Capital Punishment (14 Viewers)

[David01]

that is just it, what is the standard?
should lock up people who have willing taken another life
or should we say that you know the consequence for doing that... death
I understand what you are saying but I feel that some people really don't deserve to be alive for the actions and crimes they commited

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[GordoDeCentral]

Okay, here's an idea. We torture prisoners. For someone's who killed several people, a death sentence is peanuts and doesn't come close to "restoring balance". On the other hand, you can torture this person for decades through the best hits of what human civilization has produced in its jails, dungeons and interrogation chambers. Someone who's been through 30 years of torture is so destroyed that you do him a favor if you kill him.

How's that?

no thats the thing it has worked for thousands of years and "restored" balance.

 

[Martin]

that is just it, what is the standard?
should lock up people who have willing taken another life
or should we say that you know the consequence for doing that... death

Prison already prevents them doing it again. You can get further revenge, but it serves no purpose. It doesn't restore the loss.

I understand what you are saying but I feel that some people really don't deserve to be alive for the actions and crimes they commited

I don't necessarily disagree. However, the point is that we can agree as a society, which most western societies have, that we are above murder, we don't commit murder. Because if we did, we would be murderers as those we call criminals.

no thats the thing it has worked for thousands of years and "restored" balance.

No, it hasn't. Do you think people who have lost a loved one feel fine again when the killer gets killed? It doesn't restore the loss in any way, all it is is revenge.

People who can't get justice fall back on revenge. Understandable, but corrupt.

 

[HelterSkelter]

Martin what would you suggest the punishment for someone who commited murder,and was rightlfully found guilty of it in a court of law, be?The argument about people being given death sentences when they were not guilty gets tossed around a lot by people who are against it,which is understandable.But removing the pnunishment all together to protetect the innocent is not correct,since you also end up protecting the hideously guilty too.What's improtant that you make your Judicial system strong enough to detemine who was guilty and who was innocent.Removing a punishment to protect the innocent is not the answer.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

No, it hasn't. Do you think people who have lost a loved one feel fine again when the killer gets killed? It doesn't restore the loss in any way, all it is is revenge.

People who can't get justice fall back on revenge. Understandable, but corrupt.

that's the problem, we fail to recognise all the elements of this balance or order(seems more aligned with what i am getting at) it's not just the vistim and the perpetrator and it's not just now and and the proximate future. order is far reaching.

 

[Martin]

Martin what would you suggest the punishment for someone who commited murder,and was rightlfully found guilty of it in a court of law, be?The argument about people being given death sentences when they were not guilty gets tossed around a lot by people who are against it,which is understandable.But removing the pnunishment all together to protetect the innocent is not correct,since you also end up protecting the hideously guilty too.What's improtant that you make your Judicial system strong enough to detemine who was guilty and who was innocent.Removing a punishment to protect the innocent is not the answer.

Prison is supposed to be a form of punishment. Obviously, when prisons start to look like trendy hangouts like that Austrian one then we've gone wrong, but that is the point of a prison.

If you crave punishment so bad, I assume you're not opposed to torture in prison? What better way to punish someone?

 

[Martin]

that's the problem, we fail to recognise all the elements of this balance or order(seems more aligned with what i am getting at) it's not just the vistim and the perpetrator and it's not just now and and the proximate future. order is far reaching.

Could you run that through an unobfuscator? I don't understand any of it.

 

[HelterSkelter]

We're not talking about all punishments here though.Only Capital Punishment,which i think is completely correct when a person is found guilty of Murder.Giving death penalties for crimes like Treason for example,is something that i do not agree with.

 

[David01]

OK listen Martin, I agree that the punishment for a crime is a reflexion of a society and therefor I believe capital punishment should be only given if all other possibilities are pointless
I don't think you should sentence anyone to die because he commited a crime but I do believe it is the only sollution when we are dealing with a person who has absolutely no respect for any other life and would be a constant threat to society
there are circumstances that a society has no choice for it's own safety but to kill the offender
it should never be the rule but the exeption

 

[GordoDeCentral]

comprehensive evaluation of said "balance" with society in center stage and a sufficient timeline. You cant evaluate the effectiveness of that punishment as a balance measure by looking at just one aspect.

 

[Martin]

We're not talking about all punishments here though.Only Capital Punishment,which i think is completely correct when a person is found guilty of Murder.

I ask again, do you oppose torture?

Giving death penalties for crimes like Treason for example,is something that i do not agree with.

Not complete barbarism then. I'm pleased.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

this is looking like a gangbang you can answer me later Martin

 

[Martin]

OK listen Martin, I agree that the punishment for a crime is a reflexion of a society and therefor I believe capital punishment should be only given if all other possibilities are pointless
I don't think you should sentence anyone to die because he commited a crime but I do believe it is the only sollution when we are dealing with a person who has absolutely no respect for any other life and would be a constant threat to society

...if he weren't behind bars?

there are circumstances that a society has no choice for it's own safety but to kill the offender
it should never be the rule but the exeption

Are you talking about a case where we can't assure that someone is kept safely in prison? Because that is the assumption I've been using all along.

 

[Martin]

comprehensive evaluation of said "balance" with society in center stage and a sufficient timeline. You cant evaluate the effectiveness of that punishment as a balance measure by looking at just one aspect.

You are being horribly abstract. How do you calculate this "balance"? What units do you measure it in? What is this timeline?

What are all the "other" aspects?

 

[HelterSkelter]

I ask again, do you oppose torture?

Not complete barbarism then. I'm pleased.

No i dont oppose torture,if that's what the person deserves.And this isnt Barbarism.It's justice.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

heres balance for you: in a village of 50 people functioning normally, until one day one individual kills another. The inhabitants of the village all rely on each other for their standards of life to stay the same how do they remedy this situation, keeping in mind that the harmony of all the inhabitants how do you remedy

 

[Martin]

No i dont oppose torture,if that's what the person deserves.

Good, because murder is the ultimate form of torture. Therefore I think your opinion is consistent.

And this isnt Barbarism.It's justice.

The difference being what?

 

[Enron]

We're not talking about all punishments here though.Only Capital Punishment,which i think is completely correct when a person is found guilty of Murder.Giving death penalties for crimes like Treason for example,is something that i do not agree with.

What about a crime of passion or a case of unintended murder resulting from neglect, bad judgement etc? Should those causes be dealt with to the same result as predetermined, calculated murder? How about the kid who shoots his brother by accident while playing with his fathers gun? Or the retarded man who has no idea what he was doing was wrong or any idea where he is or what will happen to him in the future? Are all these to be tried and sentenced the same, as murder?

I don't know about you but I'd rather see someone guilty of treason go to the death chamber than the retarded fellow or the unfortunate sibling mentioned above.

 

[David01]

...if he weren't behind bars?



Are you talking about a case where we can't assure that someone is kept safely in prison? Because that is the assumption I've been using all along.

people can always escape from prison and every time that happens a shock goes through a society
ever heard of Marc Dutroux?
he was a convicted child murderer and rapist
he was sentenced to life and he escaped a couple of years ago
he was caught later on but you can't believe the terror that caused here in Belgium
I'm not saying you should kill him because he scares people but for the crimes he did

 

[HelterSkelter]

Killing a person for no apparent reason is Barbaric.Sentencing a murderer to death isnt.