The Death Penalty.

Question is, are you for or against the death penalty, and why?

My answer, as Noir already knows is yes. I believe that if you murder someone, you should be put to death. Why should you drain society hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep your murdering ass alive for the rest of your life sitting comfortably in prison? A murderer is a cancer on society, and is best simply removed.

I'm for it when guilt is established with scientific evidence. To answer the next question "should the State murder its citizens", my response is that the State (or its representative) is simply fulfilling the laws on the books and the will of the people. It's no different that if someone jumps off a building; the building or the law of gravity didn't commit murder, they just fulfilled their obligation.

I'm for, but only for the murders

Southern Man wrote:I'm for it when guilt is established with scientific evidence. To answer the next question "should the State murder its citizens", my response is that the State (or its representative) is simply fulfilling the laws on the books and the will of the people. It's no different that if someone jumps off a building; the building or the law of gravity didn't commit murder, they just fulfilled their obligation.

Hm, nice slant, you do however for that gravity does not have morals or ethics.
I think it is wrong that the state can murder its citiizens, and can not see why people will tolerate murder, esspeaily when you take religious types, for one shoud 'turn the other cheek' and 'thou shall no commit murder' yet with the death penailty the state has blood on its hands.

And how perfect will this evidence have to be? it is quite unlike you will have 100% proof in most cases, and to be guilty there needs only be reasonable doubt. There have been plenty of cases were those on death row have been found innocent, or cases were in Britain were men who have been locked up for 15+ years are innocent, our system insures that no innocent man will ever be murdered by the state, does yours?

I believe that if you murder someone, you should be put to death.

Would there be any other offences that carry the death penalty? for example rape, pedophillia, manslaughter, Large tax fraud (were huge sums are involved are involved)?

Why should you drain society hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep your murdering ass alive for the rest of your life sitting comfortably in prison?

Firstly i'm sure it isn't 'comfortable' and if it is there is something wrong with the prison, secondly, what price do you put on an innocent man being put to death? What if you were the innocent man in question? and simply the victim of circumstance?

A murderer is a cancer on society, and is best simply removed.

I agree, but i see 'being removed' as being locked up.

Laws don’t have to have morals or ethics. They just have to be consistent. The Biblical phrases that you cite refer to individuals; people; not governments or institutions.

It has been shown consistently that when the death penalty is re-instituted in a State then the murder rate declines, therefore lives are saved. One could therefore argue that to not institute the death penalty is tantamount to murder, and of innocents, not convicted violent criminals.

In the US the accused is innocent unless the preponderance of evidence proves “beyond a reasonable doubt” about the accusation. It also requires a unanimous decision by 12 jurors who have been acceptable in advance by the defendant.

The SCOTUS has recently ruled that the death penalty is too harsh a sentence for rape, even child rape.

Laws don’t have to have morals or ethics.

But they are created by people that do.

The Biblical phrases that you cite refer to individuals; people; not governments or institutions.

Is the government not by the people, for the people, of the people?
You are also suggesting that if you have a large group and call themselves a government they are immune from biblical citations?

It has been shown consistently that when the death penalty is re-instituted in a State then the murder rate declines, therefore lives are saved.

And yet so many are realeased after miscarages of justice, no justice system is perfect, but in ours if you are found innocent years after the conviction you are sure the state will not have murdered you.

Who are SCOTUS?
do you support the death sentance for rape (both child and adult)?

This coming from a country with over 11000 deaths per year from fire-arms...surly with the death penality this should be much much less?

One could therefore argue that to not institute the death penalty is tantamount to murder, and of innocents, not convicted violent criminals.

How very Orwellian of you, war is peace, freedom is slavery, Ignorance is Strength...

In the US the accused is innocent unless the preponderance of evidence proves “beyond a reasonable doubt” about the accusation. It also requires a unanimous decision by 12 jurors who have been acceptable in advance by the defendant.

Noir wrote: Firstly i'm sure it isn't 'comfortable' and if it is there is something wrong with the prison, secondly, what price do you put on an innocent man being put to death? What if you were the innocent man in question? and simply the victim of circumstance?

While the victim is dead, the killer is still alive, and yes, most people would take prison over death. But who said anything about putting an innocent man to death? I didn't. I said "convicted killers." If someone witnessed the killing, if you were video taped killing someone, or they found DNA evidence on you like blood or fluids, something that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that YOU DID IT, then you should be summarily executed.

Noir wrote:I agree, but i see 'being removed' as being locked up.

Why force the public to pay to keep a convicted killer alive? What sense does that make? What if the majority of public opinion is to have the killer put to death?

Noir wrote:

But they are created by people that do.

And yet so many are realeased after miscarages of justice, no justice system is perfect, but in ours if you are found innocent years after the conviction you are sure the state will not have murdered you.

Who are SCOTUS?
do you support the death sentance for rape (both child and adult)?
….

1. There are biblical phrases that apply to governments as well:

Genesis 9:6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.

Romans 13:1-7
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

2. Again, I believe the establish of guilt is very important, and would require scientific evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
3. Supreme Court of the United States.
4. Again, I support the death penalty for murder only.

1. There are biblical phrases that apply to governments as well:

Genesis 9:6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.

Romans 13:1-7
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

These are from Genesis and romans, hence not Christian. (while 'turn the other cheek' is Christian)

2. Again, I believe the establish of guilt is very important, and would require scientific evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt”.

In an ideal world this would be possible, but as it is not i think it is better we having a system were teh state can not murder someone becuase they are sure they've done the deed, only for scientfic developments to show that 8 years later it was someone else, and nothings foolproof and future proof.

3. Supreme Court of the United States.

Okkie dokes, noted.

4. Again, I support the death penalty for murder only.

Why only murder? If you support the death penalty as a punishment then surly those who commit offences that are worse than murder should face the death penality, i.e. a serial rapiest, or someone who has kidnapped children and subjected them to sexual acts?

But who said anything about putting an innocent man to death?

When you have a systems that murders you will have innocents murdered. Fact. I'm sure a quick serch on google would bring up plenty of examples of people on death row who have been released after being found not guilty, or for some who had there name cleared too late, and were murdered by the state.

I said "convicted killers." If someone witnessed the killing, if you were video taped killing someone, or they found DNA evidence on you like blood or fluids,

None of these are full proof or future proof. Errors and miscarriages of justice have happened in the past and will happen in the future.

Why force the public to pay to keep a convicted killer alive? What sense does that make? What if the majority of public opinion is to have the killer put to death?

Again you are putting a price on the cost of life, tehh cost of a possible innocent life who was a victim of circumstance or other scenario's. As for public opinion, that should count for very little, as public opinion can be very easily swayed by scare storries ect ect. you can not reduce the justice system to a matter of a witch hunt cus the mases want it.

Pale Rider wrote:I said "convicted killers." If someone witnessed the killing, if you were video taped killing someone, or they found DNA evidence on you like blood or fluids,

Noir wrote:None of these are full proof or future proof. Errors and miscarriages of justice have happened in the past and will happen in the future.

Wrong. All of those instances are fool proof.

Pale Rider wrote:Why force the public to pay to keep a convicted killer alive? What sense does that make? What if the majority of public opinion is to have the killer put to death?

Noir wrote:Again you are putting a price on the cost of life, tehh cost of a possible innocent life who was a victim of circumstance or other scenario's. As for public opinion, that should count for very little, as public opinion can be very easily swayed by scare storries ect ect. you can not reduce the justice system to a matter of a witch hunt cus the mases want it.

No, I'm not. You're skirting the issue. The issue is, that beyond a shadow of a doubt, that a person is guilty of murder, either by eye witness, video, or DNA evidence, all of which are 100% incriminating of your guilt, then YOU are imposing YOUR opinion on people that YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this murderer alive, albeit against their will. What gives you the right to do that? What if I don't want to pay to keep a murderer alive? Why should I have to? Answer that...

Noir wrote:

These are from Genesis and romans, hence not Christian. (while 'turn the other cheek' is Christian)

In an ideal world this would be possible, but as it is not i think it is better we having a system were teh state can not murder someone becuase they are sure they've done the deed, only for scientfic developments to show that 8 years later it was someone else, and nothings foolproof and future proof.

Why only murder? If you support the death penalty as a punishment then surly those who commit offences that are worse than murder should face the death penality, i.e. a serial rapiest, or someone who has kidnapped children and subjected them to sexual acts?

1. Genesis and writings of the Apostle Paul are both in the Christian Bible.
2. We have a system based on reasonable doubt. In the past that has been used with eyewitness testimony only, and mistakes have been made. I am suggesting reasonable doubt to include scientific evidence, which is a higher standard. No, it is not perfect, but there is no such thing as absolute certainty in matters of law. To require such would be unreasonable.
3. The Bible says “an eye for an eye”, and that’s good enough for me. Again, SCOTUS has ruled that rape is not punishable by death, and I agree with them.

1. Genesis and writings of the Apostle Paul are both in the Christian Bible.

They are in the old testiment no? Christianity is the teachings of christ, separate from the OT

We have a system based on reasonable doubt. In the past that has been used with eyewitness testimony only, and mistakes have been made. I am suggesting reasonable doubt to include scientific evidence, which is a higher standard. No, it is not perfect, but there is no such thing as absolute certainty in matters of law. To require such would be unreasonable.

Well pale seems to think they're 100% full proof....

And when you are talking about possibly taking an innocnet mans life nothing is unreasonable.

The Bible says “an eye for an eye”, and that’s good enough for me.

That is the OT....the teachings of christ speak of forgiveness, and repentance, those are Christain beliefs, 'an eye for an eye' is not a christain belief.

SCOTUS has ruled that rape is not punishable by death, and I agree with them.

So you see no crime possible worse than murder...interesting.

Yes, if I "see" someone kill somebody, and I have video of it, and the murderer has had the victims blood found on them and proved to be the victims by DNA testing, which is 1 in 100,000,000,000 out of one, then what more would you want? What if you witnessed someone kill your mother. Would you NOT want people to believe you? Even if you had video of the killer in the act, and the killer was found with blood evidence on them? You'd still want you mothers MURDERER to LIVE?!

Can you answer that, and this...

YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this murderer alive, albeit against their will. What gives you the right to do that? What if I don't want to pay to keep a murderer alive? Why should I have to?

Pale Rider wrote:Yes, if I "see" someone kill somebody, and I have video of it, and the murderer has had the victims blood found on them and proved to be the victims by DNA testing, which is 1 in 100,000,000,000 out of one, then what more would you want? What if you witnessed someone kill your mother. Would you NOT want people to believe you? Even if you had video of the killer in the act, and the killer was found with blood evidence on them? You'd still want you mothers MURDERER to LIVE?!

Can you answer that, and this...

Yes, btw if i saw my mother being murdered i don't think i'd be taking a video. Two wrongs don't make a right and i would rather see that person suffer every day as they suffered a lifetime sentence in jail.

YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this murderer alive, albeit against their will. What gives you the right to do that? What if I don't want to pay to keep a murderer alive? Why should I have to?

You could say that for anything, i.e. 'YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this rapist alive' or 'YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this paedophile alive'

Why should I have to?

Well in the end it comes down to who the people ellect into power, and hence, who has the mandate. So i can say the same back to you

YOU are going to FORCE them to now MURDER those wo have been convicted, albeit against our will. What gives you the right to do that? What if I don't want to murder them and stoop to there level? Why should I have to?

Noir wrote:

Pale Rider wrote:Yes, if I "see" someone kill somebody, and I have video of it, and the murderer has had the victims blood found on them and proved to be the victims by DNA testing, which is 1 in 100,000,000,000 out of one, then what more would you want? What if you witnessed someone kill your mother. Would you NOT want people to believe you? Even if you had video of the killer in the act, and the killer was found with blood evidence on them? You'd still want you mothers MURDERER to LIVE?!

Can you answer that, and this...

Yes, btw if i saw my mother being murdered i don't think i'd be taking a video. Two wrongs don't make a right and i would rather see that person suffer every day as they suffered a lifetime sentence in jail.

YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this murderer alive, albeit against their will. What gives you the right to do that? What if I don't want to pay to keep a murderer alive? Why should I have to?

You could say that for anything, i.e. 'YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this rapist alive' or 'YOU are going to FORCE them to now PAY to keep this paedophile alive'

Why should I have to?

Well in the end it comes down to who the people ellect into power, and hence, who has the mandate. So i can say the same back to you

YOU are going to FORCE them to now MURDER those wo have been convicted, albeit against our will. What gives you the right to do that? What if I don't want to murder them and stoop to there level? Why should I have to?

We're only talking about murderers, so, mentioning someone else is just wasting your time and mine clouding the issue with non issues.

So it boils down to majority rules. Should a murderer be put to death or not. By the little poll taken here, you lose. Not only that, I believe it's a good representation of the rest of the world.

well i was always gonna be outnumberd on the site,, thats just the way things are, however:

Not only that, I believe it's a good representation of the rest of the world.

Lets look at the world

According to Amnesty International, 137 countries have abolished the death penalty. During 2007, 24 countries, 88% in China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States alone, executed 1,252 people compared to 1,591 in 2006. Nearly 3,350 people were sentenced to death in 51 countries. More than 20,000 prisoners are on death row across the world. See also U.S. Figures.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html

Look at some of the great nations the USA is with...Zimbabwe, Somalia, Lebanon, North Korea, Cuba and China...to name but a few.

Noir wrote:well i was always gonna be outnumberd on the site,, thats just the way things are, however:

Not only that, I believe it's a good representation of the rest of the world.

Lets look at the world

According to Amnesty International, 137 countries have abolished the death penalty. During 2007, 24 countries, 88% in China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States alone, executed 1,252 people compared to 1,591 in 2006. Nearly 3,350 people were sentenced to death in 51 countries. More than 20,000 prisoners are on death row across the world. See also U.S. Figures.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html

Look at some of the great nations the USA is with...Zimbabwe, Somalia, Lebanon, North Korea, Cuba and China...to name but a few.

Oh please... infoplease.com... what kind of a biased website is that? Give me a real one... See what I mean?

So maybe I was wrong. It doesn't really matter to me. Justice used to be swift back in the old west days here in America. You murdered somebody, you were convicted, you swung from a rope the next day at noon. I wish it was still that way.

You have to realise one other thing Noir, I'm 53 years old. My opinions may not reflect how many other Americans feel. Many Americans may agree with you on this one. So you're only getting a debate from a few conservatives here.

And if you feel out numbered, invite a few of your liberal UK friends to join you here. The more the merrier.

Are you sayin they are lying about which countries have the death penalty?

and its always better to be outnumbered, more targets , but as the site grows it shall even out i guess.

Noir wrote: Are you sayin they are lying about which countries have the death penalty?

I was joking, the way you did to me earlier.

Noir wrote:and its always better to be outnumbered, more targets , but as the site grows it shall even out i guess.

Well Tommy already found the place on a search, and he's from France. So yeah, I'm sure you'll have brother and sister liberals here soon. I'm advertising the board in different places, and I have no control over who joins. That's not the idea. I don't really want the board to be known as a "conservative" or "liberal" board. Just a board where you can come and debate, freely. So far we've had a few good ones going. I've enjoyed it.

oui oui, i knew ya were jokin lawl.

btw as we're kinda on the subject, what does beltway imply? i assume its an American phrase.

Noir wrote:oui oui, i knew ya were jokin lawl.

btw as we're kinda on the subject, what does beltway imply? i assume its an American phrase.

The "Beltway" is Washington, where all our illustrious, puss bag, politicians fuck off and reside.

Usual response from me. No. The criminal justice system isn't good enough that I'd support the death penalty.

Diuretic wrote:Usual response from me. No. The criminal justice system isn't good enough that I'd support the death penalty.

Even with eye an witness, video, and DNA evidence? I don't think anything could be any more definitively proven. If you going to say no punishment after that amount of proof, then you may as well say you don't want anyone convicted of anything. Just throw the court system out.

Noir wrote:
They are in the old testiment no? Christianity is the teachings of christ, separate from the OT

So you see no crime possible worse than murder...interesting.

1. The Apostle Paul.

Main Entry: apos·tle
1: one sent on a mission: as a: one of an authoritative New Testament group sent out to preach the gospel and made up especially of Christ's 12 original disciples and Paul b: the first prominent Christian missionary to a region or group

2. Noir this is not a flame site. Don't try to put words in my mouth.