:up:

great, now they can save tax payers some money, go back to hanging and firing squads instead of fancy pain free ways to kill.

its a punishment sentence reserved for the worst crimes and the most deserving of it, its not supposed to be a humane and nice experience.

But but...
 

The Liberals will cry.:wah:

Well there's the rub. When guilt is far,... far,... far... beyond a reasonable doubt a death penalty is entirely proportional to the crime but can we trust the government not to screw it up?

I'd think that's the idea with these lengthy appeals processes that capital criminals get these days. It didn't always be like now. For example the killers in Truman Capote's "in cold blood" were executed only 5 years after their conviction (1960 to 65). Now it averages what,? 20 years or so?

Between this much lengthened appeals process and the advent of DNA and other scientific testing though I think it's now possible to determine guilt with a lot more certainty than at any time in the past.

He say's that like it's a bad thing! :hmmm:

Seriously though, when fighting monsters you must gaze at least long enough to learn how to defeat them or they will destroy what you are fighting to defend. Nietzsche doesn't really address that little detail.

There's another quote I've always liked that's far less negative and far more productive:

"Yea though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I shall fear no evil.
For I am the meanest, toughest son of a bitch in the valley."

and of course Patton said:

"I want you to stop thinking about what he's gonna do to you and start thinking about what you're gonna do to him."

You just can't go into a fight thinking you're gonna loose or you will loose. Self doubt is a cancer that eats away at the will. It's contagious too. That's the real abyss to worry about imo.

I am Liberal and we need to kill more wastes of oxygen, rather than feeding them, and giving them TV and books, and schooling, and free room and board. I'd rather buy a tank, or pay for Obamas vacations than pay my taxmoney on blatantly guilty killers.

They disrespect life, they lose there own.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

Or if you do not want to click, "an eye for an eye"

This would be considered a tad racist these days.:hmmm:

Hammurabi law is a bit dated don't you think?:)
At least the Freemen got their medical bill paid.
Or would you throw the first stone at a convicted whore?:06:

Yeah take it literal. Nice strawman,

I summed it up as an eye for an eye.

I love when people zoom past the point, because it does not fit thier agenda. You can find alot of archaic crap in the bible too, but that is holy word, and the brutal crap is generally ignored. I am sure you made that discernment before, but here, nope,...Once again, awesome deflection, but it don't work on me. Catholics eat pork, and we don't stone women. 2 things we should and shouldn't be doing if you read the Bible.

If you are calling execution barbaric, then I disagree, it is merciful to the victims, and survivors.

Why should a liberal have to discipline people on what justice is, sitting in a cell, free meals, heat and library, schooling, trade programs, is not justice.

I am glad you want to feed them and school them, I don't.

I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here and I agree that those with no respect for the life of their peers should be treated just as disrespectfully up to and including ending them. Too many people are all touchy feely about the comfort of murderers prior to their execution. That one guy in Ohio is a prime example. On death row for thirty years. Long enough to become so obese that he feared an excruciating death. Then he successfully lobbies for a stay on those grounds. Too bad we had to wait for him to die naturally, which he did.:down:

Torture the torturers and rape the rapists, eh?


Not sure about the hyper-aggressive tone this thread is taking, seems like whenever this kind of thing comes up forum members slobber all over the gleaming sword of vengeance, trying to outdo each other in bloodthirsty vows.

August - I see where you're coming from, and yes, technical evidence gathering and interpretation has come a long way. But we've had the use of DNA evidence for quite a few decades now and there are still cases of innocents sent to Death Row. I don't think the economic argument for the death penalty outweighs the moral argument against it.

Definitely we're closer to excluding reasonable doubt in some cases, I just don't believe that taking an absolutely irrevocable step is ever necessary in criminal justice. Especially where guilt is determined in an adversarial jury trial.

Ruffling feathers is fun Wolferz.
Makes ya feel alive.:D

I kinda feel the same way you do, you just stated it in a more tactful way. But...

I can understand why anti abortionists are they way they are, (though I do not agree with the tactics) I can even get the silly PETA people who splash paint on furs....

But I do not understand how so many people (I admit, it is alot) could show more empathy towards a dreg of society, than the victim of the crime.

I do not get it, if morality is your reason for your beliefs, then what about the morality of the action that got them there.? (we cannot kill him it's wrong...What did he do?...He raped and killed a woman and 2 babies....OK, lets feed him until he is elderly, give him free healthcare, and put him through school.) You know how much I would have to pay for that? I am about to commit a crime!

This anti death penalty is so dripping with hollywood Melancholy and zero reason, or regard for a smooth running society of laws.

(Edit: I love Texas)

How do I feel about ignorance and apathy?

Don't know.
Don't care.

Not just me that noticed that then, happens a lot in threads about criminals or people who have been suspected of wrongdoing in society and/or the laws eyes. The old mob mentality, once upon a time it would have resulted in pitchforks and torches, at least now it's just hastily typed words on a forum, for now anyway. I think that there's become a detachment from the law enforcing section of government and the society it serves, some Americans see police officers as tools of oppression, some British see the police as being corrupt and self-serving. As such there is a gut instinct to circumnavigate the due process that society created in th first place, thus taking us back to square one before the police were invented and the only way to solve crime was to commit crime or be very rich. Furthermore, the fact that mob mentality is incredibly easy to stir up in modern media, just look at the immigration issue in the UK or politics in the US, means that more frequently the law enforcement find themselves lagging behind in dispatching the justice demanded by the community, who have already formed a mob, got their pitchforks and torches together, decided who did it, how they should be executed and where and when before the police have even got into their cruiser.
Rapid and widespread public social communication = double edged sword.

Can you guarantee that innocent people will never get convicted of crimes they did not commit? This can and has happened with disturbing frequency in the past and not always because of forensic limitations.

As Tchocky notes our justice system is adversarial in nature. That means judgements are a product of the abilities of the lawyers involved as much as the evidence presented. Miscarriages of justice will happen but prison sentences can be commuted, the death penalty once carried out cannot.