Death penalty?

[Myzteryz]

Penalty death might be the only thing that keeps serial killers out of your neighborhood.

A person does not execute another.

A machine does.
The machine runs out of battery and *poof*

Crimes need consequences. Its the only thing that keeps us away from ... people you do not want to meet.

 

[Sargon]

Penalty death might be the only thing that keeps serial killers out of your neighborhood.

If the death penalty was an effective deterrent, there wouldn't be any murders nowadays.

 

[-fool-]

You're talking about the cost of one person.

A lot of people actually do spend quite some time in jail, despite the fact that they've done the worst of crimes.



Yeah, go talk things out with Charles Manson.



Chances are, that's a much more scholarly source then some teenagers and video game addicts debating on a forum.

There-in-lies the difference.

I think its just fine to spend money on people in jail. Thats something im willing to spend tax dollars on. Id rather do that, and crack down on the corrupt ***hats who use tax dollars to buy new houses and crap and get away with it.

Manson is an outlier. Hes just very messed up.

Remember, keep it clean, please.
—Sargon

 

[DM Cross]

If the death penalty was an effective deterrent, there wouldn't be any murders nowadays.

I think Krakka was referring to the murderers you catch.

What you can't catch, you can't exactly kill, either. That's not to be blamed on the death penalty, but rather the lack of ability people (The gov't.) have in FINDING the right people, or whatever.

Then you kill 'em.

 

[Myzteryz]

double post ok? pretty plz..

-and yea i think swearing isnt a problem for school. In freshman year of highschool 9th grade, i turned in a paper with fword in it (cathcer in the rye quotes). teacher didnt care. my english class now i wrote an entire story on the best time when i was high. other kids write about drinking and problems with screwing too many old guys they dont know... and read them outloud in class. these teachers seem to be mature enough to realize we arent in fourth grade, and treat us like that.

Keeping swear words out of school papers isn't a sign of
teacher-unmaturity.
Neo's teacher probably does not want swear words in his survey and thats understandable.

Every teacher is different and requires different things.
Lets just respect Neo's suggestion and warning. Lets not start to swear here.
Case done

 

[DM Cross]

I think its just fine to spend money on people in jail. Thats something im willing to spend tax dollars on. Id rather do that, and crack down on the corrupt ***hats who use tax dollars to buy new houses and crap and get away with it.

Manson is an outlier. Hes just very messed up.

Watch your mouth, remember?

Why bother spending money on people who are going to die in there anyway?

What, your "morals"? You think those people, if put in the other position, would stick to morals? That makes you a better person?

Tell me, what's more important, trying to help the actually morale population of America, or sticking to your morals yourself?

If I ran the government, there would be no morals. We do what we do to protect innocent people, that's it. That's our rule. Morals? Screw that.

And Manson's not so alone in how he is, mentally. Other people just aren't as notable.

 

[-fool-]

Watch your mouth, remember?

Why bother spending money on people who are going to die in there anyway?

What, your "morales"? You think those people, if put in the other position, would stick to morales? That makes you a better person?

Tell me, what's more important, trying to help the actually morale population of America, or sticking to your morales yourself?

If I ran the government, there would be no morales. We do what we do to protect innocent people, that's it. That's our rule. Morales? Screw that.

And Manson's not so alone in how he is, mentally. Other people just aren't as notable.

-im just going to assume you mean morals. correct me if im wrong.-

i dont think these people would stick to anything, but my morals say the government shouldnt be killing people. these people who are going to be killed, or life without parole, will not be changed. they messed up so badly they deserve to stay away from all the good things of life forever.

just because the death penalty is gone, people arent going to start going on massive crime rampages since there is no consquences. the amount of people on death row is very little. most people know you will not go there, and the actual consequences still exist.

and again, everything is morality. if you ran the government and protected innocent people, thats your morals. you beleive innocents should be protected, you are legislating your morality. thats the way the world works. people want to live in an area of other people who share thier morals and thoughts. morals = put into law. if we lived in a country where everyone thought it was ok to not wear a seatbelt, then it probably wouldnt be required in the law because people legislate thier own morality.

 

[DM Cross]

Yes, I meant morals, I edited that to show that, but my bad.

There is almost no argument whatsoever in this post.

"Protecting people is your morals", ok. That's true. But as far as "not killing people who commit crimes that kill innocent people" goes. No. Heck no.

I'm not saying kill all criminals. I'm cold-hearted, not insane. Kill those who kill. Simple as that.

And again, that last paragraph is just more stating that if I want to protect people, I will have morals, so ok, I explained it wrong. Thanks for pointing that out for me to clarify, but what's your point?

 

[-fool-]

when i finished that post i realized i had no point.

i donno. i just think im right and youre wrong..

 

[DM Cross]

Well... Yeah... That's amazing justification and all, but it's a debate.

You use facts to back up your opinion. Otherwise... Who cares?

To be honest, I love debating these things, and it's good practice for my new Law and Gov't. class for my senior year.

So please, if ya can't debate properly, go home It's over, you lose, get out of the car!

 

[-fool-]

loll....

i remember one comedy sketch where this guy was like "ladies. you know when youre going south, and youre done.... stop... good job... mission accomplished... get out of the car."

lol reminds me of that.
yea i got nothing to argue so w/e. but i like arguing too.

 

[DM Cross]

i remember one comedy sketch where this guy was like "ladies. you know when youre going south, and youre done.... stop... good job... mission accomplished... get out of the car."

Comedy Central, right? That's where I got it from.

Yes, arguing's all well in good, but when you're just presenting an opinion with nothing behind it, you know what people think?

Who gives a **************************?

 

[-fool-]

lol yea i agree. but thats all i got. oppinions.

(and yea comedy central lol).

-culater. dota

 

[DM Cross]

Ok, the fact that you brought DotA into a death penalty conversation is just over the line.

That's it. You're fired -.- Get out of the car!

Sleeeeeeeeeeeep.

Later.

 

[Mark YBARBO]

hey bonehead

come to Texas ,we put in an express lane for the death row ,hell why do I have to pay 10 yrs for his expense, we don’t play in Texas, yea innocent die ,but I think more people should get too it. What 30000 tax dollars a yr times ten to house a killer, sod come to Texas but don’t get out of line. Alexander come on we have no right to take life, but with DNA and new forensics come-on rapists and murders need to go, I guess Jeffery dahmer didn’t deserve death, I love Texas we execute more than all states combined,i hope you got a good lawyer and mega bucks
OJ RObert Blake comeone if you kill you die and rapists go first ,but it should be done the way they did it,innnocent till proven guilty yea right,you should be a reason for birth control

 

[DM Cross]

Wow, that was... Odd.

How do you claim "we have no right to take life" as you back up death row in Texas?

It's contradictary, makes no sense, and was a waste of time to read.

NEXT!

 

[Sud]

If I ran the government, there would be no morals.

They're already 1 step ahead of you.

And why are you guys still discussing this? My way is the only way. The punitive system is all about making people pay their debt to society. They do not pay their debt to society in either of your cases - if simply imprisoned they further rack up debt to society, if executed, they aren't paying anyone back.

Make the do hard labor for the rest of their miserable existance. Make them pay for their "housing" and anything they make above that goes as tribute to the victims family. If they don't cooperate, make their existance so utterly bleak and pathetic that they'd wish it would have been death.

 

[phyrex1an]

TI don't believe that "vengence creates more vengence" bull. You kill someone, you should die to balance it out.

Yea that is perfect
1 dead + 1 dead = 0 deads
Where is your math skill? If you could rescurect someone that would balance it out. Yea there is another option:

Someone murder someone else, someone is executed, someones organs is donated to peoples wich is going to die without them (more than one)
1 dead + 1 dead + More than 1 rescued = Less or equal than 0 deads


On the paper it is a very good idea to kill all those basdards that permits heavy crimes BUT there is a few problems:
a) What quind of 'moral' is people that growing up in a country that kills people becuse they have done something wrong going to have? "If someone makes a bad thing it is ok to kill him/her". And becuse the words wrong and bad can be very different from person to person... "Hey you touched my girl *brings up gun*"
b) Ok this is only built up on a studie made in a state in us (dont remeber wich and when or even who made it so I cant promise that it is 100% true). The week after a ('public' ie one that people know of) executin heavy crimes (murder, violence agains people ect) rised with ~10% from the week before.


Every statment below this is just 'myths' they may be true but I cant remember the source at all, it may be a friend that told me or I have seen it at Discovery. Who knows?

Also now when a 'new' teqnice, DNA controll or whatever to call it, have been intrudused some crimes there the punishment have death naow have been retested, and guess what? In a court in todays us the now dead 'criminals' whould be freeded. In 30 years who knows what new tecnics that will show how wrong the desicions of today was?

The number of heavy crimes in a counry that haves death penelty is not lower than in a county that doesnt have death penelty.


Ok below this ther is some 'facts' again
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state/
Hope that that is a relyable site
Takes 7 'randomizded' states and some the number from them

[U]State                  Death Penelty        Murder Rate (per 100,000)[/U]
District Of Colombia    No                       No Info  :( 
Georgia                 Yes                      7.6
New York                Yes                      4.9
Nevada                  Yes                      8.8
North Dakota            No                       1.9
Maine                   No                       1.2
Florida                 Yes                      5.4

Yea some nice numbers? Of course I found 1 State where the numbers could battle with those of the 'No' States

South Dakota           Yes             1.3

They havent have a sigle execution since 1976. Same with New York (4.9). Well you cant realy trust these numbers (randomized means not lock at screen and click) so they may be compleaty fair. Also it may be other resons for the high murder rate. I dont know.


Actualy I LOVE your idea sud.

 

[The Helper]

The Death Penalty is Capital PUNISHMENT - not Capital Deterrent. Its main purpose is punish serious offenders - not deter.

 

[Sud]

That being said though, the best enforcement is deterrance. If deterrance played no part, the amount of strain on every individual police department would be impossible to handle.

Statistics, in my eyes, are almost useless for this topic because they take into no account like economic situations, racial profiling of the target demographics, or other hidden factors. You can't base your results simply on the end numbers, you have to base it on whether or not it's needed to control the population that you are dealing with.