I can certainly understand your disappointment with the corruption with our government, I too would very much like to see this improved. Though I do think that we cannot let these people that commit atrocties live.. though it is sad to say I would have more trust in the "lynch mobs" these days than the officials.. If people would just defend themselves, shoot these people at the time of the crime we wouldn't have to sort them out later. Though it is not like a child can really defend themselves in these situations. Our criminal system is a mess, just like our government.. we have police carrying out mob hits, we have judges jailing people to take their property, and gangs running prisons. I can understand and share the frustration. We have a lot to fix in this country. Just yesterday I was reading an article on this murderers detailed confession of how when he looks at people he wonders what they taste like and thinks about taking their skin and making tapestry from it... and yea I can honestly say if he were in my house I would not hesitate in ridding him from this earth. I do think that sometimes we have to remove these people from this life, for our own safety, so that the rest of us can sleep at night, we just need to make sure that we have the right person before we do.
The fact is, government can not determine who has commited atrocities, much less kill them for it. Government doesn't work like that.
Again i see you using the same reasoning our socialist friends use. Sorry, Government fails. therefore it can't be trusted with life and death issues.
Government should always be treated as a necessary evil -- everything it does is at the root evil, so we should save that evil only for that which is necessary. Killers do not need to be killed. That is simply a choice we make.
How do you propose we stop these killers from ordering hits from the inside, it seems that verything they have tried has not worked, they have organizations on the inside and out that help them? Is it constitutional to force the families of victims to support these people in prison through their taxes?
Libertarianism is not the answer to everything. As a principle, it understands that some problems simply can't be solved by government, and killing its guilty citizens is one of them. Death penalties obviously don't stop what you are talking about, if "everything" they have tried has not worked. That proves the death penalty does not work, therefore, it needs to be scrapped, because it gives gpvernment a power it can't be trusted with.
Yes, it is obviously constitutional the force the families of victims to support people in prisons in that they want to live in the society that puts those people in prison for them. Just as it is constitutional to force Christians to pay for murder of murderers when Jesus calls for forgiveness. Constitutionality is not the question here.
None of this speaks to whether the state can be trusted with such power. History has shown that it can't be.
Without something in place of course, you will have families , neighbors , and normally law abiding citizens seeking out these people and taking care of it themselves just as they did in the wild west ... I mean of course say it was your child, and witnessed him throughing her body behind a bush but by the time you got your gun.. he was gone.. then later he was " let off".. would you be able to just let it go, knowing that he will be able to do that to someone elses kid? If so you are in the minority, I don't know any community that would be okay with that guy living there.
None of this justifies or warrants state sponsored murder. Emotional arguments carry no weight in discussions about the proper role of government in a free society; in fact, one on;y uses them when one has run out of reasonable arguments. Just like the left cries racist when someone opposes affirmative action, or says that someone who is opposed to welfare doesn't care about the poor.
I never said we shouldn't have a criminal justice system, just that murdering citizens is not a good idea within that justice system.
Actually I wasn't arguing for the death penalty.. I agree that we disagree on the death penalty. I respect your opinion and was honestly curious to how you would respond in such a situation. The situation I presented the death penalty would not have been an issue at all because he was set free. What I think it would apply to however would be whether or not someone should go to jail for killing the murderer of their own child. I do not think so, that would not be justice, and yes, I would think it should be considered defense, I do not believe that you have to be defending yourself or your property or your child, you can be defending other children as well to be considered defense.
Completely disagree, revenge is not defense. One can not kill in self defense "in advance" or in retaliation. Again that is the same argument I see the socialists make in economics. People can't be trusted, therefore we need to regulate them (as opposed to people can't be trusted, therefore we can't give this power tp government, which is a much more reasonable response in both cases).
In your case murderers need to be murdered, since they have murdered before and will murder again.
Sorry, I see no merits to this line of reasoning.
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans.
"I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans. "I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
This relates to a fundamental difference I often have with several members of the forums.
I can't put a cash value of an innocent man. If you have a method with 0 error, then I would be all for it. But if 1 in 100,000 people who die are innocent I find that unacceptable. I don't believe it is a drain on society to save a life. The standard of life is higher than ever, and its been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that past enough money to pay your rent eat your food and cloth yourself, their is no correlation between income and happyness. Thats not a dream ideal, thats a solid, statistical fact. So even if you are a person who would put a cash price on an innocent life, looking at the happiness gains from having the death penalty, you would have to create a cost difference that would effect the taxes of somebody below the poverty level. To accomplish this, wehave to save such a ludicrous amount of money we'd have to be selling the corpses.
I can. In some places it is as little as 50p a day.
In more developed countries it cost a lot more.
If I put a million pounds cash ina room full of people, innocent or nt they will all start killing each other.
There are some sums of money that take longer than one lifetime to acquire. These kinds of amounts are worth dying to protect.
And for me, anything worth dying for is usually worth killing for for also.
Also, money can buy you happiness. It often does.
You speak of some people, but by no means the majority.
Money can buy "happiness" for a time, but at night when that person looks themself in the mirror they feel a hole in their heart. There is still something missing.
Baff, this isn't even an argument im sorry. You can think 2+2 = 5 but you'd be wrong as well.
There is no correlation with money and happiness. Sorry if that shatters your world, but it doens't.
Sure, if you put a bunch of empoverished people in a room with money, shit might go down, but money does = happyness for them.
If you put it in a room of logical people, nobody would die...if it was full of people who voluntarily chose to remove themselves from the facts and reality such as yourself, you might also have issues. But I don't think its worth mentioning exceptions.
I have lived below and above the poverty line, I understand on an annecdotal level as well as a statistical.
You are a pessimist Baff, grow some balls and look at the bright side. Its nowhere near as bad as you have made youself beleive it is.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans. "I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
Since you cannot seem to stop harping on the fact that victims pay taxes for these prisoners to live it up luxury style in the four seasons. I'll say that as a taxpayer, I get reamed being single and no dependents etc., that my tax money shouldn't go into the black hole of bankrolling executions.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death. It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
Since you cannot seem to stop harping on the fact that victims pay taxes for these prisoners to live it up luxury style in the four seasons. I'll say that as a taxpayer, I get reamed being single and no dependents etc., that my tax money shouldn't go into the black hole of bankrolling executions.
Good thinking.. instead of suppoting them in prisons for the rest of their lives, and instead of executing them immediately after they are found guilty, all of those that wish to keep them alive can volunteer their homes, and these people can come live with you for the rest of their lives, and you get to be responsible for them. Thank you so much for taking them off our hands.
This relates to a fundamental difference I often have with several members of the forums.
I can't put a cash value of an innocent man. If you have a method with 0 error, then I would be all for it. But if 1 in 100,000 people who die are innocent I find that unacceptable. I don't believe it is a drain on society to save a life. The standard of life is higher than ever, and its been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that past enough money to pay your rent eat your food and cloth yourself, their is no correlation between income and happyness. Thats not a dream ideal, thats a solid, statistical fact. So even if you are a person who would put a cash price on an innocent life, looking at the happiness gains from having the death penalty, you would have to create a cost difference that would effect the taxes of somebody below the poverty level. To accomplish this, wehave to save such a ludicrous amount of money we'd have to be selling the corpses.
I can. In some places it is as little as 50p a day.
In more developed countries it cost a lot more.
If I put a million pounds cash ina room full of people, innocent or nt they will all start killing each other.
There are some sums of money that take longer than one lifetime to acquire. These kinds of amounts are worth dying to protect.
And for me, anything worth dying for is usually worth killing for for also.
Also, money can buy you happiness. It often does.
You speak of some people, but by no means the majority.
Money can buy "happiness" for a time, but at night when that person looks themself in the mirror they feel a hole in their heart. There is still something missing.
Baff, this isn't even an argument im sorry. You can think 2+2 = 5 but you'd be wrong as well.
There is no correlation with money and happiness. Sorry if that shatters your world, but it doens't.
Sure, if you put a bunch of empoverished people in a room with money, shit might go down, but money does = happyness for them.
If you put it in a room of logical people, nobody would die...if it was full of people who voluntarily chose to remove themselves from the facts and reality such as yourself, you might also have issues. But I don't think its worth mentioning exceptions.
I have lived below and above the poverty line, I understand on an annecdotal level as well as a statistical.
You are a pessimist Baff, grow some balls and look at the bright side. Its nowhere near as bad as you have made youself beleive it is.
There isn't anything bad in my life mate. I live in paradise.
I have lived on the street and I've lived in a mansion.
I wasn't unhappy doing either.
One thing I have learnt from these experiences is the difference wealth can bring to your life. A lot of people take it for granted.
And yet almost every divorce comes when hubby loses his job. If you think things are bad during the good times, they are a lot worse during the hard times.
When you can't afford healthcare and your child dies, it is a tragic thing not a moment of joy and happiness.
If you think money doesn't buy you happiness, you quite simply know very little about being poor.
Good thinking.. instead of suppoting them in prisons for the rest of their lives, and instead of executing them immediately after they are found guilty, all of those that wish to keep them alive can volunteer their homes, and these people can come live with you for the rest of their lives, and you get to be responsible for them. Thank you so much for taking them off our hands.
Guilty as charged But damn it, it ain't right There's someone else controlling me Death in the air Strapped in the electric chair This can't be happening to me
Who made you God to say?, I'll take your life from you
Flash before my eyes Now it's time to die Burning in my brain I can feel the flames
Wait for the sign To flick the switch of death It's the beginning of the end Sweat, chilling cold As I watch death unfold Consciousness my only friend
My fingers grip with fear What am I doing here?
Flash before my eyes Now it's time to die Burning in my brain I can feel the flame
Someone help me Oh please, God help me They're trying to take it all away I don't want to die
(SOLO)
Someone help me Oh please, God help me They are trying to take it all away I don`t want to die
Time moving slow The minutes seem like hours The final curtain call I see Im through with this Just get it over with If this is true, just let it be
Wakened by a horrid scream Freed from this frightening dream
Flash before my eyes Now it's time to die Burning in my brain I can feel the flame
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans. "I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
To me, right and wrong is the most important rule for survival. Immoral societies die.
The chance they will be set loose is no rational argument to kill them, but it is EXACTLY the argument the socialists use when arguing against freedom. Every argument you are bringing forward is being used by the left to justify socialism. I find that when we find ourselves forced into using the bad arguments of the opposition tp defend our point of view, that's a good sign that our point of view is wrong.
If murder is wrong, then so is the death penalty, because it is murder.
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans. "I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
To me, right and wrong is the most important rule for survival. Immoral societies die.
The chance they will be set loose is no rational argument to kill them, but it is EXACTLY the argument the socialists use when arguing against freedom. Every argument you are bringing forward is being used by the left to justify socialism. I find that when we find ourselves forced into using the bad arguments of the opposition tp defend our point of view, that's a good sign that our point of view is wrong.
If murder is wrong, then so is the death penalty, because it is murder.
That is where we disagree, I do not believe it is murder to take the life of someone threatening people, that is removing a threat from society. They are a threat when they say that they would kill again, or are unable to stop themselves from killing. Yes, that makes them a threat. Their actions have alreayd proven they will carry out these threats unless we prevent them from doing so. Now what I think is the proper level of prevention, and what you see as the proper level of prevention are the issue here. I think that a 100% chance of them not being able to ever kill again is the solution, and you are satisfied with a possibility of them doing it again, even if it is remote, it still exists. Though it gets less and less remote everytime one of these hits are carried out from prison.
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans. "I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
To me, right and wrong is the most important rule for survival. Immoral societies die.
The chance they will be set loose is no rational argument to kill them, but it is EXACTLY the argument the socialists use when arguing against freedom. Every argument you are bringing forward is being used by the left to justify socialism. I find that when we find ourselves forced into using the bad arguments of the opposition tp defend our point of view, that's a good sign that our point of view is wrong.
If murder is wrong, then so is the death penalty, because it is murder.
That is where we disagree, I do not believe it is murder to take the life of someone threatening people, that is removing a threat from society. They are a threat when they say that they would kill again, or are unable to stop themselves from killing. Yes, that makes them a threat. Their actions have alreayd proven they will carry out these threats unless we prevent them from doing so. Now what I think is the proper level of prevention, and what you see as the proper level of prevention are the issue here. I think that a 100% chance of them not being able to ever kill again is the solution, and you are satisfied with a possibility of them doing it again, even if it is remote, it still exists. Though it gets less and less remote everytime one of these hits are carried out from prison.
They are no longer threatening people, but the same argument can be used for enslaving every businessman into a socialist serfdom.
We may as well lock everyone up forever because no one can be trusted.
You are desirous of murdering innocent men and women. that will always be the result of the policy you favor. Sorry, sudden;y you have a faith in the state that I can not share. I feel my position is consistent. Suddenly, someone who doesn't feel government can be trusted to conttol business is fully capable of deciding whether its citizens live or die.
They are no longer threatening people, but the same argument can be used for enslaving every businessman into a socialist serfdom. We may as well lock everyone up forever because no one can be trusted. You are desirous of murdering innocent men and women. that will always be the result of the policy you favor. Sorry, sudden;y you have a faith in the state that I can not share. I feel my position is consistent. Suddenly, someone who doesn't feel government can be trusted to conttol business is fully capable of deciding whether its citizens live or die. Sorry. I don't share your faith in government.
What are you talking about? Everyone doesn't cut peoples skin off and make tapestry out of it .. these people not only have done these things they promise they will do it again givent eh chance. I was watching the History channel a couple of months ago ... even there was an episode where they went into detail on how hits were being carried out from behind prison walls to the outside. It is disturbing that we have not been able to give our people 100% protection from these creeps even after we catch them. The fact that this is still happening after these guys are caught shows us that it is not working, they will always be a threat as long as they live. I agree that our government is greatly lacking, and that is why I do not have faith that they will keep these people contained properly. It isn't like we have a lot of choices here. We either let them put them to death or the citizens will form lynch mobs and do it themselves, because containment is NOT working.
They ARE a threat... post #65 ( or around there) in this thread has all these links:
This goes on and on .... Case after case, No, people are "not" safe when these guys just go to jail. There needs to be final resolution. Oh yea FYI My friends daughter was molested and assaulted but survived, and yes she has very much expressed that she thinks all these people should be put to death, so she can know that these people will not return. Why don;t you start asking them, there are support forums for these people, you go ask them how they feel and I am sure you will get the same sentiment. These people ARE being punished by having to support these creeps with their tax dollars, the victims are being terrorized by there mere existance after commiting such atrocities.
They are no longer threatening people, but the same argument can be used for enslaving every businessman into a socialist serfdom. We may as well lock everyone up forever because no one can be trusted. You are desirous of murdering innocent men and women. that will always be the result of the policy you favor. Sorry, sudden;y you have a faith in the state that I can not share. I feel my position is consistent. Suddenly, someone who doesn't feel government can be trusted to conttol business is fully capable of deciding whether its citizens live or die. Sorry. I don't share your faith in government.
What are you talking about? Everyone doesn't cut peoples skin off and make tapestry out of it .. these people not only have done these things they promise they will do it again givent eh chance. I was watching the History channel a couple of months ago ... even there was an episode where they went into detail on how hits were being carried out from behind prison walls to the outside. It is disturbing that we have not been able to give our people 100% protection from these creeps even after we catch them. The fact that this is still happening after these guys are caught shows us that it is not working, they will always be a threat as long as they live. I agree that our government is greatly lacking, and that is why I do not have faith that they will keep these people contained properly. It isn't like we have a lot of choices here. We either let them put them to death or the citizens will form lynch mobs and do it themselves, because containment is NOT working.
They ARE a threat... post #65 ( or around there) in this thread has all these links:
This goes on and on .... Case after case, No, people are "not" safe when these guys just go to jail. There needs to be final resolution. Oh yea FYI My friends daughter was molested and assaulted but survived, and yes she has very much expressed that she thinks all these people should be put to death, so she can know that these people will not return. Why don;t you start asking them, there are support forums for these people, you go ask them how they feel and I am sure you will get the same sentiment. These people ARE being punished by having to support these creeps with their tax dollars, the victims are being terrorized by there mere existance after commiting such atrocities.
Sorry, I simply do not have the faith in government that you do. Death penalties guarantee that innocent people will be killed intentionally by the state, which means by us. Sorry, I don't want to be forced to pay for murder of innocent people. That is far worse than the families of murder victims having to pay for the justice system. They are harmed no more than any of us in this. Again you are making purely emotional arguments, not a reasonable one.
The death penalty is not justice, it isn't restitution. It is murder by state. Revenge is wrong. It is as wrong as killing someone and making a lampshade, curtains, and a slinky skirt out of their skin.
Murder is murder. What you do with the dead body matters not once you have murdered. Again that is just emotionalism for the effect.
You want the state to become those murderers, to kill, on a regular basis, innocent people.
Gotta agree to disagree with this one. I understand and sympathize with your posistion, but I feel it is just as evil as someone wearing a full suit of human skin, with dried human eyeballs as charms on a bracelet.
None of this has anything to do with whether people can be trusted with the power you want to give them.
You can pull my heartstrings, but with me, reason always prevails.
The death penalty does not deter crime. The death penalty is revenge killing, nothing more. I am very much against murder, and that's what the death penalty is.
...its been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that past enough money to pay your rent eat your food and cloth yourself, their is no correlation between income and happyness. Thats not a dream ideal, thats a solid, statistical fact.
I can. In some places it is as little as 50p a day.
In more developed countries it cost a lot more.
If I put a million pounds cash ina room full of people, innocent or nt they will all start killing each other.
There are some sums of money that take longer than one lifetime to acquire. These kinds of amounts are worth dying to protect.
And for me, anything worth dying for is usually worth killing for for also.
Also, money can buy you happiness. It often does.
...There is no correlation with money and happiness...
There isn't anything bad in my life mate. I live in paradise.
I have lived on the street and I've lived in a mansion.
I wasn't unhappy doing either.
One thing I have learnt from these experiences is the difference wealth can bring to your life. A lot of people take it for granted.
And yet almost every divorce comes when hubby loses his job. If you think things are bad during the good times, they are a lot worse during the hard times.
When you can't afford healthcare and your child dies, it is a tragic thing not a moment of joy and happiness.
If you think money doesn't buy you happiness, you quite simply know very little about being poor.
Are you even reading what im saying...
below the poverty line (ie poor) it does give you happiness.
But to quote what I said earlier, past your basic needs there there is no correlation.
Divorce from job loss? I found no studies of that, Id like to know if you have actual evidence or if its all anecdotal on your part. The experiences wealth gives you are no more "happy making" than the experiences life gives you when your anywhere else above the poverty line. Again, thats a fact, there is no argument, I've said this several times, Its 1 google away to get thousands of academic papers and research supporting that fact.
Can't afford healthcare again is a poverty issue, you need to read my posts before you try to argue a point.
I never said your life is miserable... Im just saying money has nothing to do with it.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
i agree with the death penalty.everyone should be responsible to his behaviour and be punished by the evil things he did. no one has the right to end others' lives, if he do, he shall be sent to guillotine t o atone for his crime.
Originally posted by duckcount i agree with the death penalty.everyone should be responsible to his behaviour and be punished by the evil things he did. no one has the right to end others' lives, if he do, he shall be sent to guillotine t o atone for his crime.
"No one has the right to end others' lives" and "he shall be sent to the guillotine" doesn't really mix: what are you going to do with the guillotine? Because you certainly can't use it, then you've ended another persons life.
Comments
The fact is, government can not determine who has commited atrocities, much less kill them for it. Government doesn't work like that.
Again i see you using the same reasoning our socialist friends use. Sorry, Government fails. therefore it can't be trusted with life and death issues.
Government should always be treated as a necessary evil -- everything it does is at the root evil, so we should save that evil only for that which is necessary. Killers do not need to be killed. That is simply a choice we make.
How do you propose we stop these killers from ordering hits from the inside, it seems that verything they have tried has not worked, they have organizations on the inside and out that help them? Is it constitutional to force the families of victims to support these people in prison through their taxes?
Libertarianism is not the answer to everything. As a principle, it understands that some problems simply can't be solved by government, and killing its guilty citizens is one of them. Death penalties obviously don't stop what you are talking about, if "everything" they have tried has not worked. That proves the death penalty does not work, therefore, it needs to be scrapped, because it gives gpvernment a power it can't be trusted with.
Yes, it is obviously constitutional the force the families of victims to support people in prisons in that they want to live in the society that puts those people in prison for them. Just as it is constitutional to force Christians to pay for murder of murderers when Jesus calls for forgiveness. Constitutionality is not the question here.
None of this speaks to whether the state can be trusted with such power. History has shown that it can't be.
Without something in place of course, you will have families , neighbors , and normally law abiding citizens seeking out these people and taking care of it themselves just as they did in the wild west ... I mean of course say it was your child, and witnessed him throughing her body behind a bush but by the time you got your gun.. he was gone.. then later he was " let off".. would you be able to just let it go, knowing that he will be able to do that to someone elses kid? If so you are in the minority, I don't know any community that would be okay with that guy living there.
None of this justifies or warrants state sponsored murder. Emotional arguments carry no weight in discussions about the proper role of government in a free society; in fact, one on;y uses them when one has run out of reasonable arguments. Just like the left cries racist when someone opposes affirmative action, or says that someone who is opposed to welfare doesn't care about the poor.
I never said we shouldn't have a criminal justice system, just that murdering citizens is not a good idea within that justice system.
Actually I wasn't arguing for the death penalty.. I agree that we disagree on the death penalty. I respect your opinion and was honestly curious to how you would respond in such a situation. The situation I presented the death penalty would not have been an issue at all because he was set free. What I think it would apply to however would be whether or not someone should go to jail for killing the murderer of their own child. I do not think so, that would not be justice, and yes, I would think it should be considered defense, I do not believe that you have to be defending yourself or your property or your child, you can be defending other children as well to be considered defense.
Completely disagree, revenge is not defense. One can not kill in self defense "in advance" or in retaliation. Again that is the same argument I see the socialists make in economics. People can't be trusted, therefore we need to regulate them (as opposed to people can't be trusted, therefore we can't give this power tp government, which is a much more reasonable response in both cases).
In your case murderers need to be murdered, since they have murdered before and will murder again.
Sorry, I see no merits to this line of reasoning.
I see what you are saying, but I also see murderers saying things like this:
When Frisco police asked Ji about other possible victims, he indicated that his arrest thwarted his plans.
"I haven't even gotten off the ground yet," he said. "I mean, if you caught me 10 years later, I bet I'd have a whole list for you."
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
I can. In some places it is as little as 50p a day.
In more developed countries it cost a lot more.
If I put a million pounds cash ina room full of people, innocent or nt they will all start killing each other.
There are some sums of money that take longer than one lifetime to acquire. These kinds of amounts are worth dying to protect.
And for me, anything worth dying for is usually worth killing for for also.
Also, money can buy you happiness. It often does.
You speak of some people, but by no means the majority.
Money can buy "happiness" for a time, but at night when that person looks themself in the mirror they feel a hole in their heart. There is still something missing.
Baff, this isn't even an argument im sorry. You can think 2+2 = 5 but you'd be wrong as well.
There is no correlation with money and happiness. Sorry if that shatters your world, but it doens't.
Sure, if you put a bunch of empoverished people in a room with money, shit might go down, but money does = happyness for them.
If you put it in a room of logical people, nobody would die...if it was full of people who voluntarily chose to remove themselves from the facts and reality such as yourself, you might also have issues. But I don't think its worth mentioning exceptions.
I have lived below and above the poverty line, I understand on an annecdotal level as well as a statistical.
You are a pessimist Baff, grow some balls and look at the bright side. Its nowhere near as bad as you have made youself beleive it is.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
Since you cannot seem to stop harping on the fact that victims pay taxes for these prisoners to live it up luxury style in the four seasons. I'll say that as a taxpayer, I get reamed being single and no dependents etc., that my tax money shouldn't go into the black hole of bankrolling executions.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Since you cannot seem to stop harping on the fact that victims pay taxes for these prisoners to live it up luxury style in the four seasons. I'll say that as a taxpayer, I get reamed being single and no dependents etc., that my tax money shouldn't go into the black hole of bankrolling executions.
Good thinking.. instead of suppoting them in prisons for the rest of their lives, and instead of executing them immediately after they are found guilty, all of those that wish to keep them alive can volunteer their homes, and these people can come live with you for the rest of their lives, and you get to be responsible for them. Thank you so much for taking them off our hands.
I can. In some places it is as little as 50p a day.
In more developed countries it cost a lot more.
If I put a million pounds cash ina room full of people, innocent or nt they will all start killing each other.
There are some sums of money that take longer than one lifetime to acquire. These kinds of amounts are worth dying to protect.
And for me, anything worth dying for is usually worth killing for for also.
Also, money can buy you happiness. It often does.
You speak of some people, but by no means the majority.
Money can buy "happiness" for a time, but at night when that person looks themself in the mirror they feel a hole in their heart. There is still something missing.
Baff, this isn't even an argument im sorry. You can think 2+2 = 5 but you'd be wrong as well.
There is no correlation with money and happiness. Sorry if that shatters your world, but it doens't.
Sure, if you put a bunch of empoverished people in a room with money, shit might go down, but money does = happyness for them.
If you put it in a room of logical people, nobody would die...if it was full of people who voluntarily chose to remove themselves from the facts and reality such as yourself, you might also have issues. But I don't think its worth mentioning exceptions.
I have lived below and above the poverty line, I understand on an annecdotal level as well as a statistical.
You are a pessimist Baff, grow some balls and look at the bright side. Its nowhere near as bad as you have made youself beleive it is.
There isn't anything bad in my life mate. I live in paradise.
I have lived on the street and I've lived in a mansion.
I wasn't unhappy doing either.
One thing I have learnt from these experiences is the difference wealth can bring to your life. A lot of people take it for granted.
And yet almost every divorce comes when hubby loses his job. If you think things are bad during the good times, they are a lot worse during the hard times.
When you can't afford healthcare and your child dies, it is a tragic thing not a moment of joy and happiness.
If you think money doesn't buy you happiness, you quite simply know very little about being poor.
Uh oh, someone need binky or nap?
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
If the plan is to put them in our homes, I call dibs on the hot female teachers that had sex with the 14 year olds. :P
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
You didn't specify which one!!!! I call Debbie LaFave!
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
You didn't specify which one!!!! I call Debbie LaFave!
No no I insist, I can't let you get into such risks. I call dibs therefor on all of them to protect you from such *ahem* corruption.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
You didn't specify which one!!!! I call Debbie LaFave!
No no I insist, I can't let you get into such risks. I call dibs therefor on all of them to protect you from such *ahem* corruption.
You can have Beth Geisel:
Debbie is mine though!
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Guilty as charged
But damn it, it ain't right
There's someone else controlling me
Death in the air
Strapped in the electric chair
This can't be happening to me
Who made you God to say?,
I'll take your life from you
Flash before my eyes
Now it's time to die
Burning in my brain
I can feel the flames
Wait for the sign
To flick the switch of death
It's the beginning of the end
Sweat, chilling cold
As I watch death unfold
Consciousness my only friend
My fingers grip with fear
What am I doing here?
Flash before my eyes
Now it's time to die
Burning in my brain
I can feel the flame
Someone help me
Oh please, God help me
They're trying to take it all away
I don't want to die
(SOLO)
Someone help me
Oh please, God help me
They are trying to take it all away
I don`t want to die
Time moving slow
The minutes seem like hours
The final curtain call I see
Im through with this
Just get it over with
If this is true, just let it be
Wakened by a horrid scream
Freed from this frightening dream
Flash before my eyes
Now it's time to die
Burning in my brain
I can feel the flame
Much like Francis in Left 4 Dead, I hate people. So yes kill the bastards ASAP. No bs, just do it.
This website is a safe haven for trolls and haters. I'm done with this pathetic site.
I think it should be limited to loss of experience points, and respawn at the begining of the zone, however I am against corpse runs.......
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
To me, right and wrong is the most important rule for survival. Immoral societies die.
The chance they will be set loose is no rational argument to kill them, but it is EXACTLY the argument the socialists use when arguing against freedom. Every argument you are bringing forward is being used by the left to justify socialism. I find that when we find ourselves forced into using the bad arguments of the opposition tp defend our point of view, that's a good sign that our point of view is wrong.
If murder is wrong, then so is the death penalty, because it is murder.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
To me, right and wrong is the most important rule for survival. Immoral societies die.
The chance they will be set loose is no rational argument to kill them, but it is EXACTLY the argument the socialists use when arguing against freedom. Every argument you are bringing forward is being used by the left to justify socialism. I find that when we find ourselves forced into using the bad arguments of the opposition tp defend our point of view, that's a good sign that our point of view is wrong.
If murder is wrong, then so is the death penalty, because it is murder.
That is where we disagree, I do not believe it is murder to take the life of someone threatening people, that is removing a threat from society. They are a threat when they say that they would kill again, or are unable to stop themselves from killing. Yes, that makes them a threat. Their actions have alreayd proven they will carry out these threats unless we prevent them from doing so. Now what I think is the proper level of prevention, and what you see as the proper level of prevention are the issue here. I think that a 100% chance of them not being able to ever kill again is the solution, and you are satisfied with a possibility of them doing it again, even if it is remote, it still exists. Though it gets less and less remote everytime one of these hits are carried out from prison.
Yup, and that's a great argument for life imprisonment, not a death penalty. If you are right, the killer is behind bars forever. If you turn out to be wrong, the dude can be freed.
The final option of a death penalty leaves no room for human error. As such, since governments are notorious for human error, it is a bad idea for governments to get involved in the business of murdering its own citizens.
It is also forcing the people to pay to support these people for the rest of their life, including the families of the victims. So if you want a free ride in life? just go off your neighbor eh? I mean that would beat being homeless right? And you get free medical treatment.
The arguement against life in prison, besides the financial obligations, is the fact that there is always a chance they may be set loose, and may be able to kill again in prison or otherwise. You are willing to trade that persons life for that of an innocent? With the death penalty there is a 100% chance these people will never kill again. There are som many things that can happen in the future, we are not fortune tellers. As long as that person is kept alive anywhere there is the possibility they can carry out their threats. There is only one 100% effective way to keep that from happening and that is death.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, it is a matter of survival for the rest of us. I know you may not see it that way, but to me, the trade off of one killer vs an innocent life is worth it.
To me, right and wrong is the most important rule for survival. Immoral societies die.
The chance they will be set loose is no rational argument to kill them, but it is EXACTLY the argument the socialists use when arguing against freedom. Every argument you are bringing forward is being used by the left to justify socialism. I find that when we find ourselves forced into using the bad arguments of the opposition tp defend our point of view, that's a good sign that our point of view is wrong.
If murder is wrong, then so is the death penalty, because it is murder.
That is where we disagree, I do not believe it is murder to take the life of someone threatening people, that is removing a threat from society. They are a threat when they say that they would kill again, or are unable to stop themselves from killing. Yes, that makes them a threat. Their actions have alreayd proven they will carry out these threats unless we prevent them from doing so. Now what I think is the proper level of prevention, and what you see as the proper level of prevention are the issue here. I think that a 100% chance of them not being able to ever kill again is the solution, and you are satisfied with a possibility of them doing it again, even if it is remote, it still exists. Though it gets less and less remote everytime one of these hits are carried out from prison.
They are no longer threatening people, but the same argument can be used for enslaving every businessman into a socialist serfdom.
We may as well lock everyone up forever because no one can be trusted.
You are desirous of murdering innocent men and women. that will always be the result of the policy you favor. Sorry, sudden;y you have a faith in the state that I can not share. I feel my position is consistent. Suddenly, someone who doesn't feel government can be trusted to conttol business is fully capable of deciding whether its citizens live or die.
Sorry. I don't share your faith in government.
fishermage.blogspot.com
What are you talking about? Everyone doesn't cut peoples skin off and make tapestry out of it .. these people not only have done these things they promise they will do it again givent eh chance. I was watching the History channel a couple of months ago ... even there was an episode where they went into detail on how hits were being carried out from behind prison walls to the outside. It is disturbing that we have not been able to give our people 100% protection from these creeps even after we catch them. The fact that this is still happening after these guys are caught shows us that it is not working, they will always be a threat as long as they live. I agree that our government is greatly lacking, and that is why I do not have faith that they will keep these people contained properly. It isn't like we have a lot of choices here. We either let them put them to death or the citizens will form lynch mobs and do it themselves, because containment is NOT working.
They ARE a threat... post #65 ( or around there) in this thread has all these links:
Gangs Thrive In Maximum Security
www.prisontalk.com/forums/showthread.php
www.gangsorus.com/aryan_brotherhood_prison_gang.htm
www.poligazette.com/2008/11/22/the-barrio-azteca-trial-and-the-prison-gang-cartel-interface/
www.insideprison.com/nuestra-familia-prison-gang.asp
Even police have been correupted to carry out hits for these people abd assist them to escape:
rawstory.com/news/2008/Two_NYPD_mafia_cops_sentenced_to_0307.html
www.thelocal.se/article.php
Murder ordered by mobile from prison
cms.met.police.uk/news/convictions/murder_ordered_by_mobile_from_prison
Killer ordered 'hit' from prison
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7300911.stm
Woman avoids prison in murder-for-hire case
www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_D_mafia06.2cce5db.html
Inmate charged in murder of prison nurse
allnurses.com/nursing-news/inmate-charged-murder-73487.html
From prison to Nantucket, house painters at the center of a murder
www.wickedlocal.com/capecod/homepage/x1593366114/From-prison-to-Nantucket-house-painters-at-the-center-of-a-murder
This goes on and on .... Case after case, No, people are "not" safe when these guys just go to jail. There needs to be final resolution. Oh yea FYI My friends daughter was molested and assaulted but survived, and yes she has very much expressed that she thinks all these people should be put to death, so she can know that these people will not return. Why don;t you start asking them, there are support forums for these people, you go ask them how they feel and I am sure you will get the same sentiment. These people ARE being punished by having to support these creeps with their tax dollars, the victims are being terrorized by there mere existance after commiting such atrocities.
www.insideprison.com/nuestra-familia-prison-gang.asp
What are you talking about? Everyone doesn't cut peoples skin off and make tapestry out of it .. these people not only have done these things they promise they will do it again givent eh chance. I was watching the History channel a couple of months ago ... even there was an episode where they went into detail on how hits were being carried out from behind prison walls to the outside. It is disturbing that we have not been able to give our people 100% protection from these creeps even after we catch them. The fact that this is still happening after these guys are caught shows us that it is not working, they will always be a threat as long as they live. I agree that our government is greatly lacking, and that is why I do not have faith that they will keep these people contained properly. It isn't like we have a lot of choices here. We either let them put them to death or the citizens will form lynch mobs and do it themselves, because containment is NOT working.
They ARE a threat... post #65 ( or around there) in this thread has all these links:
Gangs Thrive In Maximum Security
www.prisontalk.com/forums/showthread.php
www.gangsorus.com/aryan_brotherhood_prison_gang.htm
www.poligazette.com/2008/11/22/the-barrio-azteca-trial-and-the-prison-gang-cartel-interface/
www.insideprison.com/nuestra-familia-prison-gang.asp
Even police have been correupted to carry out hits for these people abd assist them to escape:
rawstory.com/news/2008/Two_NYPD_mafia_cops_sentenced_to_0307.html
www.thelocal.se/article.php
Murder ordered by mobile from prison
cms.met.police.uk/news/convictions/murder_ordered_by_mobile_from_prison
Killer ordered 'hit' from prison
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7300911.stm
Woman avoids prison in murder-for-hire case
www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_D_mafia06.2cce5db.html
Inmate charged in murder of prison nurse
allnurses.com/nursing-news/inmate-charged-murder-73487.html
From prison to Nantucket, house painters at the center of a murder
www.wickedlocal.com/capecod/homepage/x1593366114/From-prison-to-Nantucket-house-painters-at-the-center-of-a-murder
This goes on and on .... Case after case, No, people are "not" safe when these guys just go to jail. There needs to be final resolution. Oh yea FYI My friends daughter was molested and assaulted but survived, and yes she has very much expressed that she thinks all these people should be put to death, so she can know that these people will not return. Why don;t you start asking them, there are support forums for these people, you go ask them how they feel and I am sure you will get the same sentiment. These people ARE being punished by having to support these creeps with their tax dollars, the victims are being terrorized by there mere existance after commiting such atrocities.
www.insideprison.com/nuestra-familia-prison-gang.asp
Sorry, I simply do not have the faith in government that you do. Death penalties guarantee that innocent people will be killed intentionally by the state, which means by us. Sorry, I don't want to be forced to pay for murder of innocent people. That is far worse than the families of murder victims having to pay for the justice system. They are harmed no more than any of us in this. Again you are making purely emotional arguments, not a reasonable one.
The death penalty is not justice, it isn't restitution. It is murder by state. Revenge is wrong. It is as wrong as killing someone and making a lampshade, curtains, and a slinky skirt out of their skin.
Murder is murder. What you do with the dead body matters not once you have murdered. Again that is just emotionalism for the effect.
You want the state to become those murderers, to kill, on a regular basis, innocent people.
Gotta agree to disagree with this one. I understand and sympathize with your posistion, but I feel it is just as evil as someone wearing a full suit of human skin, with dried human eyeballs as charms on a bracelet.
None of this has anything to do with whether people can be trusted with the power you want to give them.
You can pull my heartstrings, but with me, reason always prevails.
fishermage.blogspot.com
The death penalty does not deter crime. The death penalty is revenge killing, nothing more. I am very much against murder, and that's what the death penalty is.
I wonder how many people have been put to death based on eyewitness testimony?
I can. In some places it is as little as 50p a day.
In more developed countries it cost a lot more.
If I put a million pounds cash ina room full of people, innocent or nt they will all start killing each other.
There are some sums of money that take longer than one lifetime to acquire. These kinds of amounts are worth dying to protect.
And for me, anything worth dying for is usually worth killing for for also.
Also, money can buy you happiness. It often does.
...There is no correlation with money and happiness...
There isn't anything bad in my life mate. I live in paradise.
I have lived on the street and I've lived in a mansion.
I wasn't unhappy doing either.
One thing I have learnt from these experiences is the difference wealth can bring to your life. A lot of people take it for granted.
And yet almost every divorce comes when hubby loses his job. If you think things are bad during the good times, they are a lot worse during the hard times.
When you can't afford healthcare and your child dies, it is a tragic thing not a moment of joy and happiness.
If you think money doesn't buy you happiness, you quite simply know very little about being poor.
Are you even reading what im saying...
below the poverty line (ie poor) it does give you happiness.
But to quote what I said earlier, past your basic needs there there is no correlation.
Divorce from job loss? I found no studies of that, Id like to know if you have actual evidence or if its all anecdotal on your part. The experiences wealth gives you are no more "happy making" than the experiences life gives you when your anywhere else above the poverty line. Again, thats a fact, there is no argument, I've said this several times, Its 1 google away to get thousands of academic papers and research supporting that fact.
Can't afford healthcare again is a poverty issue, you need to read my posts before you try to argue a point.
I never said your life is miserable... Im just saying money has nothing to do with it.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
There's no absolute right or wrong. No one could criticize others' doing.
Everything happens according to a certain reason
i agree with the death penalty.everyone should be responsible to his behaviour and be punished by the evil things he did. no one has the right to end others' lives, if he do, he shall be sent to guillotine t o atone for his crime.
"No one has the right to end others' lives" and "he shall be sent to the guillotine" doesn't really mix: what are you going to do with the guillotine? Because you certainly can't use it, then you've ended another persons life.
actually, what the death penalty could do is only to make casualty feel better.
It can't change anything that has happened