Death Sentence

I completely understand that justice and morals are a matter of personal preference which is why humans have disagreed more times than not.

I agree that people can lose their right to live, yet I see a lot of people don't. It doesn't mean I'm going to go all Dexter on a murderer that fits my reasoning. I'm only willing to express my opinions.

And hey, it doesn't bother a lot of people when others are given the death penalty for their crimes. You may disagree with it, but it doesn't matter to you because you're not affected and maybe it's a solution for people who were harmed by him.

But hey, you and I can agree that criminals are better off being raped in the bum for life. I guess there's just more than one solution, eh?

 

Well, whether one agrees with death being the apropriate sentence for him or not it certainly wouldn' t have hurt to trial him first. But yes, if the talion law was actually implemented a lot of american heads would start rolling for what they did abroad, For all I know Bin Laden might have been a talion law vigilante.

As for "no such thing as right or wrong" well you' re right in the absolute. However once we' ve all agreed on a subjective standard to build our morality upon, say for instance people' s wellbeing, then we can list the available courses of actions in a given scenario and compare their efficiency in terms of overall wellbeing, Sometimes we can even do that perfectly objectively.

I' m not addressing this to you in particular mind you, you' re just the one I happen to quote. I saw people draw the "everyone' s entitled to their opinion" card an awful lot on here lately and I grew tired of it. Of course they are, so ****ing what ? Kind of a duh statement. It doesn' t mean that all opinions are equally deserving of respect nor that they shouldn' t be challenged. Challenging them is just, guess what, giving yet another opinion.

To get back on the subject when we compare how many lives each alternative spares or how much they cost it' s simple math, not much room for subjectivity there. Looking at statistics should give us an idea about which is the best deterrant. It does get trickier to establish wish is most "appropriate" punishment though, I' m not terribly concerned about the fact that some people believe in hell, if they can' t prove its existence the point is moot, but even from an agnostic perspective it is fairly obvious that the suffering or solace that a person experience in a given situation cannot be quantified objectively, let alone universally.

 

Oh ok I had know clue. lol and I only replied to the first part of your post and nothing lower so it was okay for me too reply. I couldn't quote properly because I was on my phone. I just don't want to keep on disagreeing because it will literally get nowhere. This should be a poll. lol

 

• Crypt
• Pat
• Miles

• Actually, I agree with the death penalty 100%. I was simply looking at this from a different perspective, and explaining why there should be more emotions put into it than just hate and anger. As for what happens to the inmates behind bars, well, it's . . . none of my concern, if you catch my meaning.
• I was using that as an expression of my views on "right and wrong." I'm glad we took care of him. I just like pointing out that there is a distinct difference in what America views of the matter, and his homelands views.
  
  
  Okay so, like I said, "There is no right and wrong, there is do and don't do." If a group of ten agrees that an apple is no longer an apple, but an orange, and they were faced by a single person who still believed it was an apple, it would no longer be an apple. A pretty simplistic analogy to show that my statement is very similar to yours.
  
  
  I can't agree with you on this. Everyone's opinion has right to be respected. There's a difference between respecting someones opinion and going against it. Sure, you can call them out on it, and argue about it. But when you pretty much flat out state that they are "wrong," I don't believe that's okay. This ties back in with the whole right/wrong thing.
  
  
  Hmm . . . yes. I agree?
• I also agree with this. This should have definitely been a poll starting out.

 

Putting a criminal to death can actually make you seem worse than the criminal. Because in a way you’re killing someone for the simple reason of feeling better. Should anyone be killed just so you can feel happier? Is that what a living being is worth to you?
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of someone randomly killing two kids on the street? Strange example unless it’s based on a real murder case, then please post a link to the article. But in this example of Joe, you seem to believe that all killers have no regret for their actions. Most people actually regret the crime they committed the minority who have been shaped to be criminals or those with some type of mental deficiency however do not.

You’re taking their fundamental right to live, the criminals, without any regret or concern. That is troubling, you seem to have a price on human life that can actually be met. And what’s your reasoning with this? That they will learn pain? How will someone getting killed make them learn what it means to be killed? They’ll be dead and gone, they won’t learn from it. That’s more a self-serving reasoning to justify why you want them dead, and not actually a logical reason. That’s emotion, vengeance, hate, pleasure. Those are not the right feelings to experience when deciding on a life and death situation.
Do not presume to know all about prison. There are many different grades of prison, in different countries, with different wardens, guards, prisoners, facilities, rehabilitation opportunities, criminal activity, gangs, frequency of violence and so much more. I don’t think anyone here can tell you truthfully an experience in prison as a murderer, rapist, paedophile or some equivalent, all are treated differently by the clichés within prison society.

I feel like you may or may not have read the previous posts, but I will humour.

'An eye for an eye makes the whole world bling’ – Gandhi

Also, how do you judge who was deserving and undeserving to be killed by someone?
You can justify a reasoning all you wish, but ultimately it’s not likely to be even close to what actually truthfully happens. If we punished everyone who we thought could do bad we’d devolve into a Big Brother society where the very thoughts we have in our head are punished and not our actions. Humans are not above acts of barbarism, clearly obvious from the news, however it should be that in this age we have learned discipline, to not let heated emotions decide the actions our society should take. We’ve had enough senseless, stupid and emotional decisions in history that have left us with a lot of bodies and not a lot of change in the fact that we still murder each other.

Did you know Bin Laden? Did you see him kill someone? We’re told a lot of things, but how do you know they’re true?
Also, since soldiers have killed others should they be killed in turn, by your understanding?

I'm wondering, but I don't think you've put a lot of thought into your argument, I'm sorry to see.