wrong. The only way for this ever to happen is for there to be a world-wide moratoruium against the death penalty.
 
Kismet was making a blanket statement when she said that the death penalty should be banished world-wide which ,I feel, is wrong. The only way for this ever to happen is for there to be a world-wide moratoruium against the death penalty.
Click to expand...

See now, saying it that way to begin with would have been fine. But telling them they can't say such and such on here is wrong. Again, voicing opinions is fine.

On another note, criticizing actual posters for their opinions is not acceptable... like the way Madgeorge called another poster hypocritical, for example. Disagree all you want, but please refrain from criticizing other posters for their views. Argue your points, disagree with points made, but attacking others is never acceptable here, however minor the comment may seem, or was intended to be.

I am NOT the Moderator in the Misc forum, but I believe DaWacko and wibble would agree with this point.

Thanks.
 
Exactly what Baba said. You can agree/disagree with posters but do not attack on them personally.

If you haven't, you are in NO position to comment on whether or not it gives closure. No position at all. You have no right to say that the death penalty is hypocritical until you have felt the pain of losing someone, and have been able to decide firsthand whether it would give you closure. If you have lost someone, and have made the decision that the death penalty would not give you closure, then you are at liberty to say something like that, otherwise, you are every single bit as hypocritical as you think the penalty you criticise is.
Click to expand...

As stated above, you can disagree but not "attack" on a another post (perhaps attack is bit too strong word).
Madgeorge, please don't do it again. Same thing to other posters. Now that this is brought up, if it continues, you'll get warned for flaming.

I know this is sensitive discussion but because this is good discussion, it would be really nice if this would go on :)
 
I have always agreed with the Death Penalty, if it is absolutely necessary by that I mean if the criminal really has no place in society (depending of circumstance), I personally don't think it should be used instead of a life term prison sentence, but in my opinion I don’t think the Death Penalty should be ruled out.

This is just my personal opinion and I know that there are a lot of people who are very much against it for their own reasons.
 
there was an article online today, you can read it here this morning one of the cofounders of the crips gang, stanley williams, was executed for the 1979 murders of four people, hes been in death row in san quintin prison for 24 years. in this time, he has been nominated for the nobel peace prize for writing childrens books warning them about the dangers of gangs and violence.
i know not all convicts on death row contribute to society in such a way, and many of them do not regret what they have done, and are so sick and twisted they enjoy taking the lives of others.
because of stanleys long time spent on death row, he did make a turn around and i think made a positive impact on the community through his books. its unfortunate, however, that the gang he started all those years ago has led to so much pain and violence over the years. he takes credit for numerous acts of violence committed by the gang, but maintains his innocence in the shootings he was executed for.
just a whole new level of complication in the capitol punishment argument. if only we lived in a world without murder and crime. hey, a girl can dream cant she?
 
there was an article online today, you can read it here this morning one of the cofounders of the crips gang, stanley williams, was executed for the 1979 murders of four people, hes been in death row in san quintin prison for 24 years. in this time, he has been nominated for the nobel peace prize for writing childrens books warning them about the dangers of gangs and violence.
i know not all convicts on death row contribute to society in such a way, and many of them do not regret what they have done, and are so sick and twisted they enjoy taking the lives of others.
because of stanleys long time spent on death row, he did make a turn around and i think made a positive impact on the community through his books. its unfortunate, however, that the gang he started all those years ago has led to so much pain and violence over the years. he takes credit for numerous acts of violence committed by the gang, but maintains his innocence in the shootings he was executed for.
just a whole new level of complication in the capitol punishment argument. if only we lived in a world without murder and crime. hey, a girl can dream cant she?
Click to expand...

We were actually talking about this case and the death penalty today in sociology. I personally think that the death penalty is ok, but there has to be hard evidence linking them to the crime no circumstansual evidence. I mean there has to be no doubt that the person did it ya know.
 
It's kind of funny actually how if you kill someone, we will kill you back.

Canada of course doesn't have the death penalty but in my opinion, we should have it. Retribution is my thing. It's still kind of dumb before they stick the needle in that they disinfect the skin with alcohol first. Seems kind of....pointless.

I don't think that the death penalty should apply to people with psychological problems. Of course that's what the insanity defense is. But there is the situation that these offenders didn't know what they did so they couldn't possibly be held accountable for their crime, especially if the state or country wants to fry them.

You know what? Fine if he/she didn't know what they did, then they don't know we're going to kill them. Strap them to the chair and tell them it's a ride :lol: Sorry it seems heartless but I love the Comedy network :lol:

Anyway I say yes to the death penalty for personal reasons and of course what I've read here today.
 
there was an article online today, you can read it here this morning one of the cofounders of the crips gang, stanley williams, was executed for the 1979 murders of four people, hes been in death row in san quintin prison for 24 years. in this time, he has been nominated for the nobel peace prize for writing childrens books warning them about the dangers of gangs and violence.
i know not all convicts on death row contribute to society in such a way, and many of them do not regret what they have done, and are so sick and twisted they enjoy taking the lives of others.
because of stanleys long time spent on death row, he did make a turn around and i think made a positive impact on the community through his books. its unfortunate, however, that the gang he started all those years ago has led to so much pain and violence over the years. he takes credit for numerous acts of violence committed by the gang, but maintains his innocence in the shootings he was executed for.
just a whole new level of complication in the capitol punishment argument. if only we lived in a world without murder and crime. hey, a girl can dream cant she?
Click to expand...

I live in "the hood" in L.A., and the hotel where three of the victims in the Williams case were shot is directly across Vermont Avenue from where my husband works in South Central.

Even here, opinions are conflicted. IMO, if Tookie was guilty of the murders, he should have been imprisoned for life with no possibility of parole. The trial was in...what, 1981? He was convicted largely on hearsay. And to the very last, he swore he did not commit those murders. Is it possible he did? Of course. Is it possible he didn't? Very much so. And a government to whom I pledge my alleagiance had better be very, very damned circumspect about the taking of another life. DNA evidence submitted for retrials of old cases has freed some innocent men and exonerated others after they were executed. Try explaining that one to their survivors. To me, the slaughter of a single innocent by a governing body is unacceptable. Reason #1 why I'm anti-death penalty. I'll spare you the numerous others.

In the two and a half decades Tookie Williams was incarcerated, his life shanged dramatically, and he wrote books and made communications to help kids stay away from gang life. He had created a monster and he knew it. Again, IF he committed those murders, no way should he everhave been set free. Regardless, he was accomplishing good in recent years by mitigating much of the damage he'd helped to cause. That mitigating force, guilty or innocent of those four murders, is gone.

So...once a kid's in the gang mess, now why do we tell him to get out and redeem himself?

It's much like the fellow down in Orange County whose citizenship status was rather "iffy", and for an offense committed decades ago he was deported, despite the fact that in recent years he worked hard to feed the poor and help the destitute in his area. Many of those he helped were frantic that their lifeline would be lost if he were deported. Guess what - he's gone.

Redemption - good enough for Jesus, but apparently not for Arnold.

--Robin
 
And this after he specically asked the guv not to execute him! Shows what kinda gov we have, anyway!
 
I would like to apologise to anyone who took what I wrote earlier the wrong way, I didn't mean to insult anyone. What I meant was that until the person had been in the position of a victim's family, they shouldn't comment from the perspective of one. I didn't mean to word it in an offensive way. I'm sorry if I worded that badly, and very sorry to anyone who may have been offended, again, very sorry, I hope I've been able to better explain my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top