Jump to content
Sal's RuneScape Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Emanick1

Death Penalty

Should it be legal?  

138 members have voted

  1. 1. Should it? Well!?

    • Yes.
      79
    • No.
      59


Recommended Posts

Wrong. Very wrong. The Death Penalty fails in many cases, people will be alive after two or three jolts from the electric chair, people will need multiple injections... It is very often that these things fail, causing great deals of pain.

 

The electric chair is currently used in 5 states, and the executioned picks that or injection...

 

Lethal injection has only failed once and that's because the person inserting the needle missed the vein and hit the flesh - that's the operators fault and the only one that I find where it has actually "failed." And during lethal injection you are induced into a coma that uses more dosage than when doctors put a patient into a medical coma. That will knock you out fast and for a long time, they won't feel any pain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The death penatly is humane in the sense of how it's done, the worse the executioned feels is the pinprick of the needle.

I'm not saying that they're going to be in pain. The fact that you're killing them is inhumane, not how you're killing them.

 

And I agree with you that felons don't suffer one bit. I think that incarcerating them would make them suffer a bit more - pay for their crimes rather than get off the hook without having to feel anything anymore.

 

2. Does somebody who hasen't treated someone in a humane way deserve to be treated humanley in the first place? No, especially if you kill somebody they diden't show any compassion to the person they killed why should we show them any?

It's the government's job to protect everyone's basic human rights, not to determine who does and doesn't have them. Every single human being has the right to live. Saying that felons don't is only a few steps away from saying that disabled people don't. And then it's just a hop, skip and a jump to minorities.

Edited by Evin290

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's the government's job to protect everyone's basic human rights, not to determine who does and doesn't have them. Every single human being has the right to live. Saying that felons don't is only a few steps away from saying that disabled people don't. And then it's just a hop, skip and a jump to minorities.

 

I don't know exactly where you got the information that the government is supposed to protect everybodys rights and saying that criminals shoulden't have rights is nothing like saying disabled people shoulden't. Disabled people diden't do anything wrong the criminals did and should therefore pay accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The death penatly is humane in the sense of how it's done, the worse the executioned feels is the pinprick of the needle.
I don't think thats relevant, to me the method dosn't really matter the result is the same in any case.

 

But the role of a justice system isn't to churn out corpses.

2. Does somebody who hasen't treated someone in a humane way deserve to be treated humanley in the first place? No, especially if you kill somebody they diden't show any compassion to the person they killed why should we show them any?
Because that makes us no better than the criminals we're doing it to. Everybody has rights. and those should only be taken away to the point that they can do no harm to others. Edited by mystery_phill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest (CG)kody m ade

i remember living beside this realy realy fat family on well fair...i hated the kid and the family cuz while my mom strugled trying to suport 3 kids on her own the fat family had everything they shouldnt...with a big 50 inch screen tv...x box 360...like 3 computers...the works...it amazes me how a family who sits on well fair can do better then the sinngle working mom trying to keep her family alive :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because that makes us no better than the criminals we're doing it to. Everybody has rights. and those should only be taken away to the point that they can do no harm to others.

 

I disagree, I feel criminals get what they have coming to them. They shoulden't have rights, when they killed someone those rights should be forfit. It dosen't make any sense to keep them alive when they haven't done anything to deserve being alive, and have taken someone elses "right" to live.

 

i remember living beside this realy realy fat family on well fair...i hated the kid and the family cuz while my mom strugled trying to suport 3 kids on her own the fat family had everything they shouldnt...with a big 50 inch screen tv...x box 360...like 3 computers...the works...it amazes me how a family who sits on well fair can do better then the sinngle working mom trying to keep her family alive :wub:

 

Say what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's the government's job to protect everyone's basic human rights, not to determine who does and doesn't have them. Every single human being has the right to live. Saying that felons don't is only a few steps away from saying that disabled people don't. And then it's just a hop, skip and a jump to minorities.

 

I don't know exactly where you got the information that the government is supposed to protect everybodys rights

The Constitution. Or have they stopped using it nowadays?

 

and saying that criminals shoulden't have rights is nothing like saying disabled people shoulden't. Disabled people diden't do anything wrong the criminals did and should therefore pay accordingly.

"Pay accordingly"? That's complete bull. Taking away their freedom is a far more just punishment than taking away their life. And the reason I brought disabled people up is because once you remove someone's right to live, it's not so far from removing someone else's right to live. You can justify killing felons by saying "they deserve it," and you can justify killing disabled people by saying "it'll end their suffering," and you can justify killing minorities by saying "we're superior." There's always some kind of ridiculous justification. Why not draw the line and have the government never authorize the execution of its own citizens? Do you think the citizens of Wiemar Germany ever thought that they'd be dealing with genocide? No, they thought the Nazis would bring about a "just" and "fair" government. I know it seems like a great leap to you, but it really isn't. The line between justice and oppression is thin. Thin and blurry.

 

Because that makes us no better than the criminals we're doing it to. Everybody has rights. and those should only be taken away to the point that they can do no harm to others.

 

I disagree, I feel criminals get what they have coming to them. They shoulden't have rights, when they killed someone those rights should be forfit. It dosen't make any sense to keep them alive when they haven't done anything to deserve being alive, and have taken someone elses "right" to live.

Just because you don't think they deserve to be alive doesn't mean they should be killed. Let them live and suffer the consequences of their actions. Killing them is almost as bad as setting them free. They don't have to suffer guilt, imprisonment or anything. And again, the Constitution makes it abundantly clear that everyone has the right to live.

Edited by Evin290

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Constitution. Or have they stopped using it nowadays?

 

If I remember right, in the Declaration of Independence, you are supposedly granted life.

 

When you take another innocent life away (therefor murdering someone), you shouldn't have rights anymore. They are no better then scum if they murder someone, why should they be treated humanly? They did not do it to their victim(s), why should they be given kind treatment?

 

Why not draw the line and have the government never authorize the execution of its own citizens?

 

When the citizens execute the innocent (murdering). Those responsible need to be brought to justice, by the government(s) hand (the death penalty).

 

The line between justice and oppression is thin. Thin and blurry.

 

No, it is not. They are two totally different concepts, and ideals.

 

 

Just because you don't think they deserve to be alive doesn't mean they should be killed. Let them live and suffer the consequences of their actions.

 

Just like they let there victim(s) live?.....

 

Killing them is almost as bad as setting them free. They don't have to suffer guilt, imprisonment or anything. And again, the Constitution makes it abundantly clear that everyone has the right to live.

 

Those who have not murdered another has the right to live. Those that end another's right to live do not deserve the right to live themselves.

 

~John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it shouldn't. It's killing and it's useless. Death is not a punishment! If I was locked up in jail for 10 years I would pray for death. All they're doing is relieving someone of their punishment.

 

Now I believe in hell but if someone commited murder, I would want them to be punished in their life now. Rotting in a jail cell for decades is a punishment. A quick death by electricution is not.

 

And thats another thing, people think the death penalties are sooo painless and humane, just because theres no blood? I think scientists need a new study of electricity + Body. It's disgusting. They even have to blindfold the person so the people don't see their eyes blow up. Humane eh? like lethal injection. Your destroying a persons organs slowly. Again, humane?

 

Our punishment system is so flawed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now I believe in hell but if someone commited murder, I would want them to be punished in their life now.

Hell is the ultimate punishment. Why wouldn't you want them to suffer there? Do you have doubts about its existence? Do you want to make sure they're punished now, while alive, just in case?

Regardless of whether or not Hell exists, the State is separate from the Church. So it's the State's job to punish offenders now, not send them off to Hell to be punished.

Edited by Evin290

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ Yes. Kinda like fighting your own battles. The state really doesn't care if theres a hell or not they just seem to want you dead.

Which is exactly why I am opposed to the death penalty. If there isn't a hell (and I believe that there isn't) then the perpetrator of a horrible crime is getting away without having to be punished whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats what I mean. Death isn't a punishment. especially a quick death. Like I said, death is freedom from punishment. Why don't they just release everyone on death row while they're at it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ Yes. Kinda like fighting your own battles. The state really doesn't care if theres a hell or not they just seem to want you dead.

Which is exactly why I am opposed to the death penalty. If there isn't a hell (and I believe that there isn't) then the perpetrator of a horrible crime is getting away without having to be punished whatsoever.

I think death is a bit of a punishment. Some people sorta like living after all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think death is a bit of a punishment. Some people sorta like living after all...

Well, obviously people like living, but the punsihment stops the moment their brain stops working. They're not going to be able to contemplate "gee, I wish I were still alive" without a brain to contemplate things with. If they're imprisoned for life, they'll have to be constantly thinking about how they're not free and about what they did and how they deserve to be locked away. The latter seems like a far more fitting punishment to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think death is a bit of a punishment. Some people sorta like living after all...

Well, obviously people like living, but the punsihment stops the moment their brain stops working. They're not going to be able to contemplate "gee, I wish I were still alive" without a brain to contemplate things with. If they're imprisoned for life, they'll have to be constantly thinking about how they're not free and about what they did and how they deserve to be locked away. The latter seems like a far more fitting punishment to me.

 

 

if i had life and the death penelty was illegal id probably end up just being a total dick to everyone and spitting on guards n shizzle.

 

what more can they do, solitary confinement? Big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if i had life and the death penelty was illegal id probably end up just being a total dick to everyone and spitting on guards n shizzle.

 

what more can they do, solitary confinement? Big deal.

Being a jerk would stop getting fun after a while. And yes, solitary confinement is a big deal. Ask anyone who's had to endure it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if i had life and the death penelty was illegal id probably end up just being a total dick to everyone and spitting on guards n shizzle.

 

what more can they do, solitary confinement? Big deal.

Being a jerk would stop getting fun after a while. And yes, solitary confinement is a big deal. Ask anyone who's had to endure it.

 

 

 

how much you wana bet it wouldn't stop being fun for at least 10 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how much you wana bet it wouldn't stop being fun for at least 10 years.

Sure, get yourself a life sentence and be a jerk for ten years just to prove me wrong. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how much you wana bet it wouldn't stop being fun for at least 10 years.

Sure, get yourself a life sentence and be a jerk for ten years just to prove me wrong. :/

 

 

well ive been a jerk to some kids at school for about 5 years and it still extremely fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how much you wana bet it wouldn't stop being fun for at least 10 years.

Sure, get yourself a life sentence and be a jerk for ten years just to prove me wrong. :/

 

 

well ive been a jerk to some kids at school for about 5 years and it still extremely fun.

There is a big difference between school and death row :yay:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a big difference between school and death row :/ .

Yes, being a jerk to everyone in the Big House can cause major problems for you, like rape. And enduring that for ten years wouldn't quite be a picnic.

Edited by Evin290

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a big difference between school and death row :/ .

Yes, being a jerk to everyone in the Big House can cause major problems, like rape.

Also the fact after school you go home, and you don't live in a little cement room at school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how much you wana bet it wouldn't stop being fun for at least 10 years.

Sure, get yourself a life sentence and be a jerk for ten years just to prove me wrong. :/

 

 

well ive been a jerk to some kids at school for about 5 years and it still extremely fun.

There is a big difference between school and death row :yay:.

 

i said in my first post "if there was no death penelty" so there no death row

 

There is a big difference between school and death row :D .

Yes, being a jerk to everyone in the Big House can cause major problems for you, like rape. And enduring that for ten years wouldn't quite be a picnic.

 

i didnt say everyone. i said certian people, like guards, who cant rape you.

 

and what im trying to say is that being in jail for life with no chance of parole or any punishment worse then what you allready have isn't a good motivation to be good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines and Privacy Policy.