I voted "No" because an eye-for-an-eye mentality does not fit into my personal philosophical beliefs about the potential of an individual to change. And my opinion is, that, even if I am without religious background, people who see themselves within a Christian, Muslim, Jewish or other biblical religious community - I can't speak for far easter religions because of my lack of knowledge - can't combine the legal death penalty with the commandments of their prophets. For those, death penalty can just be possible if there is a strong secular mindset in political life.

A-FRICKING-MEN! :up:

I take it some individuals have been disproportionately naughty across the pond?

*fires up BBC website*

I'm of the opinion that the Death Penalty is an appropriate punishment for someone who has committed murder. An eye for an eye I say, regardless of whether or not the execution would have an effect as a deterent or really lower prison overcrowding which it really wouldn't do.

Sure, there might be a few innocent soles who will be executed but nothing is perfect in life. Death in itself, to me, isn't a bad thing for anyone. It's the pain associated with it that is bad. There might be life after death. Who really knows.

If there is a heaven and hell then your afterlife will head to the appropriate place anyway. So if that person is innocent and a good person, then all is well in the end.

If I had really commited murder, I'd prefer the death penalty because as some have pointed out, staying alive and lingering in a cell for the rest of your life leaves you far worse off unless you go to hell which must be very bad and maybe you'd like to avoid that and become a better person in prison hoping to convince God to eventually bring you to heaven. :hmm:

Why should the hard working people, have to pay for the crimes that other people have committed. Personally I dont feel I should have to pay for their crimes.

What is the average cost of one inmate to stay in prison for a day?

Then do the math and see what it costs for the prison to stay up and running to house these people.

ATT: Cynicism applied!
Do the math and tell me the costs that affect me as a tax payer if your wife gives birth to a handicapped child.

I always prefer to pay taxes for social systems, health care and good prisons to saving the money on the cost of the lives of people.

I'm for it, but in certain extreme cases, like serial killers, where there's no hope of rehabilitation, and putting them back on the street poses a risk to the public.

Whether or not the death penalty is availiable is not the issue, its using intelligent prison sentencing, i.e. no more allowing people to serve 10 years for murder and let them apply for parole. :yep:

I see you point but wouldn't I be paying for that as well.

I pay my taxes and dont gripe about it at all.

Just my opinion on it. There are obvious reason when and where to use I am not saying just use it all the time. This is contradictory to my earlier statement and I should have chosen better words agree.

And if there isn't an after life?.......:nope:

You appear to aspouse an opinion that values human life fairly cheaply. :yep:

What if the unfortunate innocent person was you or your child or anyone else that you care about? :hmm:

But I guess that wouldn't be such a big deal, at least some of those murderers got what they deserved! :roll:

I get your point more clearly now... I just wanted to outline that in all matters of society, one shouldn't rank the costs over the beings, even if those beings committed crimes beyond theft or excess of self-defence.

The death penalty, though not discussed in parliament, is a thing called for by the public always at times when a new crime happens that can be exploited by the sensationist media. But as emotionally and irrationally we perceive such crimes, often very cruel, as rationally we have to think about the chance of having the wrong man found guilty (a very popular and considerable argument), the possibility of a psychotherapy that could actually help the criminal (if well-funded and professional) or the likelyhood of a gain emerging from keeping the guilty alive (but in prison) such as learning from the sociology, psychology and history of him or her becoming a criminal.
But all these arguments are worth nothing if the idea is not established that man is not evil from his birth on, and that society and family play a role in the development of a human being.

This discussion is a complicated matter. "An eye for an eye" is an easyily outspoken but in cases devastating answer, in my honest opinion. And my guess is that the more complicated answer, which I for sure cannot utter, is the right one.

I must admit this is one of those questions that has never really bothered me. If someone murdered one of my family members I wouldn't care one whit if the state had the legal authority to execute him or not...because I would kill him myself and never think twice about it.

I'm not the least bit interested in the state meting out justice for someone who murders my little boys or my wife. I'll do that myself, thank you very much. And I don't give a hoot about what society says or what anyone might think about it.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying what I believe.

I just play a different game, with different rules, from most people, that's all.

As long as you don't meet anyone else "playing a different game"

Having said that are you prepared to what you would put the remainder of your family through? You got the satisfaction of killing a killer then you go to jail. Your wife dead and you in jail. What happens to the kids? One of your kids dead what happens to your wife and kids? No bread winner, loose the house got to move to a crappy side of town where they dare not go out after dark. Mom has to work 2 jobs to try and make ends meet. Food stamps? Is further devastation of your family worth it?

As this thread clearly demonstrates: much of so-called 'public opinion' regarding execution, be it opinion fostered by the media, lapped up by the common man and bandied about in the corridors of power by the wealthy elite; is saturated with emotion and other baggage that does not lend itself to coherent decision making. And whilst I believe a statement of justice be decided cold and calculatingly, that also lacks the necessary humanity. Relying solely on logic and clarity is as bad as basing ones decisions on emotion alone.

Ideals such as justice are mere shadows of perfection dimly perceived by man and realised with the benefit of all of his innate imperfections. Therefore the pure ideal rarely comes to resemble itself in practise. Because of this inevitable error I can never accept such a final revenge as a just punishment as the consequences of a grave mistake are incapable of being undone. Besides, a more fitting claim of life imprisonment ought to mean exactly that - LIFE. Not 18 years then parole and redemption.

What about executing mental prisoners?
 

By mental I mean mentally retarded people who dont know the've done anyhting wrong which may seem cruel to many,But it doesnt have to be cruel.For example Slap a micky mouse hat on their head and tell them there going to disney land.

"Dih-nee-lan!"as hes led down the hall to the gas chambers.

"Dih-nee-lan!" as he is strapped down.

"Dih-nee-lan!" as gas fills the room.

"Dih-nee...." as he asphixiates(i know it spelled wrong)
(this is from the skippy list)