Gibber Posted November 11, 2007 Report Share Posted November 11, 2007 IE: argument over? If you can explain why emotion has to be abandoned when making decisions. Is there no emotional involvement in your moral objection to capital punishment? or is it just logic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepshagger Posted November 11, 2007 Report Share Posted November 11, 2007 An exchange of views which can alter nothing is pointless because it detracts attention from the real issues. you really don't believe in democracy do you.what are the REAL issues then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted November 11, 2007 Report Share Posted November 11, 2007 Its like this: If someone killed my brother, I, in a state of emotion would want the death penalty - NO alternative, but it may not be the best solution for the criminal. Usually victims families are not willing to listen to reasons why the killer killed (was he provoked? is he mentally stable?), and just want him/her dead. Emotion over logic. Another example: Someone does something bad to me, I'm pissed off and want revenge (emotion) and so I go do something bad to them. Two wrongs don't make a right. I shouldn't have done anything to them because now they're going to be pissed off and go and do something bad to someone else. Karma man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepshagger Posted November 11, 2007 Report Share Posted November 11, 2007 who gives a toss what is best for the killer it is what is best for society that really matters.you and I are lucky we have not lost anyone close to us through a murderer.So I have formulated my opinion from logic, no emotions hereand with a calculated view the only way you can be sure a cold blooded murderer can 100% guaranteed never do it again is if they no longer exist.even in jail they can kill it might be a prison guard or it might be another prisoner, some one jailed for not paying their council tax sayhow can a civilised society lock up killers and council tax dodgers in the same prisonby your reasoning the only difference between these two crimes is one of severity6 months for not paying council tax 5 years for torturing and killing a baby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 how can a civilised society lock up killers and council tax dodgers in the same prison Because they have both broken laws set in place by that society. Thats how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibber Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 Its like this: If someone killed my brother, I, in a state of emotion would want the death penalty - NO alternative, but it may not be the best solution for the criminal. Usually victims families are not willing to listen to reasons why the killer killed (was he provoked? is he mentally stable?), and just want him/her dead. Emotion over logic. Yes, lets ignore extenuating circumstances because nobody really wants to see people executed if there is a situation that justified the killing. But where is your logical justification for no death penalty if you are taking emotion out of the process of deciding what to do with murderers (that have no recourse to diminished responsibility or extenuating circumstances). And best solution for the criminal can be read in a number of ways, maybe you can explain what that means. Another example: Someone does something bad to me, I'm pissed off and want revenge (emotion) and so I go do something bad to them. Two wrongs don't make a right. I shouldn't have done anything to them because now they're going to be pissed off and go and do something bad to someone else. Karma man Imprisoning people is a wrong isn't it? (Its Article 5(?) of the HR Act). Prisoners have also been known to be "pissed off" and seek revenge. Are you against imprisonment because 2 wrongs don't make a right and a released prisoner with a grudge is liable to take revenge? The executed ones certainly won't be taking revenge. No Karma for them man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 But where is your logical justification for no death penalty for one; wrongful convictions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepshagger Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 In the last hundred years only twice has the USA executed someone who may not have been guilty. perfectly acceptable statistically considering the thousands that have been taken out of circulation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibber Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 But where is your logical justification for no death penalty for one; wrongful convictions. Yes I would agree, I would vote against the death penalty in real life for this reason and the extenuating circumstances issue, and I have problems with the state deciding who to kill and for what crimes. But as a theoretical discussion I see the death penalty argument as very convincing. As a theoretical argument what can you offer against it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njugle Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 In the last hundred years only twice has the USA executed someone who may not have been guilty. perfectly acceptable statistically considering the thousands that have been taken out of circulationSeems to be different depending on how you view it.Juan Roberto Melendez spent nearly 18 years on death row for a crime he didn’t commit. This year, he joined the nearly 100 death row prisoners nationwide who have been found innocent and released. When he was finally exonerated -- thanks to the chance discovery of a crucial piece of evidence by a lawyer who was cleaning his office -- he became the 22nd death row prisoner released in Florida, the state that leads the country in exonerations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 In the last hundred years only twice has the USA executed someone who may not have been guilty. perfectly acceptable statistically considering the thousands that have been taken out of circulation It is still too much. Even if you don't believe that an executioner killing a guilty person is wrong you surely think that killing an innocent is murder on the executioners part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 As a theoretical argument what can you offer against it? I guess you could say Life (meaning LIFE) in prison. If the death penalty worked (as a deterrent) then there wouldn't be so many on death rows in prisons. I like this quote: The death penalty says more about the people who support it than it does about the criminal. It is a cop out, because of sterile thinking which leaves no room for questions such as; 'how did we as a system fail this person in such a way that he resorts to murder as a mechanism to solve problems?' 'How can we as a system learn from this person that which we can use in our education system to prevent such occurrences?' 'How can we teach compassion and understanding when we can so coldly end a life without true remorse?' bed time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepshagger Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 he joined the nearly 100 death row prisoners nationwide who have been found innocent and released what more can i say the process worked, before they were executed they were found innocent and released.the guilty got their just desserts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAStewart Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 the process worked, before they were executed they were found innocent and released. Pretty shady to be told you're gonna be killed and then be told "oopsie daisy..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepshagger Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 with 40% of the vote we should be hanging them in Edinburgh now how come less than 40% gets wis a government but not a working gallows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.