Should there be a death penalty?

SHould there be a death penalty

  • Yes

    Votes: 32 32.7%

  • No

    Votes: 66 67.3%
  • Total voters
    98
ARealConservative said:
has he ever said he would vote against it at the state level?

All I know is who once supported the death penalty at the federal level and now he doesn't.
Click to expand...

In the examples he used about rich people getting away with it and poor people being executed more, do you think he was talking only about federal murder cases? I didn't get the impression that he was. Ron Paul lives in a TX and there are a lot of executions there, he has seen a lot of mistakes made, and I don't think he was considering whether they were at the federal level or the state level, in fact when was the last time a poor person was finally acquitted of committing murder against a federal officer or on federal property after DNA evidence showed otherwise? Probably never, but certainly not a lot.

I think Ron Paul's stance is that the states should decide, but as long as we have the war on drugs and other government programs that increase poverty and crime, especially among minorities, I think he would like to see no death penalty at the state level. That's what I got from his argument. If we lived in a more free, just and prosperous society, he might change his mind and support the death penalty at the state level.
 
Last edited:
dannno said:
In the examples he used about rich people getting away with it and poor people being executed more, do you think he was talking only about federal murder cases? I didn't get the impression that he was. Ron Paul lives in a TX and there are a lot of executions there, he has seen a lot of mistakes made, and I don't think he was considering whether they were at the federal level or the state level, in fact when was the last time a poor person was finally acquitted of committed murder against a federal officer or on federal property after DNA evidence showed otherwise? Probably never.

I think Ron Paul's stance is that the states should decide, but as long as we have the war on drugs and other government programs that increase poverty and crime, especially among minorities, I think he would like to see no death penalty at the state level. If we lived in a more free, just and prosperous society, he might change his mind and support the death penalty at the state level.
Click to expand...

+rep
 
Sentient Void said:
I'd prefer to use those on death row as entertainment a la gladiator style or 'Running Man', otherwise, yes on executions for serial killers and murderers who are proud of their crimes, or would clearly do it again. Some people you just need to put down as rabid animals.

In regards to justice, I advocate at least 'an eye for an eye' or 'a tooth for a tooth' for malicious acts. Perhaps even 'two teeth for a tooth', so that which was taken away by the perpetrator will be taken away from him.

If someone steals money or property worth whatever value, it's not enough to just take it back and give it back to the victim, plus pain and suffering, etc, to make the victim 'whole'. Since the offender has deprived the property of the victim, perhaps the offender must be deprived of the same amount of property and granted to the victim in addition to what was stolen and also for 'pain and suffering', inconvenience, lost wages, lawyer fees, etc.

If the offender can't pay, then he gets put to indentured servitude to work that amount off to make restitution.

If the offender raped someone, he gets raped, twice over, if the victim desires. Perhaps by a hired professional rapist - who knows. If he cut off someone's finger, he gets two fingers cut off by the victim, or by someone the victim specifies (the government, a defense agency, a professional of some sort, etc).

It wouldn't be perfect, and there would be some instances where people can't be truly made 'whole', but it would be a helluva lot better than what we have now, IMO. Of course, the victim would have the option of forgiveness, as well - but he could require restitution or punishment *up to* the 'two teeth for a tooth' rule.
Click to expand...

People can change over time, and this includes people who seem like there's no point of return from where they are. Like I said, I've met people who have killed their own parents, but, by the grace of God, they have changed into truly Christian individuals, where, otherwise, these people wouldn't have had a chance to make a change. I don't know about you, but I highly value someone's salvation.

Besides that point, I don't think that the two-fold punishment idea may be enough for punishment. If I steal something, and I only have to return two-fold's worth of the thing I stole, that probably wouldn't deter me from trying to steal it again, especially if there was a higher chance of success than 50%. If I try to steal a $60 game from Walmart every week, and I only have a 25% chance of getting caught, given their detection techniques, I still get away with 50% the value of what I stole.

I think it's awfully fair to have a light punishment for the first offense for lesser crimes, but to increase the punishment significantly afterward. As a person who has gone through the penal system, just the fact of getting caught greatly deterred me from committing a certain "crime" (steroid possession) again because it made me realize that big brother is watching me. Now the morality of criminalizing steroid possession is another argument in itself, but the fact that one is caught is often enough deterrence. Maybe doing what you're talking about could be used for a first offense, but, after that, things have to get worse for repeat offenders.
 
ARealConservative said:
I'm not real popular with many of these beliefs, but I do accept capital punishment.


it gets down to the fundamental issue of what separates us from animals. If a person continually demonstrates that he possesses none of the qualities that separates him from animals, his right to life becomes something I don't care to protect.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't killing each other make us more like animals?
 
Like so many other issues, the death penalty works in theory, but not in practice.

- the power to kill is too much power, and it corrupts.
- when corrupted, it can be used politically.
- innocent people are often executed, and that can't be reversed.
- like a lot of our justice system, it is not administered fairly or evenly, certain groups are targeted.
- due to the legal system, it is often more expensive to execute than to leave in prison.
- the Justice system should be rational and impartial, not a system of vengence.

There are some people that need to be permanently removed from society. Life in prison is the best option we have.
-
 
Brian4Liberty said:
Like so many other issues, the death penalty works in theory, but not in practice.
-
Click to expand...

you can say the same for incarceration. the unsavory after effect is a person is generally less able to fit into society after he is locked up then before.

There are some people that need to be permanently removed from society. Life in prison is the best option we have.
Click to expand...

prison is a society in of itself. you are just removing people from your society and putting them in someone elses society.
 
ARealConservative said:
we already kill animals and claim it is ok because they don't possess a key component that humans possess, but where is the belief that all humans possess this key component ever proven?
Click to expand...

From our belief that man is made in the image of God.
 
guitarlifter said:
I personally hate the death penalty, but I'm not sure if it's better or not to have it. It possibly is a better deterrence for crime than life in prison, but, as a Christian, I believe that it would be doing a disservice to God to kill someone without giving them the fullest chance possible to work their salvation out. As a man who goes into prisons weekly and meets people who have murdered their own parents but are truly saved, I know that it is possible to become saved, no matter how far one falls.

Killing criminals would be cheaper than having them in prison for life, which does put a tax burden on someone, and that's wrong as well. I just feel like I'm "damned if I do. Damned if I don't."

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

While I respect your position, a criminal is a criminal for breaking criminal laws in this Nation, not for breaking your god's commandments. Being "saved" simply matter not, especially for the victims.

That said, I do not agree with the death penalty for a number of reasons. Among them...

1. We have gone from a Nation of "innocent until proven guilty..." to a country of "guilty until proven to have the better lawyer".

2. Death is no punishment, it is over too quickly.

I advocate a complete restructuring of our entire penal system. Rehabilitation has proven itself to be a failed system. Inmates become institutionalized and some commit crimes soon after being released, either unchanged by said rehabilitation, or as a means to get back in on purpose.

Quite simply, prison needs to become a punishment once more.

Besides a restructuring of our prison system, we must restructure our laws as well. Examples? Eliminate pot/coke possession as a crime. Increase punishment for crimes against a person, ie murder and/or rape. ATM, a convict can get more years for grand larceny than murder under certain circumstances.

Super-max style prisons across the board is what I suggest. One person per cell, no contact with other inmates, and hour of shower and sunshine a day. No cable TV, no weights, no congenial visits, none of that.

Let a murder stew in his own juices in such a prison for the rest of his life and slowly go insane.
 
Not opposed to the concept of it at all. But the cost of ten or more years worth of appeals makes it not really worth it. Used to be not that long ago in this country someone sentenced to death would be executed within months.
 
ARealConservative said:
this sophomoric argument works both ways.

if this person kills again, are you okay with the additional death being on your hands?
Click to expand...

There's a big difference. If you give someone the death penalty, and they end up being innocent, the blood is on your hands because you made a decision based upon events that had already happened, and it was your responsibility to find out the truth. If a man serves 50 years in prison for third-degree murder, and he gets out and kills again, the blood is not on your hands because you could not foresee this person's future actions (you are not responsible for seeing the future), and they paid their dues. One cannot take away rights or give punishment based on what this person MIGHT do again. It isn't fair to kill a man who doesn't deserve to die by reasoning that this person might violate someone else's rights again. This is basically sacrificing freedom for safety. Benjamin Franklin once said that, "those who are willing to trade freedom for safety will lose both and deserve neither." You cannot punish a person beyond what they deserve for safety reasons. Doing such things is simply tyrannical and has a lot of ties with neoconservatism.
 
Last edited:
Everyone already has a death sentence... most just have the luxury that they don't know when their day of execution is. Be you young, old, black, white, religious, atheist, rich, poor, criminal or saint Death will not discriminate against you.

Fear of death is irrational, as it is an inevitability for all that lives. A few years amended or subtracted makes no difference in the end. Where by we slip into the edge of eternity nothing that we have done even collectively will matter.

So yes, I am for the death penalty.
 
ARealConservative said:
please don't turn this into a theological debate, many of us reject it outright.
Click to expand...

Should I just leave then? I can not have a voice? Here we are talking about executions and the mention of God becomes anathema? Lord have mercy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmdrake
Ukraine migrant girl, 14, accused of beating her 79-year-old grandma to death
Replies
11
Views
4K
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
PAF
What Is Left Of MAGA Is Not A Movement Of People Anymore
2
Replies
38
Views
791
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Anti Federalist
There are higher things in life than the bottom line
Replies
0
Views
27
Anti Federalist
Anti Federalist
PAF
Gang Deportations Are a Fool’s Errand; Instead, End the Drug War
2
Replies
35
Views
236
TheTexan
TheTexan
Occam's Banana
Metadata shows FBI’s "raw" Epstein prison video was modified
Replies
7
Views
70
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Back
Top