Is it wrong to issue a death penalty?

[DariusMoranda]

I will be brutally honest and simple as always, when it comes to opinions on such delicate subjects.

 

It might seems complicated, but, really, it isn't that much as it looks.

 

In my opinion, crimes such as rape, killing children, women and old, helpless people, tortures, serial and mass killings and similar vicious and brutal acts should be punished with an immediate death. But not all of them, not yet.

 

Bring 10 of those kind of criminals in public and shoot them in front of everyone, for example to the crowd.

That will surely reduce the number of such potential crimes in the next 10 years, when people see what became of those who were caught for making the life of innocent people miserable.

 

The rest of the criminals should get maximum of 40 years TILL THE DEATH PENALTY.

 

So, work hard, produce, fix and do any hard labor for the country and state interests, every day, then go to sleep in a 'flea box' , then continue with the same work the next day, all that for 40 years if you survive, then , off with you to the wall and shooting squad. That would be a proper punishment , full effect.

 

WHen it comes to the method of the death penalty, the savage thing for me are those rigged chairs, injections and gas chambers , etc, those should not be in use for the black work, because I think that no man should be exposed to a torment like that. Life should be hard for those people, not death.

 

Old fashioned firing squad is enough to do the job. If those criminals acted like animals, we should not.

 

Give them hard life to repent their crimes through hard labor being productive for the country, then execute the punishment, giving the convicted criminal a quick death. Simple as that.

 

I saw that kind of cruel individuals many times in the past in various situations and mercy was and stil is the last thing which came and comes to my mind, judging from what I saw as the result of the uneccesary violence towards the innocent.

 

Ruthless? Yes it is, but it is less ruthless to give someone a quick death, then what they did to their victims, while satisfying their own sick and twisted imagination.

 

Law and justice should be executed tough and rough, without compassion and mercy to those who didn't show the same.

 

With a soft approach to the matter, you lose order and order is the basic, the soil, an arch for every healthy and perspective society.

 

Culture exists for expressing artistic and intelectual freedom, sports are here for the healthy body and spirit, law and justice is a needful thing for protecting rights,to offer safety, to punish the vile.Everything has it's own purpose.The last one should be taken seriously and performed at the top level, just as it is.

 

 

 

Live happy and free! :thumbsup:

 

Moranda

[Balagor]

>snip<

Bring 10 of those kind of criminals in public and shoot them in front of everyone, for example to the crowd.

That will surely reduce the number of such potential crimes in the next 10 years, when people see what became of those who were caught for making the life of innocent people miserable.

>snip<

 

Or at the least increase traumas amongs the population, regarding those who has to look at it.

Wonder why I come to think at countries like Libia, Iraq, some African small states, etc :sick:

[marharth]

A lot of these are mentally ill people and you are killing them for doing something they didn't realize was wrong...

 

So can someone answer me directly, what is the point of killing someone for murder?

 

Are you willing to risk a life, or destroy one just to save money?

 

 

In some cases this is the same thing as a old cripple tripping and pushing someone over, that due to his inability to walk well, ends up killing the person.

 

Just because someone has a physical or mental disorder does not mean they should be killed for it.

 

Some of these people are without question a danger to society, but we should kill them for the way they were born or raised?

 

People need to quit acting like just because you kill someone, you are instantly evil and should be punished with the full force of the government. Killing is a act that could happen for many reasons, and a lot of the time the act of killing is considered heroic and good.

 

How do you think the Afghans feel about US troops being in their country, killing civilians and terrorists alike. I am sure that group would see that killing as evil, while most of the US thinks its good.

 

So let me ask this, when do you support killing, and when do you not support killing?

[JimboUK]

 

<snip>

 

 

In my opinion, crimes such as rape, killing children, women and old, helpless people, tortures, serial and mass killings and similar vicious and brutal acts should be punished with an immediate death. But not all of them, not yet.

 

</snip>

 

 

If the punishment for rape is the same as murder the result will be a lot of dead rape victims, why leave the only witness alive when killing them doesn't make the punishment any worse?

[DariusMoranda]

There are different types of crimes and levels of the same, therefore, I named only those which, from my point of view, should be punished with death or maximum prison sentence.

 

If a burglar is shot at someone's doorstep, because the homeowner saw the knife in burglar's hands, that is another story, completely. I don't think that the homeowner deserves the worst punishment for that, nor that is an act of evil, in that example.

 

Or if a man drives on a highway , where the speed limit is much higher then in the city and a drunk peasant tries to run over the highway all of a sudden and gets killed, if the driver wasn't drunk too or didn't hit the breaks , then he surely doesn't deserve a death penalty for what he done.

 

In both of these examples, those ones who committed an act of murder , didn't do it on purpose and with an intention, maybe it was victim's fault maybe someone was defending his life and killed his opponent in fear and affect or a victim simple jumped in front of the car , giving little time for a decision to the driver, etc, therefore, in both of these examples, if they did this without point of interest, they don't deserve death for someone elses mistake.

 

Years ago , here in my country, we had a case of rape which was all over the news and papers, because we don't have much of those kind of crimes here and indeed, it was shocking when it came to details.

 

Warning-don't read this if you are sensitive in any matter

 

I will be brief with this example as it is sickening.

 

Two construction workers picked on an underage female drifter, gave her a bottle of cheap brandy and took her in an unfinished building on which they were working on. She drank the whole bottle under force and fell in a comatose state, almost an alcohol delirium. Two of them sexually abused her for hours, literally, until she died.

They left her in her own feces, on unfinished brick separation, sat down, drank more and ate some sandwiches, then raped again, which she wasn't alive anymore. Then they beat her up, for fun. That was the moment whenone of them became aware that she is not alive. They escaped both to the home of one of them, together.

 

One of them is an average man, but the other one was a petty construction assistant, carrying buckets and tools and the rest of those simple jobs, due to his mental disability. He was retarded, low IQ and a police file behind him for various domestic aggressive behavior, like beating his family and praying on his own sister in a sexual way.

 

One of them was aware of the crime but the other one responded with no sense of guilt, being unaware that the act which he performed was a crime. Criminally insane in other words.

 

Police caught them, they even tried to resist the arrest, so the cops had to teach them a lesson at the spot , to bring them in.

 

Those two were the last convicts which received the death sentence, before it was shutdown for good by the state. They had a fast but fair trial, first guy admitted his crime , the second one couldn't handle the trial because of his mental state but according to all the evidences and words of his buddy, he was there and performed this act.

 

They were brought to prison where they had their last meal, then they were executed by 3 shots in the heart area, each one of them.

 

Take this particular situation and put yourself in the judge's skin:

 

What would you do in this case? Would you feel sorry for that one guy who is mentally disabled?

 

Would you show them mercy?

 

A has no rights to decide when and how someone will die. That is one of the most common statements of those who oppose the death penalties.

 

What about those two I mentioned? Did they had rights to decide in the name of that poor girl, when and how she is going to have sex and to die ina horrible death?

 

I don't think so.

 

Order is needed where it is due and things which brings one among the people MUST be strict and cold, no matter what. If it is not, then people will suffer half-protected with hordes of all kind of savages, praying at random.

 

As I've already said, when we love, we kiss. When we paint, we enjoy in it. When we play football , we feel healthy and in a good shape.

 

When it comes to the segment of law, justice and order-

 

We are serious about it.

 

Speaking of Libya , I was in Libya, 4 times, actually, never saw similar things.

 

And 2 times I visited Africa.

 

Neither one time I saw mass executions live on TV. Those kinds of stuff happens usually when a revolution is on and some government is doomed to fall, speaking of Africa. Anarchy brings that. When there is no order. ;)

 

And I spoke a bit literally, I admit, when I said about public execution.

 

I rather thought about putting it in every newspapers and TV station-

 

' Breaking news! A rapist was executed last night! '

 

And no, I don't think that a potential rapist will think about killing his victim, because fear is a very powerful thing when it is used properly and on right places. Speaking of rapists , they are usually weak minded and cowards, they are usually 'strong' when their victims are helpless, which is almost always. If a potential attacker sees the news and his 'collegue' dead in a soundproof cell, he will think twice about his future plans. Not to mention 20-30 years + death at the very end.

 

Hit the cruel one with a double cruelty. He afraids of it, because he knows the effects of his own 'work'

 

 

 

:thumbsup:

 

Moranda

[Balagor]

The mentally retarded was not aware what he was doing, and should be placed in a treatment program in a mental hospital.

The two other guys, who new what they were doing, should serve a life long sentence in jail, doing work for the society. Killing them does not bring the girl back, nor bring her parents grief to an end. Most important thing is that they (the offenders) are not able to commit a crime anymore, ever. To keep us save.

By killing them we are in danger of creating an atmosphere of anger and hatred. The "mob syndrome". I understand your feelings with such an outrageous crime, but still, if we act like "them", we are in great danger of become like them.

Last we had this debate ( a year ago ), I compared some US states with my country, DK. We have no death penalty. Here the change of being murdered is 1 out of 100.000. In the US states with death penalty, the change is 1 out of 20.000. So even with a death penalty, you can have 5 times as much murders, as in a country with no death penalty.

[Surenas]

We are proudly following the EU directives in the matter, Balagor. They say "no death penalty, neither under peace nor war conditions", or there it goes, the membership in the EU. Actually that's one of the still rare advantages we as Europeans may draw form the EU construct of today. What others do to their people is their business, we better stay out with a shake of the head.

[marharth]

The mentally retarded was not aware what he was doing, and should be placed in a treatment program in a mental hospital.

The two other guys, who new what they were doing, should serve a life long sentence in jail, doing work for the society. Killing them does not bring the girl back, nor bring her parents grief to an end. Most important thing is that they (the offenders) are not able to commit a crime anymore, ever. To keep us save.

By killing them we are in danger of creating an atmosphere of anger and hatred. The "mob syndrome". I understand your feelings with such an outrageous crime, but still, if we act like "them", we are in great danger of become like them.

Last we had this debate ( a year ago ), I compared some US states with my country, DK. We have no death penalty. Here the change of being murdered is 1 out of 100.000. In the US states with death penalty, the change is 1 out of 20.000. So even with a death penalty, you can have 5 times as much murders, as in a country with no death penalty.

This...

 

There is reasons that people commit crime, most of the people who commit robbery need the money to live safely.

 

Most of the people who commit murder, if not all of them, do it out of revenge or out of a mental illness.

 

The mental illness should be pretty easy to agree with, the person is messed up in the head and should not be killed for a disorder.

 

Now for the revenge... A lot of the time people kill someone since the justice system can not do it. If someone rips you off for all your funds, and you know who it was but can't get any evidence for example. The justice system may not work even if you have all the evidence in the world. They may of legally ripped you off. This person is dealing with a life changing event by losing all of his money, but he can not do anything about it. What do you think the death plenty is? Its a way to serve justice by punishing something with their life that has already pasted.

 

Would you let this man who just got ripped off murder the person who ripped him off?

 

In short, if you kill from revenge then its the same thing as the death penalty in the sense that your doing it for no other reason but revenge.

 

If you kill due to a mental disorder, then you don't even have much control over it.

 

 

And coming back to the tax money thing, if you were to have prisoners that committed murder knowingly work certain jobs and still get fed and human rights, they would make money for the government.

 

In my eyes, murders should not even be punished. I see anyone who commits murder on purpose as mentally ill and they should just be cut off from society, but still be able to live like a normal person.

 

Going even further, I don't think ANY crime should be dealt with for the sole purpose of punishment.

 

You get robbed, the person goes to prison.

 

Now what happens? He uses YOUR tax money, and basically robs you even more. There is no reason to punish the person, it helps no one at all.

 

I think crimes like robbery should be dealt with by putting the person in a government job that allows the person to pay back the money.

 

Crimes like murder should be a life sentence in a high security city like place cut off from society. They should be allowed to get mental help and have human rights. They could do certain jobs to be able to fund the families of the person they murdered (since a lot of times killing a working parent can destroy a family) and have part of the funds used for government funding.

 

Rape should be like the above, but the sentence should only be 10 years if it is determined the person is not mentally ill in any way.

 

Assault should not be punished at all if no injuries are given. If injuries are given then they should have to pay the person for any medical help.

 

And a lot of people are going to say "OMG BIGGER GOV NOOOOOOOOO!1111"

 

Well the prison system is just like above, minus the human rights and tax dollars. By doing what I suggested, the average person would have to pay less in tax, instead of having to pay more. That way if you get robbed, you don't get ripped off. If your family gets murdered, you make the murderer pay YOU for what he did.

[Balagor]

@ marharth

Well first, I don´t see jails as a punishment, since I do not believe in punishment either. Punishment=revenge=hatred. However I will admit that I would feel that hatred, should anything happend to me or mine. But as a well functional being I (hope) I am able to overcome my feelings. Thus I do not see jail/death penalty as a punishment, but a mean to isolate the violater, so at least no one else will suffer in the future.

Your idea with cities is only for countries with a major crime rate, I guess, and it will cost lots of taxpayer money. Those cities needs to be run in some way, have infrastructure, etc.

In Denmark we do (as you propose) have programmes putting the convicts into puplic service for a certain amount of time. It works, a great percentage never fall back into their criminal way of live. These programmes are mostly for robbers, burglers, etc. it is not for hardcore killers. Those we keep locked up either in jail or mental hospitals. In both cases they will be monitered by a shrink.

We actually do have killers that after a long sentence have returned to the society, with no problems. Some even have a job. I am not offended that they walk around, and alive. In DK prisons we try hard to rehab the convicts, and many times with succes. I still think we have to look for the causes to the crimes in our societies, and not just kill of the symptoms. Otherwise we will never learn.

[marharth]

@ marharth

Well first, I don´t see jails as a punishment, since I do not believe in punishment either. Punishment=revenge=hatred. However I will admit that I would feel that hatred, should anything happend to me or mine. But as a well functional being I (hope) I am able to overcome my feelings. Thus I do not see jail/death penalty as a punishment, but a mean to isolate the violater, so at least no one else will suffer in the future.

Your idea with cities is only for countries with a major crime rate, I guess, and it will cost lots of taxpayer money. Those cities needs to be run in some way, have infrastructure, etc.

In Denmark we do (as you propose) have programmes putting the convicts into puplic service for a certain amount of time. It works, a great percentage never fall back into their criminal way of live. These programmes are mostly for robbers, burglers, etc. it is not for hardcore killers. Those we keep locked up either in jail or mental hospitals. In both cases they will be monitered by a shrink.

We actually do have killers that after a long sentence have returned to the society, with no problems. Some even have a job. I am not offended that they walk around, and alive. In DK prisons we try hard to rehab the convicts, and many times with succes. I still think we have to look for the causes to the crimes in our societies, and not just kill of the symptoms. Otherwise we will never learn.

Ok I will even fall back on the life sentence for murder. They should be watched for a certain time while in prison, and if they seem completely mentally stable they can be let out.

 

What I am saying, is make the cites function in a way that the people living there would have to pay for the city...

 

Make it almost like a entirely separate economy. People outside of the prison would need to watch it to make sure it stays safe, but prison should not be a place that violate human rights, and has bad living conditions. I am simply suggesting for prisons to be turned into a better living environment with its own economy. This way people could be mentally dealt with a lot easier, without having prison trauma.

 

Now I see my above system as a way of isolating without violating their rights. This way you do not have to kill them, or punish them in a prison system.