Debate Capital Punishment..

That would be an interesting controversy. . . .Capital Punishment TV. . .

I think that moraly wrong, the only people that should be allowed to watch it are the people that were effected by the criminal (family deaths etc.) It gives them a sense of justice. To others it may seem discusting. . . nationaly watching a person die. Kind of sick and twisted dont you think? I don't think it is of any one elses bussiness to see the death. The criminal has rights as well, even if he is a criminal. If they were to allow something like that, they should give the right to the criminal to dicide whether or not they want to air it, and if they do they should air it at a time when kids cant not see it and that sort of thing. It would be really hard to do. And I'm sure alot of peopel would have a problem with it.

 

First of all, I think all punishment should justified.
Next, all justified punishment should not be intentional.
Also, all persons should not be allowed to watch any punishment with any kind of satisfaction.

Lastly, the process of punishment should be so simple as to employ no executioner or as to have the convicted see Nature as the one and only executioner. This way the minds and hands of the mass are clean (so that typical souls are not tormented by observing death with firsthand experience).

Let humanity return that which belongs to Nature to Nature and let humanity return to humanity for humanity's role or purpose is never higher than all that is part of humanity. Life and Death are Nature's purpose and design.

 

I'm not sure what you mean here. Unintentional punishment?

Why? Lets say I had a daughter, and she was raped, then murdered. Why shouldn't I be allowed to watch the scumbag burn?

So what? Just let them starve?

If someone doesn't want to watch, they don't have to. I, however, would be making popcorn.

Well, I don't see what this bit here has to do with anything, and I'm not entirely sure if it makes much sense the way you phrased it, but whatever.

 

nice grammar, eh? I have to say though if you broadcast it on TV thats really going to **** up some poor suicidal sap. If you have to do anything make it a theatre. Imagine sold out tickets for accross the country just to see a man be shocked to death just like in Green Mile...

If you got to do anything I think it would be pretty interesting to make them live in a box. a small box, underground, or sort of- they would have a lid so they could have people stare at the person all the time and they could walk all over them. And the box could be in somewhere like.. Times Square, in the middle of the street, that way you could have cars run over you too, the fun of traffic jams, eh?

 

I've got mixed feelings about the death penalty. As it stands, I do recognize the major point that has been brought up here numerous times - that it's possible for an innocent person to be convicted and possibly executed. That's a horrible possibility, and I'm not sure I'd like to see accurate statistics of just how many times it's happened.

I love Kagome's Arrow's suggestion of giving people the option of choosing to be executed - that has occurred to me as well, and I think it's valid, particularly for those people who are going to be spending life in jail anyway. Of course, I'd argue that these people would need to be evaluated by a psychiatrist first, just as a precaution to prevent people screaming that they "weren't in a clear mental state" - but other than that, I don't see much wrong with the idea.

Here's a point, though: why is everyone looking at the death penalty only in terms of its ability to punish? Criminals are put in jail to punish them, true, but they're also put there to remove them from the rest of society so that they don't continue to commit crimes. (In theory... Since, after all, many who are released become repeat offenders. But whatever.) Killing someone removes them as a threat to others PERMANENTLY. In that sense, it's a lot more effective than just keeping them in jail; it prevents them from hurting other inmates, or from escaping and hurting civilians (a slim chance, but eh).

I'd have to say that in some cases, I do favor the death penalty. I'm with Neph in the idea that if something really horrible happened to someone I cared about, I would want to see the offender prevented from EVER doing it again. If the quickest way to achieve that certainty was to kill them, and if there was sufficient proof of their guilt and nothing substantial to the contrary, so be it.

 

It is unhealthy to intend a life for a life.

Just by thinking in that manner, there suggests that mortal minds may not be stable as to overcome the emotions involved in a situation.

It should be natural to suggest that our minds should avoid thinking about intentional destruction or harm to others, even when revenge seems so sweet.

I propose the natural solution of returning the creature to nature as all punishment. It is quite simple.

Forced exile or banishment is that solution, letting nature be the judge and executioner so that society does not waste much time on such affairs that concern with the immortal matters of life or death.

So then the mortal mind and hands are innocent and clean, as unclouded by hate.

 

Murders, rapists et all decided to violate the rights of others. Why should we respect theirs? Clearly they feel such rights are forfeit.

It should be, but it obviously isn't natural to avoid thinking of intentional harm(take a look at our history, the behaviour of many animals...)

Oh boy, this oughta be good.

Ok, so... what? Plunk them into the ocean with nothing but a raft so they can starve to death? How is that not executing them anyway???

You have an unreasonably optimistic perception of man.

 

No person has the right to take the life of another person.
I'm against it, everyone has a reason if they have taken a life, but most are ignored in the concept of murder.For exmple a person has just killed another person, the person they killed has murdered there loved one, they tell that to the judge and the jury, they still murdered that person, they are still gonna get the death sentance. Like one of you said, if you killed the person that commited murder you are just as bad as them. If you think about it, it could end up into a whole chain of death, the murderer is convicted, then killed, then the person who ended the murderer's life is also killed for taking there life, so it comes out into a chain of death. but life does not work that way. life is harsh and cruel, bitter, it cares for no one. not everyone is counted equal in our world. i know this is getting into religion, but heres a quote from the bible about it, its about a person which is gonna get stoned for a crime *but let those who have never sinned once throw the first stone* everyone dropped their stones. they are all guilty of sin. all the things we do bad in life are not counted equal, if they were, then we would all be dead by now, since we have all done bad in life. Why does another mere human get to make the laws? why? so, thats my answer, im against capital punishment.

 

Wouldn't the murder be the first stone to be thrown?

Because there's nobody better qualified? God never had to live with the fear of loss, the fear of death. He can't fully empathize with us. Besides, he orders massacres in the Bible.

 

Where I live...

Where I live, local crime rate is the highest than elsewhere in the country (Mexico City). Assaults, and kidnapings are the order of the day. Many people want the kidnappers suffer the capital punishment.

I support capital punishment, as it seems that there's no other option from preventing criminals from running the mob from inside the jail walls, (The other day a high officer was executioned in revenge for capturing an important drug dealer).

But there's a little problem... most of the guys doing the drug dealing and kidnapping are the POLICE OFFICERS themselves. How are we supposed to deal with that?

You think capital punishment ALONE will solve criminality problems? First the bad guys HAVE to get caught! (About 90% impunity rate in my country)

Accursed city, who let it become what it is now? (Oh, yeah. The populist left wing)

 

your probaly wright nephy, but im still unsure about the making the laws thing, i know gods too perfect to make the laws but still..., and the stone thing, im quite positive you know about being stoned to death, the people who have never done anything wrong, could throw the first stone, but since they have all sinned, the lady wasnt killed

 

Y'know it sure didn't stop Jesus from screwing up merchants displays in the temple, or promising an apocalyptic return. Obviously he does feel that its ok to have vengeance if the "sin" is serious enough.

 

ewww... thats just brutal! what makes you think that u can do that to anyone? thats just so violent! i dont think that people in civilyzed society should even think about doing something like that. seriously, its not middle ages anymore. I was always wondering where do people get such maniacal ideas from?

 

ewww thats so cruel!!!! im not sure if you would like your organs stretches out and eaten by a pack of dogs...!!!!!!

 

When did I say I could? I was tossing it out as an example of brutal punishment.

And if you know that thats what would happen, would you commit a crime?

Well I got it from a sci fi book called 'The Risen Empire'. And the author got it from real life history.

 

CONGRATULATIONS! You figured it out! Punishments that people don't like!!!

 

Actually, I don't care but I am either for it or against it in reality. However...


It is expected first of all in society that we, as its typical members or citizens, should recognize the difference between life and death. By common observation, a living thing has but one life and a living thing has but one life to lose by nature and within nature.

Nature is the taker of life and nature is the giver of life. We are nature's design and subjects. We have a conscience, a will, but we also have emotions and personality. It is assumed that we have control over ourselves for all voluntary action. Yet, within individuals there is still nature for involuntary action.

An individual who is guilty of a crime also has a life given by nature. A crime committed by this individual is an act without control. That is an involuntary act. All crimes are not voluntary because voluntary acts require control which criminals lack. Here, criminals act within their nature.

But society comes with typical individuals who act voluntarily as in the acceptance of laws or proper manners in humanity. Also, there is nature in every one of us.

However, to commit a crime by individual nature deserves nature's judgement. It is not in our conscience, will, or nature to judge how wrong or how right others are. Alas, we are raised to think otherwise from birth.

We should consider that all criminals are criminals by nature and let nature be the judge, not us.

A solution is to deal with crime in a swift and less distressing manner so that individuals who are not criminals do not lose their sanity or control over themselves in witnessing or waiting for the process of punishment.

Imprisonment is ideal but where and how that would take place are the main ideas. Perhaps bind the criminals in chains to the earth? Chain them in the desert? Or confine them in the jungle? That is, to ask nature to deal with the menace. Nature does whatever it likes. It would be wise to remember to imprison them in some secure way there such that it is not humanly possible to break free.

 

1) Nature is not a concious entity.

2) If it is just nature for some criminals to do what they do, how do you know it isn't our nature to judge?

 

Does one speak to differ or does one speak for?

Does one require nature to be conscious in order to judge? Why?

It is in some that there exists a nature to judge even though they are not qualify to judge for their own life and death are not within their individual control. Nature is the sole judge.

 

So what qualifies a murderer to take anothers life? Just because its their "nature"?

And nature doesn't judge anything. Nature is just... nothing. It's what happens in the normal processes of the universe. Our very sentience is an expression of our nature; stop acting like theres some wrinkled old woman calling upon her planeteers to murder people she wants dead.