Death Penalty

[Gryph]

..although the convicted did a horrible thing, i dont think the judge should have the power to tell what the convicted should be able to do or not to do... so by executing the convicted, is that some sort of justice that people are trying to find?.. get what im saying?..  we shouldn't kill another person just because that person killed someone...  its.. immoral.. and none of the people that lives on this earth should have that power..

 

thats what i think...

In theory that would be nice, but the human race has always been interested in lethal revenge. Even in the bible it was like that, people were killed for their sins.

 

But if there is going to be the death penalty, I think the criminal should be killed in a manner worse than their victim. If a criminal shot someone in the head, shoot the criminal in the hands, the feet, and then in the eyes. Just kidding ofcourse, but I think murderers, child molestors, and terrorists should be in maximum amount of pain for maximum amount of time.

[Jjangthekid]

grphonklaw i get what your saying but i think the parents of the victim.or something like that should decide upon what should be done with the convicted...

[Wizard]

I don't know, but there is a jury guys.

[Agozer]

grphonklaw i get what your saying but i think the parents of the victim.or something like that should decide upon what should be done with the convicted...

If things would go that far, there would be nothing but death penalties....or death by torture.

[ugenn]

Interesting to see that majority voted for a nay (as of 20/05 GMT 2000).

 

Idealistically, I would say nay too, but realistically, it costs money to run a prison, and as prison population increases, operation costs would go up as well. That money has to come from somewhere, and that usually means from the taxpayer. I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to keep some degenerate scum alive...so I would have to say a yay, although the sort of crimes that would warrant a death penalty, and the amount of power given to judges to award death penalities is debatable.

[Gryph]

Interesting to see that majority voted for a nay (as of 20/05 GMT 2000).

 

Idealistically, I would say nay too, but realistically, it costs money to run a prison, and as prison population increases, operation costs would go up as well. That money has to come from somewhere, and that usually means from the taxpayer. I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to keep some degenerate scum alive...so I would have to say a yay, although the sort of crimes that would warrant a death penalty, and the amount of power given to judges to award death penalities is debatable.

You're saying that as if the majority of people in prison are on death row. There aren't THAT many death row inmates to make that big of a difference.

[ugenn]

Interesting to see that majority voted for a nay (as of 20/05 GMT 2000).

 

Idealistically, I would say nay too, but realistically, it costs money to run a prison, and as prison population increases, operation costs would go up as well. That money has to come from somewhere, and that usually means from the taxpayer. I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to keep some degenerate scum alive...so I would have to say a yay, although the sort of crimes that would warrant a death penalty, and the amount of power given to judges to award death penalities is debatable.

You're saying that as if the majority of people in prison are on death row. There aren't THAT many death row inmates to make that big of a difference.

If you just look at yearly figures, it's not a big deal. But if death row didnt exist, and these ppl are given life sentences, then the figures become cumulative. And it does add up to make a difference in the long run.

[Gryph]

Interesting to see that majority voted for a nay (as of 20/05 GMT 2000).

 

Idealistically, I would say nay too, but realistically, it costs money to run a prison, and as prison population increases, operation costs would go up as well. That money has to come from somewhere, and that usually means from the taxpayer. I don't like the idea of my tax money being used to keep some degenerate scum alive...so I would have to say a yay, although the sort of crimes that would warrant a death penalty, and the amount of power given to judges to award death penalities is debatable.

Well I don't think killing them all off is a good solution. But they do take up resources...perhaps they can be used for manual labor. Work you worthless dregs of society!! That's what you get for murdering someone.

[Agozer]

I just wish that people would love eachother and there would be flowers and birds and laughter and stuff.....no, really.

 

Those convicts could be used as....hell, I don't know anymore. They take up resources but killing them isn't too "humane" either. Oh the agony.

Edited May 20, 2004 by Agozer

[Wizard]

My idea is going to rule if it gets passed.

[Skythe]

They should be killed the same way as their victims were.

 

Kill them all. They are breathing my air.

 

 

ENOUGH WITH THE DAMN IRAQ CRAP!!!

[OverlordMondo]

Why kill them? They could be used so much better as test subjects.

 

Or we could use them for my new reality show!!!

Where we lock people in a mall and attack with a horde of zombies!!!

The winner goes free to kill again, to support the next series!!!

[taratata]

Just a question: did any of you think about judicial mistakes? Quite hard to correct if the person is dead, isn't it?

[Skythe]

Stupid people are mistakes on this planet.

[Fatal Rose]

I vote yes. Those Child molesters deserve to DIE! What usually happens is that when they get out of prison they go and rape a child again! So they deserve to die a slow and painful death.