Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
Steingrim
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:48 am
Posts: 4
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:45 pm 
 

What are your opinions/viewpoints of the death penalty today?

Top
 Profile  
josephus
Metalhead

Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:04 am
Posts: 1288
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:31 pm 
 

Tricky one for me, this. I wouldn't mind people being executed when it is absolutely and totally certain/obvious that they are guilty. An example would be someone murdering twenty people at the superbowl, on live national television, and confessing to it as well. However, it's not always going to be that clear cut, and I hate the thought of a innocent person being executed.
_________________
Carrying Concealed

Top
 Profile  
AurvandiL
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:22 am
Posts: 1000
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:22 pm 
 

But then again, No one is innocent.

Ok, that's a bit extreme.

On a moral point of view, I do not condone Death Penalty. I think we are worth better that the Talion law.

But on a social/societal point of view, I think some criminals won't be "cured", and are a danger to society. I'm thinking about pedophile / kid murderers. I think those people should be killed, plain and simple.
Also, convicts cost heaps of money.

But this is an endless topic.

Top
 Profile  
rexxz
Retired

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 8:45 pm
Posts: 8676
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:23 pm 
 

I agree with the death penalty as a method of justice, but the manner in which it is carried out in the US is a joke; costs too much money.

Top
 Profile  
The_Count
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:04 pm
Posts: 407
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:27 pm 
 

rexxz wrote:
I agree with the death penalty as a method of justice, but the manner in which it is carried out in the US is a joke; costs too much money.



If I had to pick I would rather just be shot anyway, I do not like the idea of lethal injection.
_________________
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I'd be more than welcome to take on the jihadists. If they think they are the only ones who know how to make home made bombs and use guns... well they know nothing about redneck America.

Top
 Profile  
Burzukur
Metal newbie

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 11:13 am
Posts: 110
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:28 pm 
 

I believe that if you have killed someone, you need to die straight out. Same goes for rape in my opinion. It doesn't need to be messy or overdone or done publicly. It should be humane and fast, like a bullet to the head. There should be no life sentences, because that costs too much.
_________________
http://dontmesswithdinosaurs.com/
Dinosaur themed hip-hop. I know, but seriously, check it out.

Top
 Profile  
Gorgo
Metalhead

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 441
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:58 pm 
 

I support the death penalty, but with big restrictions. Only the hardest criminals (like serial killers) should be puth to death IF it is 100% proven that they actually did it. The US is a good example of innocent people being put to death, those are mistakes that should be avoided.

P.S.: To avoid a comment, I picked the US as example because you hear most of such things from there, I know that innocent people are locked up or killed in almost every country. And China isen't a good example because it hasn't got a democratic justice system like the US.
_________________
http://www.myspace.com/midgaardslang
"Flemish Nationalistic Black Metal"

http://www.myspace.com/onrust1
"Acoustic music"

Top
 Profile  
AurvandiL
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:22 am
Posts: 1000
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:17 pm 
 

Gorgo wrote:
And China isn't a good example because it hasn't got a democratic justice system like the US.


While I understand the subtletlies, I cannot help but smile at that.

"US of A, land of freedom..."

Top
 Profile  
BlindTortureKill
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:57 am
Posts: 1178
Location: Netherlands
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:18 pm 
 

Really, really difficult one.

I'm tempted to say no death penalty because:
1: life sentence is arguably a worse fate then death.
2: Who are we to say "eye-for-an-eye" and murder the murderers.
3: Some innocent people will be killed, finding evidence after the execution. it has happened before.

On the other hand: returning to society is out of the question for the rapers and murderers and they will just use up prison cells and tax money, although money shouldn't be an issue as long as justice is served.
Also, he or she might escape and kill, rape or make people listen to st anger more.

I'd love to see another way to deal with these individuals but as long as there is none, we'll have to put them down.

P.S. if I had to choose my own death, it would be jumping from the empire state building whilst drunk and listening to heavy metal, to feel as alive as possible before being as dead as possible.

Top
 Profile  
rexxz
Retired

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 8:45 pm
Posts: 8676
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:21 pm 
 

BlindTortureKill wrote:

2: Who are we to say "eye-for-an-eye" and murder the murderers.


Why not just forego any form of justice then? Who are we to say eye for an eye regarding anything?

Top
 Profile  
BlindTortureKill
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:57 am
Posts: 1178
Location: Netherlands
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:35 pm 
 

rexxz wrote:
BlindTortureKill wrote:

2: Who are we to say "eye-for-an-eye" and murder the murderers.


Why not just forego any form of justice then? Who are we to say eye for an eye regarding anything?


I suspected somebody might bring that up.

What I mean is: "Is it right that we kill another human being for the sake of justice? doesn't that make us murderers ourselves? or does justice compensate this fact"

And I guess thats just down to personal opinion,
But I don't really know my answer to that one.

Top
 Profile  
Andar
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:01 pm
Posts: 57
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:37 pm 
 

Psychological Re-education. Administering light doses of LSD in coupling with group therapy.

Top
 Profile  
AurvandiL
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:22 am
Posts: 1000
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:40 pm 
 

Illusion.

Some people are really broken inside, or morally devious (morale is a whole other issue... let's say these people are a risk to society) and they cannot be "repaired". I'm not saying it's best not to try, but some people are just helpless.

Recent example in France: the Fourniret guy has been proven "sane" (meaning, psychologically sane). Yet he enjoys raping and killing younglings. What can you do for such beings?

Top
 Profile  
Andar
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:01 pm
Posts: 57
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:47 pm 
 

In the US, "sane" is merely a legal term, not a scientific one. Better to have them work on a farm then.

Top
 Profile  
incarcerated_demon
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:21 pm
Posts: 195
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:50 pm 
 

If the purpose of the punishment system if retribution, then an eye for an eye is the logical answer. So is cutting off a hand for stealing a million bucks, or raping a rapist.

If the purpose of the punishment system is rehabilitation, then obviously you can't rehabilitate a dead person. Nonetheless, the prison system itself is not rehabilitative, as you often come out worse than when you went in.

If the purpose is public deterrence, I've read some articles somewhere that the death penalty is not much more effective a deterrent than life sentence.

I don't know what I think. I believe in human rights, but I don't believe in the absolute sanctity of human life in all circumstances. Like people have pointed out, the consequences of a wrong decision could lead to someone's death. However, does that not point to the failings of a legal system (incompetent lawyers and judges, obscure points of law, the jury system and trial by peers, and just plain corruption) rather than to the moral worth of the death penalty?? Or should we just chalk it all down to human error and shrug our shoulders?

Tricky question - it really depends on whether we're talking about 'in practice' or in abstract.

Top
 Profile  
The_Count
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:04 pm
Posts: 407
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:53 pm 
 

Andar wrote:
Psychological Re-education. Administering light doses of LSD in coupling with group therapy.


But would int it be a shame if lovely lovely Ludwig was ruined for us all.
_________________
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I'd be more than welcome to take on the jihadists. If they think they are the only ones who know how to make home made bombs and use guns... well they know nothing about redneck America.

Top
 Profile  
BlindTortureKill
Metalhead

Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:57 am
Posts: 1178
Location: Netherlands
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:05 pm 
 

incarcerated_demon wrote:
If the purpose of the punishment system if retribution, then an eye for an eye is the logical answer. So is cutting off a hand for stealing a million bucks, or raping a rapist.


The job of an executioner would suddenly become a whole lot kinkier.


Sorry I just had to post that

Top
 Profile  
Fatal_Metal
Metal newbie

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:05 pm
Posts: 97
Location: India
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:20 pm 
 

I have no clear viewpoint on this issue.

I don't 'believe' in human rights groups or their arguments. Neither do I attach any sanctity whatsoever to life.

The advantages of the death penalty are numerous. For instance, there's no possibility of prisoners breaking out, or say - a terrorist group bartering for their member's release with the administration. Also, a hell of a lot of tax money which would have otherwise gone into the prisoner's meals, or perhaps building new jails for all the prisoners who would otherwise have been executed would be saved.

The disadvantages of the death penalty are that it doesn't really accomplish anything. It just gets another individual killed.

Neither is a death penalty 'brutal' in actuality. Take law as a sort of covenant between the individual and the administration - and also between the individual and all other individuals in his/her society. When, say - a murderer being an individual trespasses on another individual's right to life (a part of the covenant, of course) then the covenant with regard to the murderer becomes null and void. The administration is free to do whatever it wishes with the murderer - including the sentence of death.

Top
 Profile  
Fatal_Metal
Metal newbie

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:05 pm
Posts: 97
Location: India
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:26 pm 
 

Quote:
I'd love to see another way to deal with these individuals but as long as there is none, we'll have to put them down.


As crazy as it may sound, why not use the criminals to test out newly produced vaccines on humans - and such?

Top
 Profile  
Andar
Metal newbie

Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:01 pm
Posts: 57
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:29 pm 
 

Fatal_Metal wrote:
Quote:
I'd love to see another way to deal with these individuals but as long as there is none, we'll have to put them down.


As crazy as it may sound, why not use the criminals to test out newly produced vaccines on humans - and such?


o_O

Top
 Profile  
Fatal_Metal
Metal newbie

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:05 pm
Posts: 97
Location: India
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:32 pm 
 

Andar wrote:
Fatal_Metal wrote:
Quote:
I'd love to see another way to deal with these individuals but as long as there is none, we'll have to put them down.


As crazy as it may sound, why not use the criminals to test out newly produced vaccines on humans - and such?


o_O


Well, it is productive for society and suffering for the criminal concerned.

Top
 Profile  
Zythifer
RP's left nut tastes like breastmilk

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:28 am
Posts: 128
PostPosted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:00 pm 
 

Imagine this:

You're an entomologist, and you've just stumbled upon what may very well be an as-of-yet undiscovered insect.

You lean in to get a closer look, when suddenly it rears back and emits a menacing hiss. This startles you so much that, without thinking, you smash it with your fist. Now, all that's left of this rare and valuable specimen is a nebulous pile of goo.


That's how I see the death penalty. Every time a criminal is killed, the scientific community loses a test subject. Of course, this doesn't necessarily apply to common ones, such as gang members. But to think that a guy like Ted Bundy would be executed strikes me as insane. Of course, this is just the opinion of someone with an unhealthy interest in human psychology.


Last edited by Zythifer on Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
The_Count
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:04 pm
Posts: 407
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:18 am 
 

Andar wrote:
Fatal_Metal wrote:
Quote:
I'd love to see another way to deal with these individuals but as long as there is none, we'll have to put them down.


As crazy as it may sound, why not use the criminals to test out newly produced vaccines on humans - and such?


o_O


What do you find odd about this statement? I think it is a wonderful idea and the pharmaceutical companies would appreciate it I am sure as well. Would be a lot cheaper to use stock in the US then having to goto Africa and test new shit on them.
_________________
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I'd be more than welcome to take on the jihadists. If they think they are the only ones who know how to make home made bombs and use guns... well they know nothing about redneck America.

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8397
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:46 am 
 

I must disagree with practically everybody here. I strongly disagree with the idea of death penalty, and I'm quite happy that Europe doesn't generally have it any more.

You people seem to insist that it's cheaper and only used in obvious cases, but as far as the USA goes, both those arguments fail. Executions are ridiculously expensive, and the record shows that people get killed on flimsy evidence, and that such things as skin colour, social status and the media have way too much to do with the sentencings. The USA has gone a long way down the slippery slope already, but then again, the prisoner population there already speaks volumes of different values even without a mention of death penalty.

The deterrent value has very little actual effect, too. Hypothetically, on the contrary. Let's say that I've killed someone, and I'm being sieged by the police in a house; there's no point in surrendering, if I know that I will get the death sentence in any case. I'd rather shoot a few cops and try to get out. Blaze of glory and all that.

If you really think that having the death penalty is necessary, do it the way India does: they have it, but practically never use it. What's the point of arguing that outlandishly rotten individuals such as multiple child murderers should be put to death for their outrageous crimes, and then use the laws that allow the sentence to off poor niggas whose trigger finger slipped while robbing the gas station?
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
The_Count
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:04 pm
Posts: 407
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:58 am 
 

Napero wrote:
I must disagree with practically everybody here. I strongly disagree with the idea of death penalty, and I'm quite happy that Europe doesn't generally have it any more.

You people seem to insist that it's cheaper and only used in obvious cases, but as far as the USA goes, both those arguments fail. Executions are ridiculously expensive, and the record shows that people get killed on flimsy evidence, and that such things as skin colour, social status and the media have way too much to do with the sentencings. The USA has gone a long way down the slippery slope already, but then again, the prisoner population there already speaks volumes of different values even without a mention of death penalty.

The deterrent value has very little actual effect, too. Hypothetically, on the contrary. Let's say that I've killed someone, and I'm being sieged by the police in a house; there's no point in surrendering, if I know that I will get the death sentence in any case. I'd rather shoot a few cops and try to get out. Blaze of glory and all that.

If you really think that having the death penalty is necessary, do it the way India does: they have it, but practically never use it. What's the point of arguing that outlandishly rotten individuals such as multiple child murderers should be put to death for their outrageous crimes, and then use the laws that allow the sentence to off poor niggas whose trigger finger slipped while robbing the gas station?


It is 3am and I am way to tired to post a detailed response to every statement (something I will do tomorrow). But for tonight I will leave it at if we just shot them in the head it would be cheaper and if the nigger was not prepared to die while robbing a gas station and his trigger finger "slips" then he should have not been robbing the gas station.
_________________
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I'd be more than welcome to take on the jihadists. If they think they are the only ones who know how to make home made bombs and use guns... well they know nothing about redneck America.

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8397
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:08 am 
 

The_Count wrote:
But for tonight I will leave it at if we just shot them in the head it would be cheaper and if the nigger was not prepared to die while robbing a gas station and his trigger finger "slips" then he should have not been robbing the gas station.

...and once you or someone you know stands trial and faces possible death penalty, you will be crying foul. It's not the execution that costs money, it's the process to get to that point. If you wish, you can of course cut that part out, but then you have the justice system of the Khmer Rouge in place.

Unlike every other western world penalty, death penalty is not reversible in any sense, if new evidence surfaces. I don't think anyone wants to make a mistake there, and making it absolutely sure you're killing the right guy takes time and money. Also, it's something which most countries with death penalty more or less fail in.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
The_Beast_in_Black
Metal freak

Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 11:34 am
Posts: 7741
Location: Australia
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:09 am 
 

I don't agree with the death sentence, really. Or, at least, not in the traditional sense. I don't think criminals should be executed as part of a justice system, because there are just too many problems with that, mistakes and such. Rehabilitation if possible should be pursued, imprisoning if not.

However, I see it somewhat like animals. A rabid dog that cannot be saved will have to be put down. If the criminal is 100% without-a-doubt guilty and too head-fucked to possibly be rehabilitated, then maybe it's for the best that they are put down too.

Imprisonment for the rest of their lives, though, should always be put ahead of the execution option. Execution should be a last resort, avoided if at all reasonably possible.
_________________
gomorro wrote:
Fortunately the seminar started and when it finished, I runed away like if Usain Bolt were about to rape me.

Top
 Profile  
alexanderthegreat
Metal Barbarian Dinosaur

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 5:34 pm
Posts: 1916
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:34 am 
 

The only reason I'm really against the death penalty is the possibility of wrongful execution. Miscarriages of justice are one of those things that get me going.

While I could discuss the nebulous rights and wrongs of execution as punishment or prevention, the thing which bothers me most about the death penalty is in the methods of execution: in many of them, the responsibility of the executioner is reduced.

For example, in many electric chair executions, there are two switches and a computer mechanism used to determine which switch completes the circuit and kills the prisoner. I personally view this as cowardly. To try and dilute and soften the fact that you are ending someone's life by trying to protect the employee's consciousness baffles me. Why would you need such a procedure if you truly felt that the death penalty was just?

The same goes for hanging: the principle of hanging is that the prisoner hangs himself, his own weight strangling him. He is not executed, he is put in a situation where he will fall with a noose around his neck and die.

I just think that if you are going to uphold the death penalty, you shouldn't try to diminish your responsibility for it. You should take pride in the fact you are upholding the law and preventing someone from doing harm. At least executioners with the big axes took some sort of personal responsibility: the way it is now, people act like they want the death penalty, but don't want to be held accountable for it.

Of course, this could be outdated information...
_________________
Hitherto known as... The SEXUAL TYRANNOSAURUS.
The Cimmerian
The Blog That Time Forgot

Top
 Profile  
Acrobat
Eric Olthwaite

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:53 am
Posts: 6448
Location: Fortress Northallerton/Napoli, Terronia
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:41 am 
 

well personally if someones committed a terrible crime I think live in prisonment (if it actually is life) is worse than the death penalty.

And yes death penalty is better than friends of hell.

Top
 Profile  
incarcerated_demon
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:21 pm
Posts: 195
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:49 am 
 

Fatal_Metal wrote:
The disadvantages of the death penalty are that it doesn't really accomplish anything. It just gets another individual killed.


It accomplishes quite a few things. One, it institutionalises a culture of death. Life starts to have very little meaning to 'the Man'. I hate to bring up the slippery slope argument, because I feel in most contexts it is a scare-mongering 'what if' tactic. But in this case, if we look at places with the death penalty, the state of Texas and China for example, you will see a lesser regard for the rule of law. Executions start to be the convenient option.

I don't believe in the absolute sanctity of life (I believe in abortion and assisted suicide for example), but I do regard human life as precious, not to be fucked about with by another fallible human being. In war, you pays your money and takes your chances. With the death penalty, a multitude of things can go wrong, anyone of which could possibly lead to someone's wrongful death, which as someone above me astutely pointed out, is pretty much irreversible.

Quote:
Neither is a death penalty 'brutal' in actuality. Take law as a sort of covenant between the individual and the administration - and also between the individual and all other individuals in his/her society. When, say - a murderer being an individual trespasses on another individual's right to life (a part of the covenant, of course) then the covenant with regard to the murderer becomes null and void. The administration is free to do whatever it wishes with the murderer - including the sentence of death.


You're obviously discounting all issues of proportionality then :roll: If I trespass upon someone's property, he is then free to shoot me? Or should he come over to my property and trespass on it? Rapists to be raped? Eye for an eye? If I stole a million bucks would my hand be chopped off? Or just a finger? What about a billion? What about a sticky bun?

Also according to your covenant theory, shouldn't the person's rights who you have trespassed upon exact the retribution? You haven't wronged the administration, in fact, in your strict covenant contractual type conception of law, it would be unjust for anyone other than the wronged or the wronged representatives to take retribution on the offender. And yet no legal system I know of operates on that basis. It's always State v Offender. It is also the state who metes and administers the punishment. Ask yourself why. Not only do private persons usually not have the means to investigate a crime and dole out punishment, the private person is not bound by the same laws of proportionality and reasonableness that a public institution is. Now unless I'm erecting a giant strawman here, you're either advocating a hudud type justice or a Wild Wild West mob rules/lone gunman type justice. Neither of which I can agree with.

Also, what happens when no rights are trespassed, but still a crime is committed. Drugs for example. Or parking on a yellow line. Distribution and possession of child pornography (note: the child's rights have not been directly trespassed upon with possession and distribution). What about assisted suicide with the patient's full, willing and competent consent?

Lastly, a covenant is yet to be defined, either in the Lockean social contract theory or the Hobbesian state of nature -> sovereign theory. What if I don't agree that 'right to life' should be part of that covenant, which all men must agree to? You're dressing up rights talk in your covenant conception, which is an essentially positivist theory.

The covenant theory is probably not the best argument you want to employ in defence of the death penalty. When you boil it down to bare bones, it's essentially 'an eye for an eye'. Retribution and possibly deterrence. You could argue that imprisonment is no better and I would tend to agree with you. But at least there's less chance of making a fatal mistake [ha-ha].

I agree almost completely with Napero, I think Europe has got it right on this one. Kippis :D

Top
 Profile  
2Eagle333
Metal newbie

Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:24 am
Posts: 214
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:14 am 
 

rexxz wrote:
I agree with the death penalty as a method of justice, but the manner in which it is carried out in the US is a joke; costs too much money.

What makes executions in the US cost too much is more the trial system, rather than the use of lethal injections. However, getting rid of that would guarantee a lot more innocent people dying, and the moral correctness of doing such just for cheaper executions is questionable at least.

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
Peregrinus sine aetate

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 2302
Location: Orocarni
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:54 am 
 

Other than the right to self-defense, this is pretty much the only legal area where the U.S. is still ahead of Europe, I think. But then again, I think the legal system is solely for punishment and justice, not rehabilitation.
_________________
conquer__all wrote:
I personally hate when breeders bring their fuck trophies were their not wanted. Once this low life couple brought their bastard to a rated "R" movie and it cried the whole time, I was like what the fuck is this shit I paid twelve bucks for this?!

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8397
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:24 am 
 

Earthcubed wrote:
Other than the right to self-defense, this is pretty much the only legal area where the U.S. is still ahead of Europe, I think.

Ahead = 70 years behind?
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
DGYDP
Leather Lion

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:19 pm
Posts: 1244
Location: Belgium
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:46 pm 
 

I think people should consider that being put into prison for the rest of your life is a way worse punishment that simply dying. So let's say you are a psychopath, what would you chose? The options are having a bit of fun, then dying a painless death .... or having a bit of fun and being raped for the rest of your life in prison?

If I'd be such a guy, I'd definitely choose some country like the USA to have fun. Following this reasoning the death penalty indirectly causes more crimes.

Or maybe I'm stretching this way too far.
_________________
Geshy wrote:
DEH NEH NEH NEHHHH.. BEH DUNDUNDUNDUN WAHHH NAHHH DEH NEH NEH NEHHHHH, BEH DUNDUNDUNDUNDUN WAHHHH DEH NEH NEH NEHHHHH

Top
 Profile  
goatmanejy
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:38 am
Posts: 218
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:48 pm 
 

go ahead. But, I say death penalty is only for people who kill and will kill again.
:fuck: Those people need to go. There a plauge on society. If they arent killed, they would have to be locked up for life, which is illogically expensive for the goverment.

Top
 Profile  
Noobbot
Mors_Gloria + Thesaurus

Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 4:48 pm
Posts: 426
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:48 pm 
 

Napero wrote:
I must disagree with practically everybody here. I strongly disagree with the idea of death penalty, and I'm quite happy that Europe doesn't generally have it any more.

You people seem to insist that it's cheaper and only used in obvious cases, but as far as the USA goes, both those arguments fail. Executions are ridiculously expensive, and the record shows that people get killed on flimsy evidence, and that such things as skin colour, social status and the media have way too much to do with the sentencings. The USA has gone a long way down the slippery slope already, but then again, the prisoner population there already speaks volumes of different values even without a mention of death penalty.

The deterrent value has very little actual effect, too. Hypothetically, on the contrary. Let's say that I've killed someone, and I'm being sieged by the police in a house; there's no point in surrendering, if I know that I will get the death sentence in any case. I'd rather shoot a few cops and try to get out. Blaze of glory and all that.

If you really think that having the death penalty is necessary, do it the way India does: they have it, but practically never use it. What's the point of arguing that outlandishly rotten individuals such as multiple child murderers should be put to death for their outrageous crimes, and then use the laws that allow the sentence to off poor niggas whose trigger finger slipped while robbing the gas station?


I must almost entirely agree with you.

Capital punishment should only be reserved for the most heinous of crimes, so to speak, and this doesn't mean killing one person, or raping somebody, or anything like that. It'd have to be raping AND killing twelve or so people, and there being irrefutable evidence to prove the defendant's guilt. As most have pointed out, there is little deterrence, too many innocents are erroneously condemned to death, and seeing as appeals must serve as the filter to weed out any who aren't guilty (which still doesn't stop some innocent men from dying), it is more expensive to execute than to imprison them for life.

Napero wrote:
The_Count wrote:
But for tonight I will leave it at if we just shot them in the head it would be cheaper and if the nigger was not prepared to die while robbing a gas station and his trigger finger "slips" then he should have not been robbing the gas station.

...and once you or someone you know stands trial and faces possible death penalty, you will be crying foul. It's not the execution that costs money, it's the process to get to that point. If you wish, you can of course cut that part out, but then you have the justice system of the Khmer Rouge in place.

Unlike every other western world penalty, death penalty is not reversible in any sense, if new evidence surfaces. I don't think anyone wants to make a mistake there, and making it absolutely sure you're killing the right guy takes time and money. Also, it's something which most countries with death penalty more or less fail in.


Indeed. The best people can do now, when we find that an executed man was innocent, is to say, "Oops. I guess we killed the wrong guy." And scratch their head a bit. That doesn't make the innocent man resurrect, and it doesn't fix anything at all. Even if only one out of fifty or one- or even two-hundred men put to death are innocent, that's still far more than is acceptable.

Top
 Profile  
intothevoid
Metal newbie

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:35 am
Posts: 74
Location: Antarctica
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:58 pm 
 

I'm totally against it. I'm going to drop the justice bomb.
The death penalty isn't punishment enough. It is an easy way out of a lifelong term of prison. Prison for life is much worse than the death penalty, it involves far more pain and suffering than the injection of a lethal dose of poison.
Think about it; a man has raped and murdered 3 young girls, what would be worse for him ? A quick, painless death or a sentence to suffer the injustice of prison for a lifetime ?

Giving death to those who gave the same is not justice enough. Justice would be to make a person understand the wrong they have done and make them feel aching and torturing remorse for the rest of their lives. Slowly destroying a mind is better than rapidly killing a person. Quick death is an exit from the crimes committed.
Edit: It would also stop the number of innocent people killed for crimes they have not committed.
_________________
lord_ghengis wrote:
The_Boss wrote:
Oh so he would rather prefer you playing music about mass killings, Nazis and shit instead of oh noes Satan!

"Oh, It's just the holocaust. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, carry on"

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
Peregrinus sine aetate

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 2302
Location: Orocarni
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:47 pm 
 

Napero wrote:
Earthcubed wrote:
Other than the right to self-defense, this is pretty much the only legal area where the U.S. is still ahead of Europe, I think.

Ahead = 70 years behind?


I was thinking more like "Progress =/= homo erectus-esque lack of justice" myself, actually. Unless you can provide evidence that homo erectus punished people for eating their young or stealing their food instead of letting them get away with it (or rather, shooed them away somewhere else).
_________________
conquer__all wrote:
I personally hate when breeders bring their fuck trophies were their not wanted. Once this low life couple brought their bastard to a rated "R" movie and it cried the whole time, I was like what the fuck is this shit I paid twelve bucks for this?!

Top
 Profile  
greysnow
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 10:01 am
Posts: 378
Location: Germany
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:01 pm 
 

The_Count wrote:
What do you find odd about this statement? I think it is a wonderful idea and the pharmaceutical companies would appreciate it I am sure as well. Would be a lot cheaper to use stock in the US then having to goto Africa and test new shit on them.

"stock".

Either you're trolling or you're trying to profile yourself as more grim and necro than Satan himself or you're a living reason to :puke: .

Edit: And on topic, I completely agree with Napero.
_________________
Looking up at the stars, I know quite well
That, for all they care, I can go to hell.

Top
 Profile  
The_Count
Village Idiot

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:04 pm
Posts: 407
Location: United States of America
PostPosted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:10 pm 
 

greysnow wrote:
The_Count wrote:
What do you find odd about this statement? I think it is a wonderful idea and the pharmaceutical companies would appreciate it I am sure as well. Would be a lot cheaper to use stock in the US then having to goto Africa and test new shit on them.

"stock".

Either you're trolling or you're trying to profile yourself as more grim and necro than Satan himself or you're a living reason to :puke: .

Edit: And on topic, I completely agree with Napero.


Eh I think by now most would write me off as a very lousy troll, but honestly there is some truth to my statement. If a person was convicted of molesting and murdering 12 children for example I really see no reason what so ever why he can not be used as a human guinea pig.

On a side note I have no interest in being an "internet tough guy" as to be perfectly honest I could care less what people on an internet forum I will never meet think of me.

I just have no problem what so ever in people who do horrible things having horrible things done to them.
_________________
Thorgrim_Honkronte wrote:
I'd be more than welcome to take on the jihadists. If they think they are the only ones who know how to make home made bombs and use guns... well they know nothing about redneck America.

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies. Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Adriankat, bassistneededlolnot, CapricornSupernaut, Die_Fledermaus, iamntbatman, Terri23, Thiestru and 17 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group