'Thirteen shot dead' at US army base - Page 9

Flyboy · 30-11-2009, 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze

Very true Flyboy, but seeing as anyone is capable of killing at any time. Stopping one person murdering another is virtually impossible.... On the other hand. If murder is punished with death by hanging/electrocution/lethal injection/gas. Then if found guilty by a jury of their peers, then a murderer will not ever murder again....

Before we get the usual "but what if we execute an innocent man" argument. Innocents die in droves every year. While the number of murderers in prisons increases year by year. So pick a better argument against the death penalty....

Oh come on, not even you could believe that is a reasonable argument. Just because innocent people die, it is a justification to kill even more innocent people?

30-11-2009, 11:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Oh come on, not even you could believe that is a reasonable argument. Just because innocent people die, it is a justification to kill even more innocent people?

I just deleted the couple of paragraphs I'd written in reply, but realised I'd just be wasting everyones time. A minority of posters believe the death penalty needs to be brought back. A majority of posters on these boards believe otherwise.... Diametrically opposed arguments, and never the twain shall meet.... Anyway, I'll be trying not to post further in regard to this topic, in any future threads, as I'd just be wasting the pixels.

Osem · 30-11-2009, 12:02

I can't bring myself to advocate the death penalty but perhaps fewer people would call for it if a life sentence actually meant LIFE.

broadbandking · 30-11-2009, 13:43

I would agree with the death penalty if it was full proof and it was 100% effective but it isn't, as the above post LIFE should mean LIFE.

The best way to treat a criminal stick them in a cell and they should just be given bread and water, instead of a TV and three cooked meals a day, that would make them wonder if jail is a easy sentence.

Derek · 30-11-2009, 16:38

Oh look another death penalty thread

Anyway seeing the usual 'What about the innocents that would be killed in droves' argument has been thrown into the mix I'll throw in my usual reply to these threads.

What if someone who is 100%, beyond any doubt guilty of murder would you still be against the death penalty.

**Chris** · 30-11-2009, 16:40

Yes. Because I believe in rehabilitation and the possibility of restitution. None of that is possible if the murderer is dead.

30-11-2009, 16:40

the only way I would accept they were beyond any shadow of a doubt guilty would be if I seen them do it with my own eyes

Flyboy · 30-11-2009, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

Oh look another death penalty thread

Anyway seeing the usual 'What about the innocents that would be killed in droves' argument has been thrown into the mix I'll throw in my usual reply to these threads.

What if someone who is 100%, beyond any doubt guilty of murder would you still be against the death penalty.

Seeing as that is supposed be the case in all cases, I can't see why that would need to be a factor.

TheDaddy · 30-11-2009, 18:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Seeing as that is supposed be the case in all cases, I can't see why that would need to be a factor.

Reasonable doubt in no way means 100% certain.

Derek · 30-11-2009, 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Seeing as that is supposed be the case in all cases, I can't see why that would need to be a factor.

Beyond all reasonable doubt is the threshold for criminal convictions. As mentioned thats different from absolutely guaranteed no doubt.

There are some people that will never be released due to the nature of their crimes, there are some that fall into the 100% guaranteed guilty category.

For them I've got absolutely no qualms about them being put to death rather than kept in fairly comfortable conditions at great cost for the rest of their lives.

**Maggy** · 30-11-2009, 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

Oh look another death penalty thread

Anyway seeing the usual 'What about the innocents that would be killed in droves' argument has been thrown into the mix I'll throw in my usual reply to these threads.

What if someone who is 100%, beyond any doubt guilty of murder would you still be against the death penalty.

Sadly even when we did have the death penalty people were still murdering other people...It wasn't a deterrent then and it wouldn't be now.

Gary L · 30-11-2009, 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Sadly even when we did have the death penalty people were still murdering other people...It wasn't a deterrent then and it wouldn't be now.

Things were different then. what never worked for one generation could work for another.
we have no real deterrent as it is now. we all know that there's not many vacancies at the prisons. and we do fines by long term small installments.

**Chris** · 30-11-2009, 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

Things were different then. what never worked for one generation could work for another.
we have no real deterrent as it is now. we all know that there's not many vacancies at the prisons. and we do fines by long term small installments.

What 'things' were different?

Gary L · 30-11-2009, 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

What 'things' were different?

The last time the death penalty was used was in 1964. that's 45 years ago.
society itself was different.

nobody knows that it wouldn't be a deterrent in todays society.

**Chris** · 30-11-2009, 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

The last time the death penalty was used was in 1964. that's 45 years ago.
society itself was different.

nobody knows that it wouldn't be a deterrent in todays society.

What was different about 'society itself'? In particular, could you mention the things that you think are relevant to murder and the death penalty.