Death Penalty!

Greetings again O' Dear Friends Of A Most Loved Man!

A Most Loved Man has a new and Very Exciting-Zing-A-Zing topic of THOUGHT-PROVOKING DISCUSSION for his Friends on EoFF today! :eek:

A Most Loved Man wishes to know what his BELOVED AND HEAVENLY friends of EoFF think about the Death Penalty!

Do you agree with the Death Penalty of disagree with it!? :confused:

A Most Loved Man partly agrees with it and partly disagrees with it.

He agrees with it where the crimes are too terrible to be forgiven (such as cruelty to children, murder of innocent people, etc...) and thinks those people truly deserve to die and not spend a minute more on this Earth.

But he disagrees with it sometimes too. Like if someone was very young when they committed a crime, have tried their hardest to be rehabilitated, and have shown they have learnt from their mistakes and can be a good productive member of society.

What do EoFF'ers think of the death penalty!?!?!?!

Do you agree with it or disagree!?

A most annoyed Aerith's knight believes that talking in the third person is a sign of shizofrenia.

And this belongs in the EoEO if you don't make it a poll.

*closes*

this is eoff 8) if you meant eoeo, posters have their own descretion about how serious they want the topic to be treated. There's no guarantee that they will be serious in gc :]

I think perhaps we should do away with the death penalty unless a life-sentencer chooses it themselves;o

I may just be a meanie, but I think that the death penalty is almost too good for some criminals. Why grant them freedom from punishment (i.e. death, the relief from mortal suffering), when you can throw them in jail to rot for the rest of their lives? :radred:

I support killing humans simply because I abhor any sort of anthrocentric hubris, and I think that not killing people doesn't have a justification that isn't through granting humans so artificial positive right :)

Quote:

---

Like if someone was very young when they committed a crime, have tried their hardest to be rehabilitated, and have shown they have learnt from their mistakes and can be a good productive member of society.

---

I don't think they try to rehabilitate people on the death penalty. And it is fairly difficult to award the death penalty to young people.

For the most part, I agree with the death penalty but I think it should be used only as a last resort and only if the criminal in quest shows no signs of remorse for his or her crime. I do agree with multiple life sentences though, as it is extremely costly to keep a person in jail and I do not see the sense in it at all.

I don't want to generalize and say I'm for or against it because I think it comes down to a case-by-case matter, but I'm usually against. An event where I'd probably say I'm for it is if someone raped and killed a bunch of children or something.

I think the death penalty needs to be revised and updated. So it is quicker, you know? There is no need to keep these guys/gals sitting in prison for so long in wait of their death.

I don't think all murderers should get the death penalty, just the perverted ones. If they go on a killing spree, kill them. If they are serial killers, kill them. If the did a rape/murder, kill them. Oh, and all rapist should be either killed or castrated. Unless it is simply statutory. I have a lot less against statutory. It isn't really rape.

But yes. Kill them. Faster.

I also wanted to say that I like how you get your choice for your last meal. This shows some humanity before we kill them.

For it.

Ambivalent. There are some crimes where I think it would be warranted (Only those crimes which take lives), but I cannot accept the possibility of executing an innocent, and thus I would be against the death penalty in the overwhelming majority of situations.

I find it ironic that some places allow the death penalty but are against euthanasia

I think criminals should be given a choice between the death penalty or being placed on some lawless island where a bunch of other criminals given the same choice reside.

I believe it is a good thing to have in place, but in needs to be reviewed. Because the amount of times they kill the wrong person is just crap. If they can fix the error rate, then I'd be happy to have the death penalty re-introduced in Australia, and other parts of the world where it doesn't exist. :)

The death penalty, while a very sensitive issue by its very nature, is sometimes a necessary evil, especially in a situation where a serial killer incarcerated for life escapes from prison and continues a killing spree; such was the case of Ted Bundy. He went on a killing spree, got a life sentence, escaped, and continued his killing spree, and when he got caught again, he got the death penalty.

I think in a society which prohibits one man taking another's life that it's stupid to say that as long as we all (or in practice: a court) agree on taking someone's life away then it's okay. People say that some people expend their right to live, but who can determine that if one man can still not take the matter into their own hands?

In theory I'm for a looser kind of society where one who breaks its rules severely is shut out from society and becomes lawless (i.e. not protected by any of its laws), but I don't see that working in a modern society where we want to claim to be "civilised".

In any case, I'm strongly against handing out death penalties.

If for any reason we absolutely must use the death penalty, it should be for repeat offenders only. That way the risk of executing an innocent person is virtually non-existent.

Mass-murderers, paedophiles and some terrorists would be obvious candidates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dynast-Kid

I may just be a meanie, but I think that the death penalty is almost too good for some criminals. Why grant them freedom from punishment (i.e. death, the relief from mortal suffering), when you can throw them in jail to rot for the rest of their lives? :radred:

---

Because then you get situations like the present one in Britain where the prisons are all full. A few months ago somebody not far from where I live drove over a child, then idiotically reversed back over him. He got 300 hours' community service because the prisons were full.


There are all these crimes we're constantly trying to do something about and yet plenty of potential criminals slip through our fingers and go ahead and do their deeds, and we then talk about what a dystopian society we live in. In the meantime, we continue to glamorise and condone this neat little activity known as war, something that has taken millions of lives throughout humanity's history. If we have to have no death penalty, we should stop all wars too, otherwise we humans are the biggest hypocrites ever to grace the planet. Why are we okay with potentially sentencing entire armies in another country to death, people who are ostensibly guilty of no crime but following orders (not actually a good enough excuse in my book, they shouldn't have joined the army in the first place if they don't wanna get burned for following orders) and yet we don't want to deal with our own criminals in the same way for following their own "bad" agenda? It's ridiculous.

*Casts Death on A Most Loved Man*

Depends on my mood. I prefer Death Penalty over Reclusion Perpetua

Although death may be too good for some criminals it's probably what's best for the public since it keeps the innocent safe from the likes of them.

I am completely for the death penalty.

By and large I'm against it, but I appreciate that there are circumstances that there's a strong case for allowing it, such as taking the lives of others; or repeat offenders like ReloadPsi said. I think it's particularly something that some people in Britain would support because of our ridiculously overcrowded prison system, but I believe the solution to that is building more prisons rather than implementing the death penalty.

Having said that, I'm always cautiously aware that there are times when people are unfairly imprisoned and could be proven innocent at a later date and you can't undo death. I would also worry about it being used too much and unnecessarily. I'd also feel uneasy with the law having the power to physically take away a life to an even extremer degree than simple imprisonment. The idea doesn't sit easily with me and I don't like it, so I'd give it a 'no.'

For taking some elses life, then maybe, but not for stupid crimes like robbery or anything, but something really serious and disgusting. I'm not sure though, as two wrongs don't make a right, I really don't know.

I geuss I'm kinda against, as I just think taking some one's life is out of order, no matter what.

Only in really extreme cases (i.e. repeat offenders, etc)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

Ambivalent. There are some crimes where I think it would be warranted (Only those crimes which take lives), but I cannot accept the possibility of executing an innocent, and thus I would be against the death penalty in the overwhelming majority of situations.

---

I couldn't agree more.

I saw on the news that a group of people in Iran (I think) have been sentenced to death for adultery. That's definitely something you shouldnt get it for. I know religion is strictly against adultery, but death as punishment? smurf right off.

I think they need to bring back hanging here. Put the fear into some of the bastards we have running about. ASBOs aren't enough.

Charlie Manson, anyone?
>_>
<_<