NationStates Jolt Archive

-.- Are you a complete and total BAKA!!!! That gives people more of a reason to murder because you will have the easy life without working a dayAs far as I've heard, Australian prisons are more like 4 star hotels, and they don't seem to have as much as a criminal problem as places that have less comfortable prisons.

-.- Are you a complete and total BAKA!!!! That gives people more of a reason to murder because you will have the easy life without working a day

Easy life? I'm sorry, Club Fed is generally reserved for White Collar criminals. Most of the rest get "Federal Pound-me-in-the-ass Prison"

I dont see what this has to do with really anything, sorry.
One mistake doesnt mean the whole system has to be shut down, just fixed.
The only hole I'll be digging BS will be a criminals grave hopefully, not that they deserve to be buried, chuck them in a pit to the crows.


Ok...one more time, so you get it.

It shows two things:

1. It provided an excellent example of the frequency that innocent people are sentenced to Death Row, or long prison sentences.

2. It shows that you didnt bother to read it, and therefore, were not actually arguing any other points except the same, thoroughly debunked hogwash you have been spouting for three days now.
The same rhetoric that has everyone telling you how much of an asswipe someone would have to be if they wanted to bring back public executions.

No they haven't.
I speak as a victim here, and while I support seeking justice for every offense, I oppose the notion that rapists or child molesters loose any of their human rights.
I was molested as a child, and NOBODY is going to kill the person who molested me in my name.
That is disgusting and why we need capitol punishment for certian crimes -.- We should use them as test subjects on new spacesuits or experamental things and if they happen to die its not like its a problem, they were scheduled for death anyways and they may of helped save people's lives in the long run, or they may die pointlessly, anyway they go to the next world and don't bug us anymore

No they haven't.
I speak as a victim here, and while I support seeking justice for every offense, I oppose the notion that rapists or child molesters loose any of their human rights.
I was molested as a child, and NOBODY is going to kill the person who molested me in my name.

My condolences again, but...weird.

Child molesters, rapists...human rights?
Their not human, in form maybe, but thats about it.

As far as I've heard, Australian prisons are more like 4 star hotels, and they don't seem to have as much as a criminal problem as places that have less comfortable prisons.
Probably because the criminal's flock to the jail's to relax, but it does wastes tax payer money

What possible connection could I have with a murderer or child molester, unless I was one myself?
I more than know what humans can be like, trust me.
The connection is that you are a human, just like him. Attempting to deny that he is so unlike you or me is nonsense.

Idiot. I already know I'm better, because I wouldnt stoop to such depravity.
I dont have to prove anything. I love children for the beautiful interesting people they are, not in the sick perverted way a child molester reasons.
How you psychobabbled me into being a monster as great as a child molester, for wanting him removed him from society, thus ensuring the chances of him screwing up more innocent childrens lives not happenning, is beyond my comprehension, you truly are one twisted sick fucked up individual to think so.I have news for you. You're not much better. You're not better, but that's mainly because of your racist views that you've been expressing all over this forum. While you may not harm children, your behavior is rather disgusting and it crosses the line of what I consider acceptable. You? Better? Not by much.

My condolences again, but...weird.

Child molesters, rapists...human rights?
Their not human, in form maybe, but thats about it.

Why? Because I refuse to stoop to his level? Because I think that yes, it was horrible what he did, but how is that going to help me or anybody if he got killed?
The one retribution I would like to get from him is an apology.

That is disgusting and why we need capitol punishment for certian crimes -.- We should use them as test subjects on new spacesuits or experamental things and if they happen to die its not like its a problem, they were scheduled for death anyways and they may of helped save people's lives in the long run, or they may die pointlessly, anyway they go to the next world and don't bug us anymore

Drop them into an acid vat, they never existed.

That is disgusting and why we need capitol punishment for certian crimes -.- We should use them as test subjects on new spacesuits or experamental things and if they happen to die its not like its a problem, they were scheduled for death anyways and they may of helped save people's lives in the long run, or they may die pointlessly, anyway they go to the next world and don't bug us anymore

Again, not in my name. If you want an excuse to torture others, don't use the victims of crimes.

Drop them into an acid vat, they never existed.Gessler, if can't contribute anything new besides disgusting ways of treating other human beings to the discussion, then just stop posting.

Why? Because I refuse to stoop to his level? Because I think that yes, it was horrible what he did, but how is that going to help me or anybody if he got killed?
The one retribution I would like to get from him is an apology.
-.- An apology... So if someone was to slaughter 1 Billion people by himself in cold blood all he would need to do is apologise and everything would be fine and no one would hold a grudge -.-

[QUOTE=Cabra West]Why? Because I refuse to stoop to his level? Your not, you never could unless you molested someone yourself.


Because I think that yes, it was horrible what he did, but how is that going to help me or anybody if he got killed?

Probably wont help you, but it would certainly help society if the danger of him doing it again to more kids, is permanently removed.



The one retribution I would like to get from him is an apology.

Well thats noble of you, but it doesnt remove the danger of more kids copping what you did does it.

Gessler, if can't contribute anything new besides disgusting ways of treating other human beings to the discussion, then just stop posting.
Its my thread, I'll contribute as much as I like.
You seem to have no problem with MGE'S gory solutions, why is that?
Are you making this dare I say, personal for some reason?

You better not stoop to his level and start molesting, that would just be wrong


Woah...that was really out of line.

I think you should apologize, or just not return to this thread.

Killing someone quickly is overrated. There are definitely crueler punishments. I don't mean just physically crueler. I mean physically, mentally and emotionally crueler.

Like life imprisonment without parole. Can you imagine spending the rest of your life being forced to follow someone esle's rules, someone else's schedule, someone else's orders, someone else's whims until the day youy die? Knowing that you will never...NEVER spend a day free again?

To me, the worst form of capital punishment we have in the world is ironically called 'life'.

Its my thread, I'll contribute as much as I like.
You seem to have no problem with MGE'S gory solutions, why is that?
Are you making this dare I say, personal for some reason?
Well my solutions actully help others in the long run, why kill them when we could use their body's to help other people who haven't turned to crime

[QUOTE]

Well thats noble of you, but it doesnt remove the danger of more kids copping what you did does it.

That's highly unlikely. Most child molesters show very differnet behavioural patterns, and my father would actually never imagine doing that outside his own family. as I was his only girl and neither me nor my brothers are reproducing, he won't do it again, which is why I would even regard imprisonment as useless in his case.
As for most child molesters : If anything, they need medical attention and psychological treatment. Very extreme cases cannot ever be released again, but that still doesn't in any way justify killing them.

Probably wont help you, but it would certainly help society if the danger of him doing it again to more kids, is permanently removed.

Ok..lets say that what you wished came true, and every pedophile on the planet, who got convicted, was executed publicly.

Do you actually think that it would put an end to that kind of behaviour?

Of course not...

So ultimately, what good is it?

-.- An apology... So if someone was to slaughter 1 Billion people by himself in cold blood all he would need to do is apologise and everything would be fine and no one would hold a grudge -.-

I don't pressume to speak for 1 billion people, I'm speaking exclusively for myself.
In what way do you think it is going to help those 1 billion people if you killed the killer?

Ok..lets say that what you wished came true, and every pedophile on the planet, who got convicted, was executed publicly.

Do you actually think that it would put an end to that kind of behaviour?

Of course not...

So ultimately, what good is it?
You would think twice about doing it knowing your going to be used in any kind of experament

You would think twice about doing it knowing your going to be used in any kind of experament


No..it wouldnt..

Thats not how the minds of such predators work.
They do it becuase they HAVE to..they dont care about the consequences of the actions.
Its all about domination, and control.

I don't pressume to speak for 1 billion people, I'm speaking exclusively for myself.
In what way do you think it is going to help those 1 billion people if you killed the killer?
#1. The people who were killed were avenged

#2. He can't kill 2 Billion people if hes dead

Ok..lets say that what you wished came true, and every pedophile on the planet, who got convicted, was executed publicly.
Do you actually think that it would put an end to that kind of behaviour?
Of course not...
So ultimately, what good is it?

Im not saying the behaviour would end, this seems to be unfortunately a sad and sick part of human nature, but you must admit it sure would reduce the amount of kids being molested down to almost nil.
Alot of child molesters were victims themselves, I do feel sorry for these guys, but they are recreating the cycle, so they must go for the greater good. Less victims means less molesters means less victims and so on.
Its said the victims a child molester gets averages at fifteen.
Is there any wonder there is so much child porn etc, the only way we will get on top of this problem is to kill them.

whats this about deterents, shouldnt good behaviour be encouraged rather than bad behaiviour discouraged

i recognise that there has to be some punishment involved, but there shouldnt be huge punishments, especially not public floggings and executions.
encouragement of good behaiviour is much better
and besides, alot of people on life imprisonment would rather be killed

The connection is that you are a human, just like him. Attempting to deny that he is so unlike you or me is nonsense.
I have news for you. You're not much better. You're not better, but that's mainly because of your racist views that you've been expressing all over this forum. While you may not harm children, your behavior is rather disgusting and it crosses the line of what I consider acceptable. You? Better? Not by much.

Then you truly are an idiot to think this, your pc driven paranoia of racism, now puts in your mind a racist, as you consider me to be, which I don't think I am, and dont really care if you or others do, just barely above a sick child molester who molests kids of all races.
I love kids, of any race.
I think what you consider acceptable, not worthy of any consideration at all, as you are a pc nutjob.

Im not saying the behaviour would end, this seems to be unfortunately a sad and sick part of human nature, but you must admit it sure would reduce the amount of kids being molested down to almost nil.
Alot of child molesters were victims themselves, I do feel sorry for these guys, but they are recreating the cycle, so they must go for the greater good. Less victims means less molesters means less victims and so on.
Its said the victims a child molester gets averages at fifteen.
Is there any wonder there is so much child porn etc, the only way we will get on top of this problem is to kill them.


See..this is where we disagree.

I dont think it would have any impact on the number of cases a year.
I think that anyone who is going to molest a kid, is going to do it, regardless of the consequences.
Besides, in prisons, such people are often the lowest of the society, and are often raped frequently, or even killed themselves.
The consequences that exist now, are pretty damn severe, and Im almost positive that it plays no part on the persons mind when deciding to commit such an act.

Im not saying the behaviour would end, this seems to be unfortunately a sad and sick part of human nature, but you must admit it sure would reduce the amount of kids being molested down to almost nil.
Alot of child molesters were victims themselves, I do feel sorry for these guys, but they are recreating the cycle, so they must go for the greater good. Less victims means less molesters means less victims and so on.
Its said the victims a child molester gets averages at fifteen.
Is there any wonder there is so much child porn etc, the only way we will get on top of this problem is to kill them.

Actually no, it would reduce the number of children being molested almost nil. New offenders pop up all the time, regardless of the "they were abused" theory. Its not like one generation of humanity came out "wrong" or something. These people sprout in just about any community on any continent.

Your "solution" is simply a call for more brutality, nothing more or less. You basically want death and you don't seem to care how you get it. You started this thread with whipping corrupt public servants for fun, now you're up to the deaths of thousands of people you almost pity enough to kill privately instead of publicly.

Perhaps people should be thankful you still impose limits on the nature of your brutality.

[QUOTE=Cabra West][QUOTE=Gessler]

That's highly unlikely. Most child molesters show very differnet behavioural patterns, and my father would actually never imagine doing that outside his own family.
True most children are molested by someone they know in the family.
Your father may do it outside, you dont really know that.
How do you know what he imagines.


as I was his only girl and neither me nor my brothers are reproducing, he won't do it again, which is why I would even regard imprisonment as useless in his case.

Truly sad, but I would support executing him anyway.


As for most child molesters : If anything, they need medical attention and psychological treatment.

I dont think their worth it to be honest.



Very extreme cases cannot ever be released again, but that still doesn't in any way justify killing them.

Why not, it guarentees they will never harm another child again.

[QUOTE=Niccolo Medici]Actually no, it would reduce the number of children being molested almost nil. New offenders pop up all the time, regardless of the "they were abused" theory. Its not like one generation of humanity came out "wrong" or something. These people sprout in just about any community on any continent.

Wrong, it would reduce the number being molested dramatically, less molesters means less kids being molested, simple enough...
And like I already said, alot of molesters were abused, I didnt say all, these guys seem to be the root of the whole problem.

Your "solution" is simply a call for more brutality, nothing more or less.

A very simplistic way to equate kids being brutalised as bad as molesters facing the punishment of the crime, which child molestation is.

The call for 'more brutality' as you see it, would end alot of brutality against kids, just swapping one horrible unnecessary brutality for a necessary one.


You basically want death and you don't seem to care how you get it.

I want justice, and if their deaths bring it, then so be it.

You started this thread with whipping corrupt public servants for fun,

Not for fun, thats just your childish spin on what I said.
I whole heartedly support public floggings to be bought back, and the sooner the better.


now you're up to the deaths of thousands of people you almost pity enough to kill privately instead of publicly.

Thousands? More like millions, these bastard are everywhere.
I dont see them as people either.

Perhaps people should be thankful you still impose limits on the nature of your brutality.

My brutality as you call it, is just a recognisation, of what it really takes to have a problem solved.
Your problem is your too soft.

Why not, it guarentees they will never harm another child again.

Well, why not execute all of mankind, in that case? Makes sure nobody can ever harm anybody else ever again...

I want justice, and if their deaths bring it, then so be it.



No, you don't. You don't want justice, you want revenge for something that didn't even happen to you.

No, you don't. You don't want justice, you want revenge for something that didn't even happen to you.

Wrong I want proper justice. I dont care if you want to see it as revenge, like you said, it didnt happen to me, just three of my sisters, one is nearly a head case because of it.
Half the problem is people keeping this sewerage around to do more harm.

Well, why not execute all of mankind, in that case? Makes sure nobody can ever harm anybody else ever again...

Why would I do that, I care about people, thats why I want these sickos, murderers etc removed for good so they cant do any further harm.

The reason why the U.S.A. have such a high violent crime rate, isn't because they have too many "brown" people, as Herr Geßler tries to point out. Just look at all those caucasian american serial killers:

David Berkowitz
Ted Bundy
Richard Chase
Otis Toole
Jane Toppan
Coral Eugene Watts
Wayne Williams
Eddie Leonski
Henry Lee Lucas
Jeffrey Dahmer
Glennon Engleman
Albert Fish
Dean Corll
Henley and David Brooks
Charles Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate
John Wayne Gacy
Danny Rolling
Arthur Shawcross
Gerard John Schaefer
Bobby Joe McCauley
Herman Mudgett
Herbert Mullin
Earle Nelson
The Boston Strangler
William Bonin
Jerry Brudos
Jesse Pomeroy
Aileen Wuornos
Derrick Todd Lee
Ed Gein
Donald Harvey
Gary M. Heidnik
Hillside Strangler
Patrick Kearney
Edmund Kempe
Randy Steven Kraft
Leonard Lake and Charles Ng
Dorothea Puente
Gary Ridgway
John Edward Robinson

Americas society is hypocrite and pathological. The problem is, besides money they don't have any (earnest) values.

[QUOTE=BackwoodsSquatches]
I dont think it would have any impact on the number of cases a year.

Well you would be afool then, removing child molesters for good, takes away the chances overall and over time, for them to do more damage. Simple logic.

I think that anyone who is going to molest a kid, is going to do it, regardless of the consequences.

True, but lets make it so he doesnt even have to consider the consequences for next time.

The consequences that exist now, are pretty damn severe, and Im almost positive that it plays no part on the persons mind when deciding to commit such an act.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-13397788,00.html?f=rss

They werent really that severe for this guy, after each time he was released in Australia, he raped kids again.

Well, why not execute all of mankind, in that case? Makes sure nobody can ever harm anybody else ever again...

I have read nearly every single page of this thread and It has been getting pretty tiring. It has become less important to actually argue your own points and it has instead become a game of trying to make the other person look bad. It is like a childs playground.
"you stink!"
"you stink more!"
"Do not!"
Except instead of saying you stink they pull out the fascist or racist label to argue. Your guys are trying to scare someone out of believing what they believe because you try to convince them that in in order to believe these things you have to be racist.

My oppinion is that I am concerned with justice. Regardless of whether it actually deters or not. It is the principle of the matter. Rapists, murderers, and child molesters deserve to die. Now I know some of you are going to try to argue semantics and say "that´s not justice, that´s revenge, your are a barbarian!" Oh well, your defination of revenge is apparently my defination of justice. Thank you

PS and before any of you call me fascist I would like to respond to that in advance. "Thank you, I know I am, and I am damn proud of it." :cool:

You idiot. Everyone knows states with the death penalty has more crimes. Goof ball.

I have read nearly every single page of this thread and It has been getting pretty tiring. It has become less important to actually argue your own points and it has instead become a game of trying to make the other person look bad. It is like a childs playground.
"you stink!"
"you stink more!"
"Do not!"
Except instead of saying you stink they pull out the fascist or racist label to argue. Your guys are trying to scare someone out of believing what they believe because you try to convince them that in in order to believe these things you have to be racist.

My oppinion is that I am concerned with justice. Regardless of whether it actually deters or not. It is the principle of the matter. Rapists, murderers, and child molesters deserve to die. Now I know some of you are going to try to argue semantics and say "that´s not justice, that´s revenge, your are a barbarian!" Oh well, your defination of revenge is apparently my defination of justice. Thank you

PS and before any of you call me fascist I would like to respond to that in advance. "Thank you, I know I am, and I am damn proud of it." :cool:

Well said, especially the part about one mans revenge being anothers sense of justice, to tell you the truth, these idiots seem to enjoy watching society fall apart, I guess its because they have no true sense of goodness in themselves, so dont like to see it expressed elsewhere.

[QUOTE]
Thousands? More like millions, these bastard are everywhere.
I dont see them as people either.

Then you would be a mass murderer surly. You know Stalin and Hitler thought like this, they thought that the Jews and the ones who opposed them had commited some herendos crime and that they should die, all of them. They didn't see them as people.

To solve anything you need apathy, and you don't have it.

You idiot. Everyone knows states with the death penalty has more crimes. Goof ball.

The states have more murders and violent crimes etc, because an active gun and gang culture is widely spread over there, it has nothing to do with the death penalty.
Your the goofball. :rolleyes:

The states have more murders and violent crimes etc, because an active gun and gang culture is widely spread over there, it has nothing to do with the death penalty.
Your the goofball. :rolleyes:

No no, are you going to make me pull out the death penalty research...do you really want me to embarass you by showing it again?

[QUOTE=Aust][QUOTE=Gessler]
Then you would be a mass murderer surly. You know Stalin and Hitler thought like this, they thought that the Jews and the ones who opposed them had commited some herendos crime and that they should die, all of them. They didn't see them as people.

I wouldnt, I'm not volunteering to go blow away every child molester myself. I am only showing my support for getting rid of these mongrels as quickly as possible through the law system, that needs a dramatic overhaul.


To solve anything you need apathy, and you don't have it.

Good.
Apathy creates problems, it never solves anything, how the hell did you arrive at that screwy theory anyway?

No no, are you going to make me pull out the death penalty research...do you really want me to embarass you by showing it again?

Your death penalty research is misleading.
Like I told you last time.

I have read nearly every single page of this thread and It has been getting pretty tiring. It has become less important to actually argue your own points and it has instead become a game of trying to make the other person look bad. It is like a childs playground.
"you stink!"
"you stink more!"
"Do not!"
Except instead of saying you stink they pull out the fascist or racist label to argue. Your guys are trying to scare someone out of believing what they believe because you try to convince them that in in order to believe these things you have to be racist.

My oppinion is that I am concerned with justice. Regardless of whether it actually deters or not. It is the principle of the matter. Rapists, murderers, and child molesters deserve to die. Now I know some of you are going to try to argue semantics and say "that´s not justice, that´s revenge, your are a barbarian!" Oh well, your defination of revenge is apparently my defination of justice. Thank you

PS and before any of you call me fascist I would like to respond to that in advance. "Thank you, I know I am, and I am damn proud of it." :cool:

The difference is the simple fact that I don't believe that anybody deserves to die, no matter what they did.

Your death penalty research is misleading.
Like I told you last time.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/art...scid=12&did=167
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/art...scid=12&did=168

"As executions rose, states without the death penalty fared much better than states with the death penalty in reducing their murder rates. The gap between the murder rate in death penalty states and the non-death penalty states grew larger (as shown in Chart II). In 1990, the murder rates in these two groups were 4% apart. By 2000, the murder rate in the death penalty states was 35% higher than the rate in states without the death penalty. In 2001, the gap between non-death penalty states and states with the death penalty again grew, reaching 37%. For 2002, the number stands at 36%."

The death penalty is infamous for not being a very effective crime deterrent. This really has been known for a long time.

How is that misleading....What was that...facts? Must be very misleading.

Gessler,
I believe that the beginning of Resurrected Fascism's posting was more or less directed at yourself.
I too have read this thread and all you have done is call people stupid, idiot and dumkopfe (amongst other things), because they don't agree with your opinion.

All this does is make you look like an irritating child and your posts will be ignored even if they have something valid to say.

I do not agree with your method of debate, I do not agree with your politics, but I do agree with one thing.

Yes, in some cases, repeat child molesters, repeat rapists and repeat murderers, should be put to death in this country.

Your death penalty research is misleading.
Like I told you last time.

It simply shows that death penalty =/= less crime. That's all.

[QUOTE=Odins Forgiven]Gessler,
II too have read this thread and all you have done is call people stupid, idiot and dumkopfe (amongst other things), because they don't agree with your opinion.

I have copped alot more abuse than given out on this topic, in fact Ive been quite civil for the most part, and you know it, you have little credibillty therefore, in saying this.

All this does is make you look like an irritating child and your posts will be ignored even if they have something valid to say.

Great. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE]

I have copped alot more abuse than given out on this topic, in fact Ive been quite civil for the most part, and you know it, you have little credibillty therefore, in saying this.



Funny... you called me a fool three time, but I don't seem to remember calling you anything similar :rolleyes:

I believe that the beginning of Resurrected Fascism's posting was more or less directed at yourself.


The post was actually directed at both sides of the argument. The thing I have noticed in public forums when arguments begin is that there are suddenly no rules. People don´t have to see the person they are mocking. Suddenly every self concious coward becomes a name bashing flamer because there are no repercussions for what they say. I would bet none of you would have the guts to stand up in front of a crowd and say the things you say on these forums.

Back to topic :rolleyes: . Why does everyone keep talking about the determent of crime. Who cares!? It is the moral principle of delivering justice/revenge. Besides people have tried to use examples of countries who have the death penalty to show that it is only used in uncivilized countries. Hello, The USA is indisputably the most powerful country in the world and it uses the death penalty. Capital punishment doesn´t seem to be affecting its status as a world superpower.

[QUOTE=Gessler]

Funny... you called me a fool three time, but I don't seem to remember calling you anything similar :rolleyes:

Would you two still be so cocky if you were talking to eachother face to face? I would wager not.

[QUOTE=Glinde Nessroe]http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/art...scid=12&did=167
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/art...scid=12&did=168
"As executions rose, states without the death penalty fared much better than states with the death penalty in reducing their murder rates. The gap between the murder rate in death penalty states and the non-death penalty states grew larger (as shown in Chart II). In 1990, the murder rates in these two groups were 4% apart. By 2000, the murder rate in the death penalty states was 35% higher than the rate in states without the death penalty. In 2001, the gap between non-death penalty states and states with the death penalty again grew, reaching 37%. For 2002, the number stands at 36%."

Only shows that the states with the death penalty were alot more violent than the states without it, which is probably why they bought the DP in in the first place.


The death penalty is infamous for not being a very effective crime deterrent. This really has been known for a long time.

It mighten be a crime deterrent in the short term, (anyway what is) but over time it would be effective, especially if more and more crims are executed.


How is that misleading....What was that...facts? Must be very misleading.

Your facts here hold little water.

Gessler
If you begin speaking to a contributor by calling them fool or idiot or whatever term that springs to mins as long as it is insulting, just because they do not agree with your opinion, then you will, in most cases get the same sort of reply back.

The post was actually directed at both sides of the argument. The thing I have noticed in public forums when arguments begin is that there are suddenly no rules. People don´t have to see the person they are mocking. Suddenly every self concious coward becomes a name bashing flamer because there are no repercussions for what they say. I would bet none of you would have the guts to stand up in front of a crowd and say the things you say on these forums.

Acutally, I have, on several occasions. But then again, I try to treat this here the same way I would any normal discussion, not stooping to insults.


Back to topic :rolleyes: . Why does everyone keep talking about the determent of crime. Who cares!? It is the moral principle of delivering justice/revenge.

There is a moral principle to deliver justice, that is correct. Revenge, however, can never be regarded as moral in any way or form.


Besides people have tried to use examples of countries who have the death penalty to show that it is only used in uncivilized countries. Hello, The USA is indisputably the most powerful country in the world and it uses the death penalty. Capital punishment doesn´t seem to be affecting its status as a world superpower.

No, but it doesn't seem to affect their criminal statistics in a positive way, either.

[QUOTE=Cabra West]

Would you two still be so cocky if you were talking to eachother face to face? I would wager not.

What, telling him to stop calling me a fool while not calling him the same in return?
I think I would... :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Gessler]

Funny... you called me a fool three time, but I don't seem to remember calling you anything similar :rolleyes:

You can say whatever you want, unlike some on here I have the skin of a rhino, if your so worried about being called a fool then I must have hit a sore point.
I've copped alot worse than fool, but I didnt see you attacking those posters for abuse.
You have no credibility here in this, because you are biased about who does the insults.

It mighten be a crime deterrent in the short term, (anyway what is) but over time it would be effective, especially if more and more crims are executed.



How many millenia do you think this might take? Death penalty has been around as long as civilisation, without ever being an effective deterrant. :rolleyes:

Gessler
If you begin speaking to a contributor by calling them fool or idiot or whatever term that springs to mins as long as it is insulting, just because they do not agree with your opinion, then you will, in most cases get the same sort of reply back.

I couldnt care less actually, if you would like but anyway to go back to pg 1, you will see the first insults were being directed at me, not the other way around as you would like to mislead.

[QUOTE]

Only shows that the states with the death penalty were alot more violent than the states without it, which is probably why they bought the DP in in the first place.

It mighten be a crime deterrent in the short term, (anyway what is) but over time it would be effective, especially if more and more crims are executed.

Your facts here hold little water.

...How much time do you need. Clearly its not working.

My facts hold little water....what facts do you need to prove it doesn't work. 1+1=2...."oh dear your facts don't hold any water because I've got my head up my ass."

Okay, clearly it's not even worth it, if you got slapped in the face you'd go "Oh no I did not get slapped in the face just then. Even the premise that I actually got slapped in the face...well it just holds little water"

Public execution is too far but they should bring back the stocks

like you've never wanted to pelt someone with rotten vegetables

[QUOTE=Cabra West]

You can say whatever you want, unlike some on here I have the skin of a rhino, if your so worried about being called a fool then I must have hit a sore point.
I've copped alot worse than fool, but I didnt see you attacking those posters for abuse.
You have no credibility here in this, because you are biased about who does the insults.

I'm not biased about anybody when it comes to insults. But the only one handing out insults to me so far was you.
Why should I stand up for you if somebody insults you?

[QUOTE]

crims do not deserve to breathe the same air as us, they are nothing but scum.


I'm sorry? Do you actually believe that? sure, some criminals probably are evil psychotics. SOME AREN'T. I can't take you're arguments seriously because your fundamental idea is prejudiced and, basically, WRONG.

How many millenia do you think this might take? Death penalty has been around as long as civilisation, without ever being an effective deterrant. :rolleyes:

How do you know? Civilisation without proper constraints on its criminals may have not got to this point, I see with our slack laws over time the criminal class running riot over us, untill of course proper laws are restored for the scum, they will never change, but our society will for the worse if we keep getting softer.

[QUOTE=Canzanetti][QUOTE=Gessler]
I'm sorry? Do you actually believe that?

Yes, I cant stand them.

sure, some criminals probably are evil psychotics. SOME AREN'T. I can't take you're arguments seriously because your fundamental idea is prejudiced and, basically, WRONG.

Your too soft, what the hell would you know about them, they have no respect for anything or anyone, even themselves.
To hell with the lot of them, lazy self centred nasty, non contributing scumbags.

The post was actually directed at both sides of the argument. The thing I have noticed in public forums when arguments begin is that there are suddenly no rules. People don´t have to see the person they are mocking. Suddenly every self concious coward becomes a name bashing flamer because there are no repercussions for what they say. I would bet none of you would have the guts to stand up in front of a crowd and say the things you say on these forums.

Yes I was aware of that, but Gessler was so cocky with the fact and seemed to believe that he was not included in this matter.


Back to topic :rolleyes: . Why does everyone keep talking about the determent of crime. Who cares!? It is the moral principle of delivering justice/revenge. Besides people have tried to use examples of countries who have the death penalty to show that it is only used in uncivilized countries. Hello, The USA is indisputably the most powerful country in the world and it uses the death penalty. Capital punishment doesn´t seem to be affecting its status as a world superpower.

I hate to say this again, given the fact that our politics differ so much, but yes I agree again.

Well at least to persistant offenders.
If someone is convicted of a crime and goes to prison only to be releaes and offend again with the same crime, than they have had their chance, they have had their try at rehabilitation, they no longer deserve that choice.

How do you know? Civilisation without proper constraints on its criminals may have not got to this point, I see with our slack laws over time the criminal class running riot over us, untill of course proper laws are restored for the scum, they will never change, but our society will for the worse if we keep getting softer.

Yes, crime rates in Europe are definitely getting worse ever since the 19th century... no wait, actually they are in decline! Strange...

[QUOTE=Cabra West][QUOTE=Gessler]
I'm not biased about anybody when it comes to insults. But the only one handing out insults to me so far was you.

You seem to have selective viewing, or go have abetter look through this thread.

Why should I stand up for you if somebody insults you?

Well if your going to get up me for insulting people, then you should get up them for insulting me as well.
Or your just being biased, and therefore there is nothing wrong with me insulting people on here, if you have no problem with them insulting me.

Yes, crime rates in Europe are definitely getting worse ever since the 19th century... no wait, actually they are in decline! Strange...

Not amongst the middle eastern populations there, it sure isnt.
Its probably only declining with the whites, as the white population is itself is in decline.

[QUOTE=Resurrected Fascism] I would bet none of you would have the guts to stand up in front of a crowd and say the things you say on these forums.

I have.

*sigh*
and now the two of you are back to the playground arguements again.

Basically Cabra West, Gessler, you have both said all you can say about the topic and all you can do is bicker at each other.

Doesn't do much for either of you or your causes.
You are both putting yourselves forward as petty little children and are infact disolving both of your opinions as you speak.

However, that is all I am going to say upon the matter of name calling and pettiness, because this is not what this thread is about.

[QUOTE=Cabra West]
Would you two still be so cocky if you were talking to eachother face to face? I would wager not.

If the subject came up, I would express my views as I have here, Id probably leave the name calling out but.

You seem to have selective viewing, or go have abetter look through this thread.



Well if your going to get up me for insulting people, then you should get up them for insulting me as well.
Or your just being biased, and therefore there is nothing wrong with me insulting people on here, if you have no problem with them insulting me.

Did you read my post?

I don't have selective views, but none of the other posters here has called me a fool so far. You were the only one so far who attempted to insult me.

I'm not blaming you for insulting others, it's up to them to blame you if they wish. I'm blaming you for using inappropriate and childish language directed at me. And you were the only one to do that.

Acutally, I have, on several occasions. But then again, I try to treat this here the same way I would any normal discussion, not stooping to insults.



There is a moral principle to deliver justice, that is correct. Revenge, however, can never be regarded as moral in any way or form.



No, but it doesn't seem to affect their criminal statistics in a positive way, either.

I too have stood in front of a crowd and delivered speeches over topics like this. But rest assured my friend the comment was not directed at you it was directed at the people on this forum who stoop to name calling to try and win an argument.

Second point: I do not believe it is revenge, I only used the word because some of the people on this forum are going to call it tha anyway. Revenge is a personal act. justice is administered impersonally by the state. It is free of personal bias when in its purest possible form. It is this pure and true form that I would try to achieve if it were up to me.

Third: True america has a higher percentage of crime, but I would wager this is largely in part to the moral degradation of our society following the "sexual revolution" of the sixties. Children without strong parental figures in general will lead the child to a more wild lifestyle and in some cases to crime. Besides, don´t believe what michael moore would tell you in bowling for columbine. Every country has it´s whackos. Just last week a poor innocent 16 year old girl was brutally raped and murdered. It can happen anywhere regardless of the justice system. It is societies moral responsibility to deliver just to scum who would do acts like this. :sniper:

Not amongst the middle eastern populations there, it sure isnt.
Its probably only declining with the whites, as the white population is itself is in decline.

I seriously doubt that we would find any figures about crime comitted by Middle Eastern minorities in Europe in the 19th century, so it has to be in decline with the white population and in consequence can't be as high in the Middle Eastern population as it was in the white population 100 years ago...

[QUOTE=Odins ForgivenBasically Cabra West, Gessler, you have both said all you can say about the topic and all you can do is bicker at each other.

Not really, I have respect for Cabras intelligence and arguements even if she has little for mine, I just dont agree with some of her views.
Your taking the name calling too seriously I think, aferall, like you said its just the internet.

Doesn't do much for either of you or your causes.

Speaking for myself, it doesnt change anything, a few names always get thrown, bit of spice who cares.


You are both putting yourselves forward as petty little children and are infact disolving both of your opinions as you speak.

Thats rubbish, so if someone presented an excellent debate, and then threw a few names as well in it, you would disregard all the rest they have said, regardless of its correctness.
Thats not very smart, like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


However, that is all I am going to say upon the matter of name calling and pettiness, because this is not what this thread is about.

For someone who just arrived you sure have a big mouth. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Resurrected Fascism]

If the subject came up, I would express my views as I have here, Id probably leave the name calling out but.

That is what I am talking about Gessler. The name calling. It makes this topic overall unenjoyable and it would be best if everyone stopped the name calling and the arguing. We all have different oppinions and that is fine.(until my rise to power) ;)

So lets just try to debate this thing without stooping to name calling

[QUOTE][QUOTE=Canzanetti]

Yes, I cant stand them.



Your too soft, what the hell would you know about them, they have no respect for anything or anyone, even themselves.
To hell with the lot of them, lazy self centred nasty, non contributing scumbags. So the stupid guy who decides to smoke cannabis is the same as Mike Tyson or whatever?
Did you know… Nelson Mandela was a criminal.

Third: True america has a higher percentage of crime, but I would wager this is largely in part to the moral degradation of our society following the "sexual revolution" of the sixties. Children without strong parental figures in general will lead the child to a more wild lifestyle and in some cases to crime. Besides, don´t believe what michael moore would tell you in bowling for columbine. Every country has it´s whackos. Just last week a poor innocent 16 year old girl was brutally raped and murdered. It can happen anywhere regardless of the justice system. It is societies moral responsibility to deliver just to scum who would do acts like this. :sniper:

If that were the case, then why is there no similar phenomenon in Europe today? The sexual revolution took place in Europe as well, it's not an isolated movement in the States.

True, every society has it's criminals, it's psychopaths and it's "wackos". The difference in societies is the way they deal with them. In the US, the priority seems to be punishment, whereas in Europe the general idea is that prevention is the better option.
Punishment is a very isolated issue, it's very easy to hand out and be done with. Prevention is much more complicated and has to go through all levels of society, always keeping the balance between being protective and being intrusive...

Yes, crime rates in Europe are definitely getting worse ever since the 19th century... no wait, actually they are in decline! Strange...

IT is only declining because there are fewer crimes in a way

Public humiliation, yes, public executions and lashings and bashing or whatever - why on earth would anyone want to watch that to start with?

I seriously doubt that we would find any figures about crime comitted by Middle Eastern minorities in Europe in the 19th century, so it has to be in decline with the white population and in consequence can't be as high in the Middle Eastern population as it was in the white population 100 years ago...

Im talking about the present crime rates

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/02/muslim-rape-epidemic-in-sweden-and.html
http://www.newnation.org/NNN-news-world.html
http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=60

Public humiliation, yes, public executions and lashings and bashing or whatever - why on earth would anyone want to watch that to start with?

You would be surprised.

Did you read my post?

I don't have selective views, but none of the other posters here has called me a fool so far. You were the only one so far who attempted to insult me.
I'm not blaming you for insulting others, it's up to them to blame you if they wish. I'm blaming you for using inappropriate and childish language directed at me. And you were the only one to do that.

OK I apologise. Happy now?

IT is only declining because there are fewer crimes in a way

:confused:

Erm... yes, that is the point of crime statistics, to show the number of crimes....

You would be surprised.

that's pretty sick really
well that's my opinion .....

OK I apologise. Happy now?

*lol

I have the feeling I ought to print that and frame it ;)
Thanks.

:confused:

Erm... yes, that is the point of crime statistics, to show the number of crimes....

Not as in Crimes commited but as things you can do to get on the wrong side of the law eg in 1790 there were over 240 things you could be excecuted for. Including a welsh woman who was hanged for stealing two pints of milk from a lord.

It's true, Gessler, that if you kill them they won't commit crimes again. It's also true that if you lock them up they won't commit crimes again, except to each other, and you seem to be okay with that.
Prisons don't have to cost the taxpayers a huge amount.

that's pretty sick really
well that's my opinion .....

"Panem et circenses..."
Yes, it is sick, human beings tend to be that way. The Romans used to keep the public happy that way, and so did European "civilisation" well into the 19th century.
Public executions were abolished around the same time it became fashionable to visit mental asylums and view the mentally ill with the whole family as some sort of Sunday entertainment.

Not as in Crimes commited but as things you can do to get on the wrong side of the law eg in 1790 there were over 240 things you could be excecuted for. Including a welsh woman who was hanged for stealing two pints of milk from a lord.

The punishments became more lenient, that's true. But stealing milk would still be a crime today.
However, if you leave aside the seriousness of the offense and the regarding punishment and just look at the overall number of offenses, there is a definite decline.

It's true, Gessler, that if you kill them they won't commit crimes again. It's also true that if you lock them up they won't commit crimes again, except to each other, and you seem to be okay with that.
Prisons don't have to cost the taxpayers a huge amount.

But executions are even cheaper. Now I don´t what to hear a bunch of stuff about how an execution costs the taxpayer ten times as much as life imprisonment. In the present system I know, it sucks. However, in justices purest form an execution would cost only the disposal of the body, because you can use a rope multiple times, and bullets are very cheap.

In consideration to the phenomenon of american crime rates it is difficult to come up with a clear answer. Serial killers are in every society, but that is not what makes up the majority of violent crime. Relatively speaking it is a small percentage. Gang crime and crimes by those with unfortunate living circumstances are a large portion of it. America had serious race problems earlier in its history. I think we may still be riding the aftermath of that upheaval.

In consideration to the phenomenon of american crime rates it is difficult to come up with a clear answer. Serial killers are in every society, but that is not what makes up the majority of violent crime. Relatively speaking it is a small percentage. Gang crime and crimes by those with unfortunate living circumstances are a large portion of it. America had serious race problems earlier in its history. I think we may still be riding the aftermath of that upheaval.

You certainly do.
If you compare America to Europe, apart from the crime statistics one of the major differences is the large, vast gap between extremely rich and extremely poor in America. Personally, I think this is the very root for the attraction crime seems to have to so many in the US.
As long as European society resembled that (say, during the 19th century, before social refoms took effect), the criminal statistics were much the same. Europe embraced a more social society and an integral approach to crime, using not only punishment as a deterrant as that idea is obvioulsy flawed, the USA refuses that.
That's their right, of course, and their desicion. But I think if a cure is offered and refused, there's not much point in keeping complaining about the disease.

Are the statistics showing decline crimes per thousand people or something like that or crimes per year overall

"Panem et circenses..."
Yes, it is sick, human beings tend to be that way. The Romans used to keep the public happy that way, and so did European "civilisation" well into the 19th century.
Public executions were abolished around the same time it became fashionable to visit mental asylums and view the mentally ill with the whole family as some sort of Sunday entertainment.

Gosh .... I don't know, just makes me feel very un-easy.

Second point: I do not believe it is revenge, I only used the word because some of the people on this forum are going to call it tha anyway. Revenge is a personal act. justice is administered impersonally by the state. It is free of personal bias when in its purest possible form. It is this pure and true form that I would try to achieve if it were up to me.
I tend to disagree with your logic on this matter. While "revenge" tends to be personal in nature, the States that adhere to capital punishment, exact the "revenge" on behalf of the aggrieved who support such a system.

Third: True america has a higher percentage of crime, but I would wager this is largely in part to the moral degradation of our society following the "sexual revolution" of the sixties. Children without strong parental figures in general will lead the child to a more wild lifestyle and in some cases to crime. Besides, don´t believe what michael moore would tell you in bowling for columbine. Every country has it´s whackos. Just last week a poor innocent 16 year old girl was brutally raped and murdered. It can happen anywhere regardless of the justice system. It is societies moral responsibility to deliver just to scum who would do acts like this. :sniper:
Blaming higher crime rates on the "sexual revolution" is a cop out and misses some of the more fundamental problems of the society in which one lives. Canada has a much lower violent crime rate than the US and yet both countries experienced the "sexual revolution". So you need to dig a little deeper to discover why America has "a higher percentage of crime".

One could just as easily say that blaming capital punishment is a cop out also. But I degress. This point has already been dealt with. I would be interested to see crime rate from the 40s through 50s. Capital punishment was more common then and society overall was more closely knit around healthy family structures. Does anyone have any stats.

I dont have specific statistics but I have heard stats that children without a strong father figure in there childhood are significantly more likely to turn to crime. It is problems like this in society that contribute the most to crime. Not capital punishment or gun laws.

*lol

I have the feeling I ought to print that and frame it ;)
Thanks.

I only apologise because you genuinely wanted one.

It's true, Gessler, that if you kill them they won't commit crimes again. It's also true that if you lock them up they won't commit crimes again,
except to each other,
and you seem to be okay with that.
Prisons don't have to cost the taxpayers a huge amount.

Thats right, they are history, we as a society shouldnt have this scum, I'm talking about murderers, serial killers, child molesters and rapists breathing the same air as us, it lowers us to have them around. If you just lock them up, they also have the chance to escape and commit more crimes as that is all they have left in their nature, they cant just lay low, and hopefully assume a new idenity and start again, because the basic perverted urge that runs through the core of their pschye, and defines who they are to themselves, is till there waiting for the chance, to strike again.
They are not worth rehabilitating, because of the damage they have caused, they have well and truly crossed the line, and so must be called into account.

that's pretty sick really
well that's my opinion .....

You should toughen up abit then.
It would be better than watching the soapys.

So, how mant public executions have you seen then Gessler?
What do you honestly think your reaction would be?

So, how mant public executions have you seen then Gessler?
What do you honestly think your reaction would be?

None yet sadly, I dont deny I would be sickened probably, by the sight of a mans head sliding off his shoulders, but my revulsion comes second to the greater good.

None yet sadly, I dont deny I would be sickened probably, by the sight of a mans head sliding off his shoulders, but my revulsion comes second to the greater good.

Then you'd be displeased to know that public executions have been banned in civilised nations for the greater good.

Then you'd be displeased to know that public executions have been banned in civilised nations for the greater good.

Why?
Bring them back, justice should be seen by everyone, not just the law.

I'm not a big fan of the whole "rendered according to his/her deeds" thing; I leave that up to God. The primary focus of our justice system should be to play its vital role in preserving and improving the society in which we live. In principle I leave the death penalty on the table, although I have a lot of problems with the way it is implemented in practice in the US (which is where I live), but public executions are not productive to this end any more than gladiators are.

BTW, studies show it costs more to execute a person in the US than it does to incarcerate them for life. Hard to believe, but true (the main reason for this is all the extra appeals and such, and the associated court costs).

Hang on a minute.

I have agreed that in certain circumstances, (repeat sex offenders and muderers), that there should be a death penalty.

But you are now advocating public execution by what?
Guillotene (sp)? or is it an axe we're talking about here?

Also, why if you believe you would be sickened by the site, would you want to watch anyway or even say that it would be better than watching 'soaps'?

BTW, studies show it costs more to execute a person in the US than it does to incarcerate them for life. Hard to believe, but true (the main reason for this is all the extra appeals and such, and the associated court costs).

Thats a huge problem I admit, bought on by leeching lawyers more interested in getting rich and feathering their own nest, than any real justice.

Why?
Bring them back, justice should be seen by everyone, not just the law.

Judging by this post, we should also be givien free dictionaries by the government.

...Wait, that's actually a damn good idea!

[QUOTE=Odins Forgiven]
I have agreed that in certain circumstances, (repeat sex offenders and muderers), that there should be a death penalty.
But you are now advocating public execution by what?
Guillotene (sp)? or is it an axe we're talking about here?

Guillotine. Axe would be too messy, what if the axeman was on an off day and flayed the axe causing half his skull to go flying off into the crowd.
Although, an axe used rightly would be more spectacular and send the right message to the criminal community.

Also, why if you believe you would be sickened by the site, would you want to watch anyway or even say that it would be better than watching 'soaps'?

It would take some getting used too, not growing up with it.

I am now convinced that you are just on a wind up Gessler.

Because I have seen your reasoned argument (at the beginning of this thread), turn into a flame war of who could abuse the other better with insult and now into the ludicrous idea that there should be public beheadings.

[QUOTE=Odins Forgiven]I am now convinced that you are just on a wind up Gessler.

Im not. I am 100% behind it.

Because I have seen your reasoned argument (at the beginning of this thread), turn into a flame war of who could abuse the other better with insult and now into the ludicrous idea that there should be public beheadings.

It was always public beheadings from the beginning.
Thats what a guillotine does.
The flaming was expected frrom the usual anti capital punishment/pro abortion mob.

It was always public beheadings from the beginning.
Thats what a guillotine does.

People were also hung up in cages to die and hung drawn and quartered, shall we return to those forms of death as well?

The flaming was expected frrom the usual anti capital punishment/pro abortion mob.

I seem to recall that it was you who was doing most of the flaming and I fail to see why you have brought pro abortion into the conversation.

=Odins Forgiven]People were also hung up in cages to die and hung drawn and quartered, shall we return to those forms of death as well?


No, thats just needless cruelty, not justice.



I seem to recall that it was you who was doing most of the flaming

Like what???
and I fail to see why you have brought pro abortion into the conversation.

Because thats what the Left generally support, as well as being against capital punishment.
I was trying to illustrate how ridiculous their outrage is when held up to their indifference of the great slaughter that goes on in most western countrys against the most innocent and defenceless life of all.

*LOL*

Because thats what the Left generally support, as well as being against capital punishment.

I'm what you term as 'Left', you should take care not to 'generalise' a person by a single opinion they hold, life, politics and people aren't that easily defined.

And I am certainly not going to be drawn into a discussion on abortion.
If you wish to discuss that then there are plenty of threads discussing it elsewhere.

However back on topic.

There are far easier and cleaner ways of exicution than beheading.
The idea of going back to that method when there are far better, quicker and cleaner ways, is just a little extreme.

There is a simple solution to the problem. Since this is a democratic society, take a vote. Those in favor of the death penalty should not have to pay from thier taxes the cost of housing violent criminals that would otherwise be qualified for the death penalty.

Hey, I'd rather pay for a prisoner's life imprisonment than his execution. The former is cheaper.

<The wife of Warboski>Everyday someones child dies to a murderer who will probably do 5-10 years then get out. What of the innocent he killed? Well that life took the back of the buss because the poor criminal is a "victim of society" and doesn't deserve the death penaly. What of the kids family that he just ruined? Thier stuck dealing with thier loss. A child that they brought into the world loved and raised is nomore and there's no amount of money that will ever replace that. Would you like to set someone that would do that free again?

Why must death penalty advocates always claim that you're either for the death penalty, or you're for letting murderers go free? What about those of us who oppose the death penalty and also want to make life mean life?

Why must death penalty advocates always claim that you're either for the death penalty, or you're for letting murderers go free? What about those of us who oppose the death penalty and also want to make life mean life?

Because it is very rarely mentioned within the discussion?

It would also mean that an already over crowded prison system would be even more clogged up, which is why 'life' no longer means a life time behind bars anymore in the first place.

[QUOTE=Odins Forgiven]
I'm what you term as 'Left', you should take care not to 'generalise' a person by a single opinion they hold, life, politics and people aren't that easily defined.

So your against open slather abortion then? Taking away awomans right to soley decide?
If so, then my apology, if not then I'll stick with the common view to what seems to descibe all of you.

And I am certainly not going to be drawn into a discussion on abortion.
If you wish to discuss that then there are plenty of threads discussing it elsewhere.

I didnt want to discuss it, I just bought it up as a point of interest.


There are far easier and cleaner ways of exicution than beheading.
The idea of going back to that method when there are far better, quicker and cleaner ways, is just a little extreme.
Like what?
Also an execution should show blood and gore to get the message across to all watching, as well as the criminals.

[QUOTE]

So your against open slather abortion then? Taking away awomans right to soley decide?
If so, then my apology, if not then I'll stick with the common view to what seems to descibe all of you.



But it doesn't describe all of 'us' does it?
According to you, I should be anti death penalty and I am not.

[QUOTE]
Like what?
Also an execution should show blood and gore to get the message across to all watching, as well as the criminals.

I don't need to tell you the other methods of execution.

Are you saying that, in your opinion, the only way to execute someone is to decapatate in public?
What if that public that you so want to teach the lesson to refuses to watch?

Oh well, another person speaking out of anger and pain it would seem... correct me if I'm wrong Gessler, but as far as I can tell, I would guess you or someone dear to you has been a victim of those you consider monsters.

The problem here is that you are trying to get rid of the symptoms of deeper problems. I don't care if you think murderers are scumbags that should suffer a painful and gory death, insulting sure isn't going to get this anywhere. However, have you ever thought about what circumstances can bring someone to this point? Have you ever thought that crimes might be the result of different problems, like poverty and marginalization? I agree that we can't let these people off. I agree giving them so many things in prisons probably isn't quite a good idea. But I don't agree that we should seek revenge. We must seek comprehension, so that we can prevent what breeds murderers, molesters and the like in our society.

I agree, it is not perfect. It is not the kind of miracle and instant solution you might want. But it is what differentiates humans from beasts: the ability to understand others and their surroundings, and to resolve problems accordingly. We don't have to sink as low as those who rape and murder. Instead of using our ressources to do to these persons as they do to us, don't you think we could use them for something less "primal"? Just think, for example, of how much the USA could do for the less fortunate people, for the environment and the like if they would just stop spending as much for wars. We should do the same, and use our intelligence for more constructive tasks.

Anyway, I hope you can see that I've done my best not to offend you, and thus that you will do the same. I think your views are extreme, but I sure prefer trying to understand why you think this way rather than just flame you.

[QUOTE=Odins Forgiven][QUOTE=Gessler]
But it doesn't describe all of 'us' does it?
According to you, I should be anti death penalty and I am not.

Well why do you have such ahuge problem with my open to the public executions then?

If you dont want to see it, simply dont go and watch.





I don't need to tell you the other methods of execution.


I know them, but they are performed as if taking a persons life as punishment for being a murderer rapist etc should be as sterile and painless as possible.
It doesnt send the message over like a guillotining would, that what they did is wrong.

Are you saying that, in your opinion, the only way to execute someone is to decapatate in public?
Its the best one, dramatic, quick and relatively painless.


What if that public that you so want to teach the lesson to refuses to watch?

I think curiosity would get the better of most.
The killers/rapists familys victims would definitley be there.
I also think that most people given the choice of catching a gory movie, or any movie, or seeing some scumbag down the mall getting his comeuppance in such a fashion, would definitely prefer the latter.

[QUOTE=Da Wolverines]Oh well, another person speaking out of anger and pain it would seem... correct me if I'm wrong Gessler, but as far as I can tell, I would guess you or someone dear to you has been a victim of those you consider monsters.

Actually three of my sisters were interfered with by my step Grandad, a person who was loved and part of the family, it forever changed my view of him.

The problem here is that you are trying to get rid of the symptoms of deeper problems. I don't care if you think murderers are scumbags that should suffer a painful and gory death, insulting sure isn't going to get this anywhere. However, have you ever thought about what circumstances can bring someone to this point? Have you ever thought that crimes might be the result of different problems, like poverty and marginalization? I agree that we can't let these people off. I agree giving them so many things in prisons probably isn't quite a good idea. But I don't agree that we should seek revenge. We must seek comprehension, so that we can prevent what breeds murderers, molesters and the like in our society.


Ive met people from all walks of life, and they have all displayed good natures or evil ones, blaming their upbringing has nothing to do with .


I agree, it is not perfect. It is not the kind of miracle and instant solution you might want. But it is what differentiates humans from beasts: the ability to understand others and their surroundings, and to resolve problems accordingly.

Unfortunately the scum dont have such high ideals, but will take advantage of yours to fool you into false security, you are fighting aloosing battle if you think you can convince them of the errors of their thinking, basically they are cruel, callous people who are above all lazy.

We don't have to sink as low as those who rape and murder.


Were not, by executing them, we are sending the message that we wont tolerate their behaviour anymore.
This is a true adult way of thinking, you are not risking further innocent people especially children being hurt, in favour of some high moral ground to crow from.

Instead of using our ressources to do to these persons as they do to us, don't you think we could use them for something less "primal"? Just think, for example, of how much the USA could do for the less fortunate people, for the environment and the like if they would just stop spending as much for wars. We should do the same, and use our intelligence for more constructive tasks.


You can spend all the money you like on them, it wont change them.
The problem is too deeply rooted in them, its their selfish lazy natures, you might as well throw the money down the drain.



Anyway, I hope you can see that I've done my best not to offend you, and thus that you will do the same. I think your views are extreme, but I sure prefer trying to understand why you think this way rather than just flame you.

Ah you are truly an intelligent man or woman then, thankyou for your consideration.
To be honest, most of the guys that flame me on here are only looking for a reaction for their amusement, their not really that concerned at all.
If they thought my views were that wrong, they simply wouldnt answer them.

You might like Iran, then. Thats the kind of thing they do there.

If you did it in any western or democratic nation, the amount of protest that would appear at every public flogging by people against barbaric punishments would cause it to disapear pretty quickly. That's if the politicians want to keep their jobs.

Well, I fully support the idea of public executions, preferably done using hanging by crane. Public flogging would be good too. Both of those are real deterrents, not some rediculous lethal injection nonsense or jail. Combined with that, I think police should be issued MP-5s or M-4s, and if criminals attempt to run or resist in any manner, the police should use them. I don't see why the police should have to track down some murderer or criminal so they can have a case tied up for a decade or so in court when they could be removed off the street permanantly.

I think police should be issued MP-5s or M-4s, and if criminals attempt to run or resist in any manner, the police should use them. I don't see why the police should have to track down some murderer or criminal so they can have a case tied up for a decade or so in court when they could be removed off the street permanantly.

Exactly.
I like the way you think.

Exactly.
I like the way you think.

Thank you, when it comes to law and order, I don't believe in coddling criminals. I think violent criminals need to be treated like criminals who have intentionally acted against the liberty of the people they have harmed.

China dealt with serious drug problems after their commie takeover rather efficiently. Just grab the drug addict, and the dealers, march them into the street, then have them get on their knees. A little shot to the head and the problem was solved. I am in no way advocating this solution, but it does pay to see what happens in other societies. Call them barbaric methods, but seriously I think a would be murderer would perhaps think twice before killing grandma for her SS check if he knew that if he were (more then likely) caught, he would be executed immediately after a trial. Then his next of kin would be billed for said trial and execution. I seriously doubt we would have a crime problem here.

Of course, you also can get shot for protesting against the government in China. I'm not so sure I'm ready to give that sort of absolute judgement to anyone...

Our system isn't perfect, but we developed it to prevent those in power from leveraging the threat of physical retribution against those who are not. I suppose you also have to ask yourself which is worse, a criminal who goes free, or an innocent man who gets killed.

Thank you, when it comes to law and order, I don't believe in coddling criminals. I think violent criminals need to be treated like criminals who have intentionally acted against the liberty of the people they have harmed.

Exactly, they shit on our laws and morals, so they shouldnt really have much hope of applying for them for help.

Thats right, they are history, we as a society shouldnt have this scum, I'm talking about murderers, serial killers, child molesters and rapists breathing the same air as us, it lowers us to have them around. If you just lock them up, they also have the chance to escape and commit more crimes as that is all they have left in their nature, they cant just lay low, and hopefully assume a new idenity and start again, because the basic perverted urge that runs through the core of their pschye, and defines who they are to themselves, is till there waiting for the chance, to strike again.
They are not worth rehabilitating, because of the damage they have caused, they have well and truly crossed the line, and so must be called into account.

You seem to be clinging on to the - long disproven - early 19th century believe that criminals suffer form some sort of mental disorder.
While this is true in a number of cases, the majority of criminals are just regular people. I know I myself was close to becoming a murderess due to circumstances at least twice in my life, yet these murders would have been isolated incidents, not in correlation with any other form of criminal behaviour and more than unlikely to recurr. While I do agree that, had I really killed the person in question, I should definitely have gone to jail for that, I feel that it would not have been justified in any way to be killed by the authorities in return.
Being or becoming a criminal is not a mental state, it is a social one. The combination of your social surroundings, economic situation and your character will determine at various points in your life whether or not you will resort to criminal actions.

You seem to be clinging on to the - long disproven - early 19th century believe that criminals suffer form some sort of mental disorder.
While this is true in a number of cases, the majority of criminals are just regular people. I know I myself was close to becoming a murderess due to circumstances at least twice in my life, yet these murders would have been isolated incidents, not in correlation with any other form of criminal behaviour and more than unlikely to recurr. While I do agree that, had I really killed the person in question, I should definitely have gone to jail for that, I feel that it would not have been justified in any way to be killed by the authorities in return.
Being or becoming a criminal is not a mental state, it is a social one. The combination of your social surroundings, economic situation and your character will determine at various points in your life whether or not you will resort to criminal actions.

All wrong. Its in your head, social conditions have nothing to do with it.
I know a guy who got bought up in one of the roughest suburbs in Brisbane, he was given a gun and told to shoot someone, he threw the gun down and walked away. knowing he could be shot himself.
Since then, he made the bigger jump of leaving the suburb and adapting a amore civilised lifestyle, and above all working hard for his money and not wasting it.

All wrong. Its in your head, social conditions have nothing to do with it.
I know a guy who got bought up in one of the roughest suburbs in Brisbane, he was given a gun and told to shoot someone, he threw the gun down and walked away. knowing he could be shot himself.
Since then, he made the bigger jump of leaving the suburb and adapting a amore civilised lifestyle, and above all working hard for his money and not wasting it.

Good for him, really. The majority of people would have reacted differently, though. I don't think it's a coincidence that the poorest areas and the areas with the lowest level of education are the areas with the highest crime rates. And that's a pattern you can see whereever you go in the world, on every single continent, in every culture and every civilisation. It's human nature, sad, but not perverse.

I know a guy who got bought up in one of the roughest suburbs in Brisbane...
What suburb was that?

All wrong. Its in your head, social conditions have nothing to do with it.
I know a guy who got bought up in one of the roughest suburbs in Brisbane, he was given a gun and told to shoot someone, he threw the gun down and walked away. knowing he could be shot himself.
Since then, he made the bigger jump of leaving the suburb and adapting a amore civilised lifestyle, and above all working hard for his money and not wasting it.

So..one guy in 6 billion, and you think he represents the majority of individuals?

What suburb was that?

Eagleby, its near Brisbane.

Good for him, really. The majority of people would have reacted differently, though. I don't think it's a coincidence that the poorest areas and the areas with the lowest level of education are the areas with the highest crime rates. And that's a pattern you can see whereever you go in the world, on every single continent, in every culture and every civilisation. It's human nature, sad, but not perverse.

Just because they grow up there, doesnt mean their shackled to it, best thing they can do is leave and get far away.
Start again, learn from observing what decent human behaviour is, and unlearn what was indoctrinated into them from birth, because it was wrong.
Above all unlearn the threat of violence to solve every problem, they think everyone is like that, but their wrong.

So..one guy in 6 billion, and you think he represents the majority of individuals?

No, unfortunately, if he wasnt, we wouldnt have so many problems with housing commission areas.
Thats why we need capital punishment and harder penalties for crime, because these guys want the free social benefits, but nothing else.
Soon the way its going, we wont be able to build enough jails quick enough to hold them.
Then capital punishment, and quick hard punishments such as floggings, will come back as necessary.

Just because they grow up there, doesnt mean their shackled to it, best thing they can do is leave and get far away.
Start again, learn from observing what decent human behaviour is, and unlearn what was indoctrinated into them from birth, because it was wrong.
Above all unlearn the threat of violence to solve every problem, they think everyone is like that, but their wrong.

You're right again. But their environment will teach them over and over that "decent behaviour" is weakness and will be punished by others, be that by their "friends" or by society on the whole. If you steal, you may end up with a better life and more money than if you work at Wal-Mart. A very simple equation.
So, if your aim is crime prevention, start right there. Make sure to eliminate the reasons that push ordinary people to criminal behaviour.
Otherwise you will end up executing people just for being poor....

Just because they grow up there, doesnt mean their shackled to it, best thing they can do is leave and get far away.
Start again, learn from observing what decent human behaviour is, and unlearn what was indoctrinated into them from birth, because it was wrong.
Above all unlearn the threat of violence to solve every problem, they think everyone is like that, but their wrong. Right, now how exactly are you proposing to do that? "Unlearn what was indoctrinated into them from birth" - do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?
Btw I'm not trying to go soft on criminals or anything here. Whatever works.

[QUOTE=Liskeinland]Right, now how exactly are you proposing to do that? "Unlearn what was indoctrinated into them from birth" - do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

Its not ridiculous, if you want to change bad enough for the better, anything is possible.
Ive met guys who spent nearly half their life in institutions and jails, then they realised they were wasting their lives by fighting the system, and decided to become law abiding instead, thats all you have to do, to start the change, just obey the laws, and get a job, and save.
And keep away from the dumb crims.

I've met people from all walks of life, and they have all displayed good natures or evil ones, blaming their upbringing has nothing to do with .
Some people are definitely a product of their environment, and I do believe that all people have good and bad within, and some are more extreme than others.

Unfortunately the scum dont have such high ideals, but will take advantage of yours to fool you into false security, you are fighting aloosing battle if you think you can convince them of the errors of their thinking, basically they are cruel, callous people who are above all lazy.
People can and have been re-habilitated. I think that your generalization does not apply.

Were not, by executing them, we are sending the message that we wont tolerate their behaviour anymore.
The message that you are sending to the world is that you are killing people to prove that killing people is wrong. Apparently, most of the "civilized" nations don't share your views.

This is a true adult way of thinking, you are not risking further innocent people especially children being hurt, in favour of some high moral ground to crow from.
I think a "true adult way of thinking" is to not condone human killing of any sort.

You can spend all the money you like on them, it wont change them.
This is simply not true, and unless you have statistics to back up your claim, it is just your opinion?

The problem is too deeply rooted in them, its their selfish lazy natures, you might as well throw the money down the drain.
Apparently you are throwing "money down the drain" by executing people in the US.

If they thought my views were that wrong, they simply wouldnt answer them.
Many people who think your "views" are wrong have responded on this thread. It is called debate. So far, I don't think you have made your case and the poll tends reflect that.

[QUOTE]

Its not ridiculous, if you want to change bad enough for the better, anything is possible.
Ive met guys who spent nearly half their life in institutions and jails, then they realised they were wasting their lives by fighting the system, and decided to become law abiding instead, thats all you have to do, to start the change, just obey the laws, and get a job, and save.
And keep away from the dumb crims.

You do realise that you yourself just gave an example why capital punishment is wrong? Those people, even if they are few, change and became productive members of society....

Just wading through this debate, didn't want to comment till I read all, but then came across this:
The family should be fined for the victim. What I mean is that when a murderer is executed, their estate (if any goes) to the next of kin. That would be seized by the state and given to the family of the murdered person. If the criminal had no estate, a fine should be levied onto the next of kin, a fair amount from what they have.
This is called "Sippenhaft" in German, meaning that a family of is punished for the deeds of one of the members of that family. This was a widely used instrument in the third reich. Yes, this is another great ideas that sprung from the deranged minds of the nazis (along with making the families pay for the cost of executions). Now, anyone who knows anything about this part of German history also knows that a lot of people were executed on rather spurious grounds, mostly because they opposed the system (btw, I'm not talking about concentration camps here, but about people sentenced by "proper" courts).

Why should "Sippenhaft" be a deterrent? If my brother decided to kill someone, knowing he might be executed as a result, I guess the fact that I'd have to pay money for his deed might not weigh on his mind too much. Also, am I my brother's keeper?

Israel is one of the countries that practices this kind of revenge. The army regularly flattens the houses of the families of suicide bombers. Does this work as a deterrent? No! Does this incite further hatred? You bet!

To make my position clear: I do in theory think that there are crimes which are so horrendous that you would forfeit your right to be considered a part of the human population and should be executed.
In practise I'm a strict opponent of capital punishment, because there will always be innocents who are executed. And if under millions of executed criminals there should be only one inncocent then for the sake of this one person all the others should also live.

[QUOTE=Cabra West]You're right again. But their environment will teach them over and over that "decent behaviour" is weakness and will be punished by others, be that by their "friends" or by society on the whole.

Of course it will, thats why they have to make a clean break from it, even if it means spending years alone, because you dont know how to fit into law abiding society, especially the more relaxed social situations.
They have to watch and obseve in a friendly manner, and above all not even think of comitting crime, no matter how small.
Later on in life when they have benefitted from the clean break, by having a family that isnt in an enviroment ruled by fear, and just does the normal happy stuff all familys should do, they will realise they made the right choice.
And I disagree that society will punish them for decent behaviour, if anything it will reward them.
Their old criminal enviroment that views decent behaviour as weak, is just aload of crap to keep them sucked in and under the criminal thumb, decent behaviour is anything but weak.

If you steal, you may end up with a better life and more money than if you work at Wal-Mart. A very simple equation.

You will end up with more money sure, but definitely not abetter life.
Id rather earn a hundred dollars honestly, than a million dishonestly.
Stealing money is just pure laziness, because you wont work hard for it instead.



So, if your aim is crime prevention, start right there. Make sure to eliminate the reasons that push ordinary people to criminal behaviour.
Otherwise you will end up executing people just for being poor....

Like I said being poor is no excuse. And there are quite a few rich people who are crims too.
Crims breed crims, the problem is with them, no jail or punishment was ever forced on them, or offered as the only alternative for their life to end.
Quite simply, they have to fix the problem themselves by turning their back on crime and other criminals.

And I disagree that society will punish them for decent behaviour, if anything it will reward them.
Their old criminal enviroment that views decent behaviour as weak, is just aload of crap to keep them sucked in and under the criminal thumb, decent behaviour is anything but weak.

how many rich people do you know who got their money by working for it?
I know a number of comparatively rich people (yearly income of 700 000 Euro and above), and not one of them who got there by really working for it.
While I personally refrain from criminal action, I also realise that I do so because I refuse to believe that money should be a priority.
On the other hand I have seen my mother steal food when I was a child, simply to keep her three children fed after her dear husband left her. Do you seriously suggest publicly flogging her for that?



You will end up with more money sure, but definitely not abetter life.
Id rather earn a hundred dollars honestly, than a million dishonestly.

Definitely a good attitude. But not shared by too many, I'm afraid.


Quite simply, they have to fix the problem themselves by turning their back on crime and other criminals.

Don't you think it would be more effective helping them to do so, than calling for more severe punishments that will in reality only serve to place another hurdle between them and true rehabilitation?
Do you know just how difficult it is to get a job once you have a criminal record? And how, without job or income, crime seems the only alternative again?

Don't you think it would be more effective helping them to do so, than calling for more severe punishments that will in reality only serve to place another hurdle between them and true rehabilitation?
Do you know just how difficult it is to get a job once you have a criminal record? And how, without job or income, crime seems the only alternative again?Have you read "Der Hauptmann von Köpenick"? It really shows how someone gets locked into a situation that he can't escape because of what you listed.

[QUOTE=CanuckHeaven]Some people are definitely a product of their environment, and I do believe that all people have good and bad within, and some are more extreme than others.

Doesnt mean they cant change.

People can and have been re-habilitated. I think that your generalization does not apply.

I know, and rehabilitation is good for those who want to change, but for those who dont, fuck them.


The message that you are sending to the world is that you are killing people to prove that killing people is wrong. Apparently, most of the "civilized" nations don't share your views.

Which is probably why they are starting to be overrun with criminal behaviour.
If citys can't provide a safe enviroment for its law abiding taxpayers, then those citizens will flee the citys, thus ending civilisation, Rome is the best example of that, and the new barbarians encouraged by no quick hard punishments are approaching from within.



I think a "true adult way of thinking" is to not condone human killing of any sort.

Why? Just because you think all killing is bad?
Is that what you base your arguement on? A simple little statement that doesnt take any circumstances into account?

This is simply not true, and unless you have statistics to back up your claim, it is just your opinion?

Just mine? Its not just mine, its everyone elses who has a shred of commonsense between their ears.

Apparently you are throwing "money down the drain" by executing people in the US.

That isnt the way capital punishment should be conducted for a start, the endless appeals system is just money for the lawyers, and agony for the victims of these bastards who have to go through the shit again.


Many people who think your "views" are wrong have responded on this thread.

You seem to think that this forum reflects general societys opinions, this is a predominantly liberal website as you well know, its wrong for you to assume this is what the majority of people think.

It is called debate. So far, I don't think you have made your case and the poll tends reflect that.

I have made my case well enough, and put alot more into it, and talked to alot more people in this thread than you have. :rolleyes:

Have you read "Der Hauptmann von Köpenick"? It really shows how someone gets locked into a situation that he can't escape because of what you listed.

I had him in mind. No job with criminal record, no permanent address without job, no passport to start a new life elsewhere without permanent address....

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Hauptmann_K%C3%B6penick.JPG

It would also mean that an already over crowded prison system would be even more clogged up, which is why 'life' no longer means a life time behind bars anymore in the first place.
You know, off course, that prisons are not generally overcrowded because of murderers and child molesters and others like it? Prisons are overcrowded, because more and more people are locked up for petty crimes.

[QUOTE=Cabra West]how many rich people do you know who got their money by working for it?

Most of them do Cabra.
The only way an honest person can get rich is to put alot of hard work into it, of course there is inheritance, loads of money passed on, there is even criminals who get rich then go legit, and bring up their kids legit.


I know a number of comparatively rich people (yearly income of 700 000 Euro and above), and not one of them who got there by really working for it.

How do you know that? One thing I know about rich honest people is they dont ever brag or even tell you if they work hard.
Of course there is luck too, like investing in a property boom at the right time etc, but thats usually not the case with everyone.


While I personally refrain from criminal action, I also realise that I do so because I refuse to believe that money should be a priority.

So if money was a priority for you, you would steal?


On the other hand I have seen my mother steal food when I was a child, simply to keep her three children fed after her dear husband left her.

Thats abit sad, couldnt she have got a job? How much food did she have to steal every week that could have been paid for by an income of even alow paying job?
What was she stealing, hundreds of dollars of luxury food every week or something?



Do you seriously suggest publicly flogging her for that?

No, I don't believe in flogging women for starters.




Definitely a good attitude. But not shared by too many, I'm afraid.

Exactly, if it was their wouldnt be any need for harsher punishments.



Don't you think it would be more effective helping them to do so, than calling for more severe punishments that will in reality only serve to place another hurdle between them and true rehabilitation?

The rehabilitation is always there on offer, but if the crims wont work with it, then you give them the punishment instead, you have to have this for the crim, its the only thing their thick heads will respect, after proper rehabilitation, they will realise how lucky they were, not for being punished, but for seeing what a limited crock of shit the criminal lifestyle really is.


Do you know just how difficult it is to get a job once you have a criminal record? And how, without job or income, crime seems the only alternative again?

Yes, which is why to encourage crims to go straight they shouldnt have to tell an employer they have a criminal record.

Eagleby, its near Brisbane.
Not exactly a "rough" suburb...

Most of them do Cabra.
The only way an honest person can get rich is to put alot of hard work into it, of course there is inheritance, loads of money passed on, there is even criminals who get rich then go legit, and bring up their kids legit.

How do you know that? One thing I know about rich honest people is they dont ever brag or even tell you if they work hard.
Of course there is luck too, like investing in a property boom at the right time etc, but thats usually not the case with everyone.


Family. On my father's side.. and, yes, they do brag about that.... they tend to refrain from violent crime, but they are all big players regarding business crime, fraud, etc.



So if money was a priority for you, you would steal?


If money was my no 1 priority, I would. However, so far, not hurting others is my no 1 priority, and I would if I stole from them.


Thats abit sad, couldnt she have got a job? How much food did she have to steal every week that could have been paid for by an income of even alow paying job?
What was she stealing, hundreds of dollars of luxury food every week or something?


She was training for her job, but didn't get paid yet. It was basically almost right after my father had kicked her and us kids out.
The main problem was that she was not entitled to welfare, as her husband had more than enough money. On the other hand, nobody on official side had the authority to enforce her claims.



No, I don't believe in flogging women for starters.


So you believe in corporal punishment only for men???



The rehabilitation is always there on offer, but if the crims wont work with it, then you give them the punishment instead, you have to have this for the crim, its the only thing their thick heads will respect, after proper rehabilitation, they will realise how lucky they were, not for being punished, but for seeing what a limited crock of shit the criminal lifestyle really is.

Don't you think it might be a bit difficult to rehabilitate an executed criminal?

Not exactly a "rough" suburb...

It was pretty rough when I lived there, I was on Dion drive, we got two police cars every night come up and down at two different times.

It was pretty rough when I lived there, I was on Dion drive, we got two police cars every night come up and down at two different times.
And?
I so far haven't been to a single rough neighbourhood in Australia. There were a few mean parts in Hamburg City though. Where the police cars actually would do something (if they dared).

[QUOTE=Cabra West]
If money was my no 1 priority, I would. However, so far, not hurting others is my no 1 priority, and I would if I stole from them.

Why not work for it instead?

She was training for her job, but didn't get paid yet. It was basically almost right after my father had kicked her and us kids out.
The main problem was that she was not entitled to welfare, as her husband had more than enough money. On the other hand, nobody on official side had the authority to enforce her claims.

No excuse, it sounds like a temporary situation, what about charity?
No shame in that, better than stealing, Ive been helped by charitys when I needed them.
Of course I believe she should have got much better help from the welfare too.

So you believe in corporal punishment only for men???

Yes, Im a bit squemish about seeing women getting hurt.


Don't you think it might be a bit difficult to rehabilitate an executed criminal?

Ah yes, thats why they should try and put more effort into being rehabilitated to avoid this.

[QUOTE=Leonstein]And?

If they heard yelling and screaming, they would go and investigate.


I so far haven't been to a single rough neighbourhood in Australia.

Just because you havent been their doesnt mean they dont exist.

Just because you havent been their doesnt mean they dont exist.
I guess so. But just because you come from a rough neighbourhood, are you more likely to shoot someone?
I guess it largely depends on the actual "roughness". Compton LA or QB in New York could probably be more inducive to violent behaviour than even Berlin Kreuzberg, and especially your place in Oz.

Were missing seeing justice being dealt out up close and personal. I would like to see public floggings bought back for minor crimes such as theft, fraud and assault. Anyone seeing this, and hearing the screams of say a civil servant, or insurance agent, or politician even after they have had their tie removed and shirt ripped from their back, then given a good twenty lashes with the knotted cat o nines, will think twice about committing the same crimes themselves. A good lesson for the kiddies too, who should be bought to wittness true reality which will make them look at crime in a new light.
Also public execution down at the local shopping centre square, gilluotine(sp) is still the most painless and humane way to execute a criminal.
Your thoughts?



Have you watched the history of Punishment on the History Channel? It changed my mind on this topic. These public punishments became (would eventually become, if it started again) a form of entertainment. People would become jaded. Many that aren't already blood thirsty would turn blood thirsty. You know it would eventually become televised... I mean look at all the money to be made there. It would rival <insert popular sporting event here> after the masses have grown accustom to it. Not sure how many years that would take.. personally I think a major disaster will happen before it would get to that point, but who knows. Also who would the majority of people identify with.. the executer or the executed? It wouldn't be politicians or ceo's being punished, for the most part it would be the commons. I know there are alot of rat bastards out here who deserve a good ass beating, but overall I think it would cause more harm than good.

An eye for an Eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. Call it draconian, but dammit when crime rises 10% every year the status quo isn't working. If my child murdered someone, I am sorry, but not only would I turn them in, but I would tell them that their lives are forfeit. There are certain circumstances such as self defence, but when talking about punishments that can't be included as not only will you rarly be accused of wrong doing, but a jury will not convict you. I am talking about cold blooded murder like that of a convient store clerk who is shot because he didn't hand over the 46 dollars fast enough. And it shouldn't be a nice death where they fall asleep and there hearts and breathing are stopped, it should be whoever they did it to the victim. Shot in the head, stabbed 56 times, ran over, or whatever the circumstance. You say what kind of society can justly kill? I say whay kind of society locks people up that are of no use and do absolutly no work, and just suck up money. In america there is more money spent on each prisoner every year than per student. How civilized is that?

Because it is very rarely mentioned within the discussion?

Whether it's mentioned or not, it seems rather silly to assume that a person who is anti-death penalty must also be anti-prison, doesn't it?

It would also mean that an already over crowded prison system would be even more clogged up, which is why 'life' no longer means a life time behind bars anymore in the first place.

Capital offenders make up only a small percentage of the prison population. Killing them all isn't going to solve prison overcrowding, and there are better ways to do that anyway.

An eye for an Eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. Call it draconian, but dammit when crime rises 10% every year the status quo isn't working.

Except that violent crime is decreasing (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/viortrdtab.htm).

I am talking about cold blooded murder like that of a convient store clerk who is shot because he didn't hand over the 46 dollars fast enough. And it shouldn't be a nice death where they fall asleep and there hearts and breathing are stopped, it should be whoever they did it to the victim. Shot in the head, stabbed 56 times, ran over, or whatever the circumstance.

Wow. Familiar with the Eighth Amendment, by any chance?

You say what kind of society can justly kill? I say whay kind of society locks people up that are of no use and do absolutly no work, and just suck up money. In america there is more money spent on each prisoner every year than per student. How civilized is that?

Considering we spend more on death row inmates than any other kind of prisoner, maybe you should tell me.

An eye for an Eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. Call it draconian, but dammit when crime rises 10% every year the status quo isn't working.
Ah, what an enlightened old testamentarian attitude.

Also, it is absolutely disproven that more draconian measures have any effect on the rise or fall of criminal activity. There is, however, a link between the death penalty and the brutalization of a crime. If a certain crime is punishable by death, the criminal is more likely to use additional force, because after all, he's got nothing to lose, i.e. if during a bank robbery you shoot a teller, you are more likely to shoot any other witness.

In Germany most types of crimes have been declining over the past 10 years and despite the general feeling of the population, Germans are now less likely to be the victim of a violent crime than 10 and 20 years ago.
The actual use of fire arms went down from 7708 incidents in 1993 to 5499 incidents last year (source: criminal statistics German Interior Ministry 2004)

96% of all murder and manslaughter incidents and 83% of all rape incidents and other sexual crimes are solved. Over 50% of these crimes were committed by relatives or at least people who were close to the victims. In other words, it is quite unlikely in Germany to be killed by someone you don't know.

All this without the death penalty!

Doesnt mean they cant change.
That is exactly my point. People can and do change.

I know, and rehabilitation is good for those who want to change, but for those who dont, fuck them.
And you want to play God?

Which is probably why they are starting to be overrun with criminal behaviour. If citys can't provide a safe enviroment for its law abiding taxpayers, then those citizens will flee the citys, thus ending civilisation, Rome is the best example of that, and the new barbarians encouraged by no quick hard punishments are approaching from within.
Again, your logic does not stand up to the facts. Many States have the death penalty for certain crimes, yet they still have higher crime rates than certain States that do not have the death penalty. The death penalty is NOT a deterrent to crime according to many articles that I have read.

Why? Just because you think all killing is bad?
Is that what you base your arguement on? A simple little statement that doesnt take any circumstances into account?
I am basing my argument on fact and on morality. Apparently you cannot support your argument factually?

As far as "simple little statements", you have made many of them on this thread, based solely on your opinions?

Just mine? Its not just mine, its everyone elses who has a shred of commonsense between their ears.
Ahhh. Rather than post the statistics I requested to back up your claim, you resort to an ad hominen attack.

That isnt the way capital punishment should be conducted for a start, the endless appeals system is just money for the lawyers, and agony for the victims of these bastards who have to go through the shit again.
Oh? You want to deny people due process? There are innocent people already being executed and you would want to increase that amount by eliminating due process just to save a few bucks? I question your morality on that one.

You seem to think that this forum reflects general societys opinions, this is a predominantly liberal website as you well know, its wrong for you to assume this is what the majority of people think.
I understand that this is a predominantly liberal forum and it appears that your message is falling on deaf ears.

I have made my case well enough, and put alot more into it, and talked to alot more people in this thread than you have. :rolleyes:
It is not the quantity of debate, it is the quality that counts and according to the results, you haven't exactly sold your capital punishment/ off with their head routine.

Try using some facts to support your assertions and maybe you can then present a convincing argument?

Many people don't understand a fundemental when it comes to detterents. The criminal, almost without exception, does it believing he will not be caught. An offender doesn't say "Yeah, it's worth doing this for five years but not for ten", they do it with the mindset the punishment is irrelevant.

Rehabilitation is the only route to follow.

Actually three of my sisters were interfered with by my step Grandad, a person who was loved and part of the family, it forever changed my view of him.

You have my deepest sympathies. That explains a lot, actually.

Ive met people from all walks of life, and they have all displayed good natures or evil ones, blaming their upbringing has nothing to do with.

And you don't think that, for example, the education their parents did (or didn't) give them don't have any part to play in this? Sure, you can't blame everything on it, but it does have effects. I mean, take the USA. They've got quite a violent culture, with the government going to war against so much things and people, trying to demonstrate that might is right (and killing a hefty number of innocent people in the process), displaying black and white opinions (you're either with us or against us, if you're with us you'll kill people because we ask you to, else we must get rid of you), etc. If parents and schools don't teach kids how to use their judgement, to think for themselves and try to uphold objective moral values (as a side note, objectivity in morality, while difficult, is possible -- like, for a basic example, hitting someone other than for self-defense is most likely to get him or her to have a violent response, with all the problems that means, thus it is better to find peaceful solutions to your problems with other people), well, what do you think happens in that kind of environment? Sure, some people can learn along the way without any proper education, usually after making quite a few mistakes AFAIK, but they are rather exceptionnal.

Unfortunately the scum dont have such high ideals, but will take advantage of yours to fool you into false security, you are fighting aloosing battle if you think you can convince them of the errors of their thinking, basically they are cruel, callous people who are above all lazy.

Were not, by executing them, we are sending the message that we wont tolerate their behaviour anymore.
This is a true adult way of thinking, you are not risking further innocent people especially children being hurt, in favour of some high moral ground to crow from.

While I actually understand your stance (oh yes, I'm sure some are going to try and take advantage of what I suggest), I have to disagree with it. To have it truly work, you would first have to make a HUGE overhaul of the judicial system. You would have to define in very strict terms what deserves capital punishment, you would have to make sure above ALL doubts (which hardly happens that often presently) that the person is guilty (think about someone who is charged with murder who claims self-defense, but there're no witnesses), you would have to make sure this person is truly irrecuperable, you would have to make sure the judge isn't biased in any way (for he might be way too quick to deal with people he thinks as monsters, see the case I mentionned above), you would have to make sure the system can't be abused (think about people accusing others of rape just because they don't like them or the like, it happens once in a while, and a quick beheading sure wouldn't be fun in these cases...), nor be used as a tool for corrupt people (I can see it very well being used by crooked politicians to get rid of political opponents), and so on and so forth...

You can spend all the money you like on them, it wont change them.
The problem is too deeply rooted in them, its their selfish lazy natures, you might as well throw the money down the drain.

Hmm, I guess in the end, it all boils down to if you think a person is naturally evil or if people become so (innate versus acquired). I agree some cases might be irrecuperable. But really, I don't think all murderers were born as such (except for those who have mental problems, you know chemicals in the brain and all), and thus, while we might not be able to do anything for die-hard criminals out there, understanding what made them so might help us prevent others from sinking to this point.

Ah you are truly an intelligent man or woman then, thankyou for your consideration.

You're welcome.

To be honest, most of the guys that flame me on here are only looking for a reaction for their amusement, their not really that concerned at all.
If they thought my views were that wrong, they simply wouldnt answer them.

Well, as I pointed out, your views being kinda extreme, some people are going to be, erm, to be polite, uncomfortable with them. Unfortunately, when less patient people start flaming, both sides usually stop looking at whatever arguments the other side is bringing up and thus fall on a very strict (and usually wrong) black and white view of the problem, bringing in turn more insults and flaming.

Well, that's about it for now. Once again, my sympathies for your sisters. I wish you all to be able to find some inner peace again.

Were missing seeing justice being dealt out up close and personal. I would like to see public floggings bought back for minor crimes such as theft, fraud and assault. Anyone seeing this, and hearing the screams of say a civil servant, or insurance agent, or politician even after they have had their tie removed and shirt ripped from their back, then given a good twenty lashes with the knotted cat o nines, will think twice about committing the same crimes themselves. A good lesson for the kiddies too, who should be bought to wittness true reality which will make them look at crime in a new light.
Also public execution down at the local shopping centre square, gilluotine(sp) is still the most painless and humane way to execute a criminal.
Your thoughts?
Well ok, just for once. How would you like to die?

No, they don't.

You're just silly.

US Census 2000
White 75.1%
Black or African American 12.3%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 12.5%
American Indian and Alaska Native 0.9%
Asian 3.6%
Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander 0.1%
Some other race 5.5%
Two or more races 2.4%



Erm. I make that 112.4%. Did they ask a few tourists too?

Not even close Mongoose:

US Census 2000
White 75.1%
Black or African American 12.3%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 12.5%
American Indian and Alaska Native 0.9%
Asian 3.6%
Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander 0.1%
Some other race 5.5%
Two or more races 2.4%

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_event=&geo_id=01000US&_geoContext=01000US&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010

Britain:

Ethnic groups:
white 92.1%, black 2%, Indian 1.8%, Pakistani 1.3%, mixed 1.2%, other 1.6% (2001 census)

Ireland:

Ethnic groups:
Celtic, English

Germany:

Ethnic groups:
German 91.5%, Turkish 2.4%, other 6.1% (made up largely of Greek, Italian, Polish, Russian, Serbo-Croatian, Spanish)

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

Odd, i could have sworn the countries I mentioned were in EUROPE... when he asked what EUROPEAN countries were diverse.... very odd... and given your stats- those European countries appear just as diverse as the US.
And, Ireland having a 'Celtic' ethnic group??????

'Celtic' means: Gaelic, Anglo-Irish, Norman, German, French, Spanish, Viking, Icelandic, Scotti and more recently:

Chinese, Nigerian, Russian, Polish, Latvian, Malayasian, Congolese.

Walk down a street in Ireland and the least number of people you will see is 'Celtic'. The second strongest language in Ireland is Mandarian and the fourth is Russian.

Know what your talking about before making an argument, silly rabbit.

Well ok, just for once. How would you like to die?

Whats that got to do with executing criminal scum?
I dont break the law, and have respect for decent people who dont either, so your silly point here doesnt really apply to me. I guess I'd like to die either peacefully, or saving someones life, or peoples lives.

An eye for an Eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. Call it draconian, but dammit when crime rises 10% every year the status quo isn't working. If my child murdered someone, I am sorry, but not only would I turn them in, but I would tell them that their lives are forfeit. There are certain circumstances such as self defence, but when talking about punishments that can't be included as not only will you rarly be accused of wrong doing, but a jury will not convict you. I am talking about cold blooded murder like that of a convient store clerk who is shot because he didn't hand over the 46 dollars fast enough. And it shouldn't be a nice death where they fall asleep and there hearts and breathing are stopped, it should be whoever they did it to the victim. Shot in the head, stabbed 56 times, ran over, or whatever the circumstance. You say what kind of society can justly kill? I say whay kind of society locks people up that are of no use and do absolutly no work, and just suck up money. In america there is more money spent on each prisoner every year than per student. How civilized is that?

Spot on. Criminals flout every rule and law they can, yet still try to take advantage of any soft law that can benefit them, the Libertarians are creating a more dangerous society for us to live in, by letting these 'people' get away with literally murder, so they can rest easy at night, snug in their high principals that get more innocent people hurt.
Basically kids should be taught from the earliest age that crime is wrong, at home and at school, alot more than they are now. They should devote alot more time and effort to it, bring in criminals who have totally reformed to lecture them, above all provide more positive male role models for kids, especially young boys, who have the most chance of turning to crime with negative male heroes as their idols.
The snag is a shocking role model for boys, or any children, this insipid useless creature, although highly intelligent in most cases, is about as inspiring to boys and everyone else as a limp piece of lettuce.

Spot on. Criminals flout every rule and law they can, yet still try to take advantage of any soft law that can benefit them, the Libertarians are creating a more dangerous society for us to live in, by letting these 'people' get away with literally murder, so they can rest easy at night, snug in their high principals that get more innocent people hurt.
One does not need to be a Libertarian to disagree with your "high principles" that would include public executions and floggings.

Basically kids should be taught from the earliest age that crime is wrong, at home and at school, alot more than they are now. They should devote alot more time and effort to it, bring in criminals who have totally reformed to lecture them,
From what I understand, this is a tool that is already in place in certain jurisdictions.

above all provide more positive male role models for kids, especially young boys, who have the most chance of turning to crime with negative male heroes as their idols.
Since you already have advocated reduced civil rights, what would your criteria be for these "more positive male role models"?

I'm feeling bad about this topic now. I voted yes, but I assumed we meant in NS. In the real world? Don't be ridiculous. In this game we can afford to be wanton in our attitude towards people's lives because they don't really exist, but in the real world we have a responsibility to respect all life. Executions leave no space for repentance, restitution, forgiveness. And public executions just serve to feed the bloodlust of those who get a kick out of such things. I for one want my children to grow up learning to hold dear the sanctity of human life. Not to see its discarding as a spectacle for the masses.

I'm feeling bad about this topic now. I voted yes, but I assumed we meant in NS. In the real world? Don't be ridiculous. In this game we can afford to be wanton in our attitude towards people's lives because they don't really exist, but in the real world we have a responsibility to respect all life. Executions leave no space for repentance, restitution, forgiveness. And public executions just serve to feed the bloodlust of those who get a kick out of such things. I for one want my children to grow up learning to hold dear the sanctity of human life. Not to see its discarding as a spectacle for the masses.
I agree. Very well stated!!

[QUOTE=CanuckHeaven]One does not need to be a Libertarian to disagree with your "high principles" that would include public executions and floggings.

No, but its probably more than likely to be the case isnt it?


From what I understand, this is a tool that is already in place in certain jurisdictions.

A tool that isnt properly applied or used much these days.

Since you already have advocated reduced civil rights,

For criminals, absolutely, if your not criminally inclined, then what do you have to really fear?

what would your criteria be for these "more positive male role models"?
Remove for one all the silly feminist brainwashing that has created a generation of confused men, and simply let men be as they are, the positive role models will come from this naturally.

I for one want my children to grow up learning to hold dear the sanctity of human life. Not to see its discarding as a spectacle for the masses.

Their only criminals, they dont care about your children, so why should your children care about them?
Only by identifying scum for what it truly is, and punishing it appropriately, can we then hold up the good decent things in life as important again.

Their only criminals, they dont care about your children, so why should your children care about them?
Only by identifying scum for what it truly is, and punishing it appropriately, can we then hold up the good decent things in life as important again.

They may be "only" criminals and it may be true that THEY do not care about
your/ our/ my children.
This is always assuming that innocent people are not being executed
and that on any individual occasion the person being slaughtered on behalf
of the state did in fact commit the act they have been found guilty of.
(Further assuming you have any time whatsoever for trials)


Why should your/our/my children care about them?

Because criminals are people, other human beings and because WE
do care about your/our/my children and to raise them to have a callous
disregard for human life, would be harmful to those children who would grow up
as you seem to have done, thinking that it is ever justified to murder
another human being.


See, fundamentally Gessler
we differ on only one point.
I believe murder is wrong and always wrong.
You believe that it is okay as long as it is done by you or someone you approve of.

For criminals, absolutely, if your not criminally inclined, then what do you have to really fear?

I am keeping the fuck out of this minefield, but I will chuck one comment, hand-written on a paper aeroplane, into the midst of it that you may catch it and read at your leisure, and that is that the "The innocent have nothing to fear" is one of the worst conceivable arguments for reducing civil rights. I hope I don't have to explain why, quoting examples from history; I hope you can see it for yourself.

[QUOTE=Relative Power]They may be "only" criminals and it may be true that THEY do not care about
your/ our/ my children.
This is always assuming that innocent people are not being executed
and that on any individual occasion the person being slaughtered on behalf
of the state did in fact commit the act they have been found guilty of.
(Further assuming you have any time whatsoever for trials)

By innocent people being killed, you seem to have not much faith in the law and court system to determine this.
Your innocent man is a rarity, not common.
And unfortunately, must be sacrificed for an improved society, that isnt run at night by criminals, and in some places 24/7.
Do you really think an innocent man would get executed without any doupt about his guilt?
Just the doupt would be enough, for the judges to reconsider, and examine again, if there was no doupt from the beginning, then to the guillotine with all due haste.

Because criminals are people, other human beings and because WE
do care about your/our/my children and to raise them to have a callous
disregard for human life, would be harmful to those children who would grow up

Then you have a very rosy view of criminals then, sure their human, but only in a physical sense, they tread all over our morals and values, yet expect us to save them with them.
Don't take this personally, because I only think your abit naive about them, but to them you would be a gullible target and a sucker.
They want you to believe above all else, that they are good people just like you are, then when you are relaxed or not paying attention, they strike in how they want to, this is what disgusts me about them more than anything, not the actual crime, but how they take advantage of you in committing it.


as you seem to have done, thinking that it is ever justified to murder
another human being.

Its not murder, its justice.

See, fundamentally Gessler
we differ on only one point.
I believe murder is wrong and always wrong.
You believe that it is okay as long as it is done by you or someone you approve of.

The law is above murder.

I am keeping the fuck out of this minefield, but I will chuck one comment, hand-written on a paper aeroplane, into the midst of it that you may catch it and read at your leisure, and that is that the "The innocent have nothing to fear" is one of the worst conceivable arguments for reducing civil rights. I hope I don't have to explain why, quoting examples from history; I hope you can see it for yourself.

Your thinking of countrys not run by proper democracys.
In a democracy, only the criminal or enemy of the government has agood reason to fear, and thats the way it should be.

Your thinking of countrys not run by proper democracys.
In a democracy, only the criminal or enemy of the government has agood reason to fear, and thats the way it should be.


Gessler you rock man check out my countrys motto i think you'd like it trust me

And i'm sick of a lot of you, the death penalty is justice. When you murder someone you deny them their basic human right. Their right to life. If you are willing to do that then you deserve no human rights. In short treat other people as you would like to be treated call it karma

BRING BACK HANGING!!!! :)*waits to get flamed by liberal nutjobs* :headbang:

=Disropia]Gessler you rock man

Thanks *wipes eye its nice to get a compliment.


check out my countrys motto i think you'd like it trust me


I like it.
'What have you got to fear, if you have nothing to hide'
Something our lefty friends could reflect on.


And i'm sick of a lot of you, the death penalty is justice. When you murder someone you deny them their basic human right.

Exactly.

Their right to life. If you are willing to do that then you deserve no human rights. In short treat other people as you would like to be treated call it karma

Thats right. We are the justice on Earth, and we will pass on to God, the highest justice, what we wont accept.

BRING BACK HANGING!!!!

Too messy, a Guillotine will take care of the problem much better.
Not to mention its alot more humane for its swiftness.

bump

I like it.
'What have you got to fear, if you have nothing to hide'
Something our lefty friends could reflect on.

How about you lead by example and sacrifice your right to privacy first. Move into a glass house and tell us your real name, phone number, address, etc. After all, "What have you got to fear, if you have nothing to hide."

How about you lead by example and sacrifice your right to privacy first. Move into a glass house and tell us your real name, phone number, address, etc. After all, "What have you got to fear, if you have nothing to hide."

My real name is James Tierney, my phone number is 0407649998, my address is 48 East Esplanade Manly, Sydney.
Uh the glass house is taking it a bit far.

Thanks *wipes eye its nice to get a compliment.

I like it.
'What have you got to fear, if you have nothing to hide'
Something our lefty friends could reflect on.

Exactly.

Thats right. We are the justice on Earth, and we will pass on to God, the highest justice, what we wont accept.

Too messy, a Guillotine will take care of the problem much better.
Not to mention its alot more humane for its swiftness.
I am a liberal nutjob, but the nutjob part is completely unrelated to any form of liberalism :) .

What have I got to fear? Well if I lived in China, I'd have a lot to hide and fear from the government. Even in democracies, wrong people get convicted… what was that recent case involving the IRA? About seven people were convicted of a crime which involved death and would merit the death penalty if it was around - but were then found to be innocent. What would you do then after you'd killed them?

What is wrong with slaving rapists/murderers out in government-controlled mines or whatever? If they're found innocent later on, you can recompense them in full and release them, and they do something useful while they're around.

My real name is James Tierney, my phone number is 0407649998, my address is 48 East Esplanade Manly, Sydney.
Uh the glass house is taking it a bit far.

Well I certainly give you kudos for your guts ;).

It is certainly more than I would do, and I have nothing to hide.

But the glass house, while taking it a bit far, is stretching the idea to its logical conclusion. For people with nothing to hide, everything they do should be open to everyone to see.

Well it's all quite clear now.

If you take life then you must be killed,
so the murderer gets killed by the executioner
who then must be killed by another executioner
and so on and on until theres no one left who is willing to continue it
and then all you'll be left with are left wing liberal bedwetters like me.

I like that plan

carry on

tell me if you was flogged wouldn't you be a bit pissed and be more likely to commit a more violent crime (think about telling a teenager what to do)

execution just wastes life look at all the people who get let out early because they get treatment and become sane (it's more economical to kill them I know but one of them could cure cancer)

The utlilitatrian argument put forward by the death penalty advocates appears to be that the death penalty prevents crime, either through deterrence or the elimination of recidivism. If this is true, I am confident that they can put foward objectively verifiable evidence that in a democratic jurisidiction which has introduced the death penalty, crime has fallen.

Any other argument being put forward by death penalty advocates appears to fall somewhere in the questionable moral ground between blood vengeance and sadism for its own sake.

As regards the casual dismissal by death penalty advocates of concerns that there may be miscarriages of justice, there is ample evidence to suggest that wrongful conviction and sentencing is a significant risk. Over and above that, in two of the best researched death penalty jurisdictions, there is strong evidence that the death penalty is applied in a discriminatory fashion - and if this risk is present in the democracy which carries out the greatest number of executions each year as well as in the theocracy which carries out the greatest number of theocratic executions, there would certainly appear to be grounds to argue that there is a systemic problem for executions.

Rehab doesn't work. At least, not with junkies. Or drunks. Or smokers.

Why should it work with violent serial rapists.

Doctor to rapist: Now. From now on, you won't stalk women, okay?
Rapist: Sure.

3 months later...

News Anchor: A string of violent rapes has occured recently in the last week. The rapist in question has been identified as a man you just got out of a rehab for convicts a few months back. More at 11.

Hasn't that happened before?

No. Public executions should never come back. The best thing to do is to abolish capital punishment altogether.

Rehab doesn't work. At least, not with junkies. Or drunks. Or smokers.

Why should it work with violent serial rapists.

Doctor to rapist: Now. From now on, you won't stalk women, okay?
Rapist: Sure.

3 months later...

News Anchor: A string of violent rapes has occured recently in the last week. The rapist in question has been identified as a man you just got out of a rehab for convicts a few months back. More at 11.

Hasn't that happened before?
You know how many convicted rapists there are out on the streets? You know how rare it is for a repeat crime?

We need to bring back Phrenology. At about the age of five you get taken to a Phrenologist who measures the lumps on your head and the spacing of your eyes etc., and from this they determine whether you are Criminal Scum or a Hard Working, Honest Citizen. Then they dispose of the Criminal Scum, and let the God-Fearing, Decent Citizens grow up in a crime-free utopia. Hooray!

I can see some point to this. Granted whipping for jaywalking or littering is a bit much. but what about some humiliation. Stocks, or even turn the prisions into Zoos. if you knew you were going to be put on display for being convicted of shoplifiting (still will have trials and rules of evidience and all) how many people will still shoplift?

whipping for the more serious crimes, and permament public display in an "zoo-like" setting for lifers. they can see their kids, and admission can help fund the prisions.

Lafier']I can see some point to this. Granted whipping for jaywalking or littering is a bit much. but what about some humiliation. Stocks, or even turn the prisions into Zoos. if you knew you were going to be put on display for being convicted of shoplifiting (still will have trials and rules of evidience and all) how many people will still shoplift?

whipping for the more serious crimes, and permament public display in an "zoo-like" setting for lifers. they can see their kids, and admission can help fund the prisions.Damn am I glad I live in a country where human dignity is the first thing to be protected.

As has been mentioned, people don't tend to think of the consequences when committing crimes (oh wait a sec, at that point they exit the human race...). Very few crimes are committed after carefully weighing up the risks and benefits, so humiliation, flogging etc only serve to satisfy some people's desire for revenge.

Lafier']I can see some point to this. Granted whipping for jaywalking or littering is a bit much. but what about some humiliation. Stocks, or even turn the prisions into Zoos. if you knew you were going to be put on display for being convicted of shoplifiting (still will have trials and rules of evidience and all) how many people will still shoplift?

whipping for the more serious crimes, and permament public display in an "zoo-like" setting for lifers. they can see their kids, and admission can help fund the prisions.

Actually, the stocks were not just a humiliation - they were a highly dangerous experience. You were completely at the mercy of the crowd and whatever they took into their heads to do to you. People were routinely maimed or killed in the stocks unless they had enough friends to protect them.

I'm taking it that the idea of making the prisons into zoos is a joke.

Damn am I glad I live in a country where human dignity is the first thing to be protected.
status Quo. Rape Victims are also put on trial, their sexual history brought up and put on display to try and protect the Accussed rapist. IF the Rapist is sent to jail, he's practially a home town hero in there (unless he raped a kid, then he's free game.) but the victim still lives in fear. however, the rapist is displayed and all gets to know what he looks like, that makes it harder for the criminal to live down.

and anyone who takes a life, violates other's rights and dignity, puts another person through personal hell, should spend some time knowing what it's like.

and two, by keeping it open to the public, you also improve the conditions that they live in. their cells must still meet proper standards, meals must still be nutritional... it's just that some (ok, most) of their privacy is removed.

Actually, the stocks were not just a humiliation - they were a highly dangerous experience. You were completely at the mercy of the crowd and whatever they took into their heads to do to you. People were routinely maimed or killed in the stocks unless they had enough friends to protect them.

I'm taking it that the idea of making the prisons into zoos is a joke.but with a little modification, those in the stocks can be protected. a plexiglass barrier, Guards, designed to be ergonomically correct, and anyone openly and physically torturing anyone in there will be arrested and may end up next to the person.

Lafier']status Quo. Rape Victims are also put on trial, their sexual history brought up and put on display to try and protect the Accussed rapist. IF the Rapist is sent to jail, he's practially a home town hero in there (unless he raped a kid, then he's free game.) but the victim still lives in fear. however, the rapist is displayed and all gets to know what he looks like, that makes it harder for the criminal to live down.

and anyone who takes a life, violates other's rights and dignity, puts another person through personal hell, should spend some time knowing what it's like.

and two, by keeping it open to the public, you also improve the conditions that they live in. their cells must still meet proper standards, meals must still be nutritional... it's just that some (ok, most) of their privacy is removed.Not possible in the country I live in. The constitution prevents any "two wrongs make a right" crap. And don't consider the German legal system equal to the American one. We don't live in a country where lawyers can neccessarily get away with something like that. Also, our jury system is completely different, with no jury being the usual case.

Not possible in the country I live in. The constitution prevents any "two wrongs make a right" crap. And don't consider the German legal system equal to the American one. We don't live in a country where lawyers can neccessarily get away with something like that. Also, our jury system is completely different, with no jury being the usual case.Sorry, didn't see the Germany location.

Lafier']Sorry, didn't see the Germany location.I don't recall the US constitution protecting human dignity. It happens to be the first article of the German one, though.

I don't recall the US constitution protecting human dignity. It happens to be the first article of the German one, though.Ours protects against "Cruel and Unusual Punnishments" which is why I'm being so creative and taking this thread's original post as a creative execise and not somthing that will actually pass.

Lafier']Ours protects against "Cruel and Unusual Punnishments" which is why I'm being so creative and taking this thread's original post as a creative execise and not somthing that will actually pass.

Although since you have capital punishment, "cruel" must be pretty subjective...

Aye, I could bring me mutton n' ale and pack a bag o' throwin' rocks ta be sure!

Although since you have capital punishment, "cruel" must be pretty subjective...
The constitution explicitly provides for capital punishment in many places. As so, it can not be cruel under the intent of the meaning of the amendment.

Lafier']Ours protects against "Cruel and Unusual Punnishments" which is why I'm being so creative and taking this thread's original post as a creative execise and not somthing that will actually pass. Yeah, well the German constitution starts with "The dignity of human beings is untouchable." which leaves very little room for interpretation. Note that it says "and" and not "or", so, while some punishments may be cruel, if they get done often enough, they're no longer unusual (as was the argumentation to harsher punishments for drug abuse a while back).
(US constitution is mine too, btw)

Yeah, well the German constitution starts with "The dignity of human beings is untouchable." which leaves very little room for interpretation. Note that it says "and" and not "or", so, while some punishments may be cruel, if they get done often enough, they're no longer unusual (as was the argumentation to harsher punishments for drug abuse a while back).
(US constitution is mine too, btw)
Dual Citizenship? Kewl :p

Lafier']but with a little modification, those in the stocks can be protected. a plexiglass barrier, Guards, designed to be ergonomically correct, and anyone openly and physically torturing anyone in there will be arrested and may end up next to the person.

A very long time ago i had to write an essay on the logical justification for punishment. I worked through all of the thirteen traditional arguments in favour, finding that none was ethically or morally sustainable, and concluding that there was no justification for punishment. It concluded with the cheerful suggestion that if you wanted to carry out punishments in such a way as to do it cheaply (since it wasn't worth doing for either prevention or deterrence, why spend more money on it than you had to?) and meet the requirements of the largest number of arguments in favour of punishment, televised torture would be the way to go.

The essay got an A+, my highest ever mark for anything.
One thing that I found interesting in my reading to prepare the essay was that people who favoured punishment discounted completely the idea that emotional suffering was a matter for concern in the way that physical suffering would be. Another was that people would often argue for physical punishment hedged around with careful precautions to contain the harm. It didn't seem to occur to them that by recommending the precautions, they were conceding that wilfully harming people was inherently impossible to justify.

What I really didn't like about the origin of this thread - and what provoked me to intervene - was the "criminal" groups which the first poster wanted to see flogged. I've noticed that the physical gratification crowd tend to pick two groups of people for processing - the egregiously criminal (paedophiles, serial rapists and other fun people of that ilk) and then small time crooks and social irritants like civil servants. What I can't remember seeing is anyone calling for the hanging of big businessmen, corrupt politicians and other major social disasters.

Since I'm opposed to the death penalty, I won't be adding the names of Ken Lay and the rest of the little list of society offenders who won't be missed, but as long as there's pressure for punishments that people will really FEEL, and which might affect their planning so as to deter crime, I really do think that taking money off the greedy gets their attention in a way which is much more easily demonstrated than possible outcomes from flogging the poor (I note that no country which uses flogging ever seems to see the number of floggings dwindle over time, which suggests that flogging isn't a particularly effective deterrent).

Lafier']Dual Citizenship? Kewl :pIt rocks! :D (cept for the double taxes... and the double draft...)

How come, if excecution is so barbaric and inhumane and degrading to the executor and excecuted why do people come to watch it in huge crowds. Iran people flock to the excecutions today, Britain it used to be a mornings entertainment, bring the picnic etc. and when ever a monarch is bumped off you get even bigger crowds. I could almost garuntee if we caught the terrorists who committed the 7/7 attacks or Osama Bin Laden or when Saddam Hussein is on the block people would flock to come see the event, because excecuted people are not innocent.

It rocks! :D (cept for the double taxes... and the double draft...)
(Double Ouch)

Double draft? assuming you're not talking about the beer but the military... what would happen if both drafts you at the same time? (impossible, I know, since US has done away with the draft, don't know about germany)

Lafier'](Double Ouch)

Double draft? assuming you're not talking about the beer but the military... what would happen if both drafts you at the same time? (impossible, I know, since US has done away with the draft, don't know about germany)I'm talking about the military one. As for America making away with Selective Service, a common misconception. They don't take anyone because there's enough volonteers and because of Vietnam, but if you don't register for it, you aren't elligible for student aid or running for office.
The German draft occurs after you're done with school in most cases. They didn't want me though. I'm supposedly totally unfit for military service (I got T5 out of a possible 5 degrees, T5 being the worst) but I don't know why... :D
So I don't have to worry about both hitting me. Things would have to be very bad for me to get pulled in.

I for one, would love to get rid of most jail sentences under 5 years and replace them with public caning. Theft? 25 lashes. Murder? 250 lashes then a swift execution.

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.

I for one, would love to get rid of most jail sentences under 5 years and replace them with public caning. Theft? 25 lashes. Murder? 250 lashes then a swift execution.

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.So someone robbing someone is equal to 25 lashes? Sounds more like 25 lashes for a theft than eye for an eye...

By innocent people being killed, you seem to have not much faith in the law and court system to determine this.
Your innocent man is a rarity, not common.
And unfortunately, must be sacrificed for an improved society, that isnt run at night by criminals, and in some places 24/7.

Innocent people must be sacrificed to improve society?
Its an interesting concept and one I am sure you wouldn't approve of
if that innocent person were you or your children


Do you really think an innocent man would get executed without any doupt about his guilt?
Just the doupt would be enough, for the judges to reconsider, and examine again, if there was no doupt from the beginning, then to the guillotine with all due haste.

It has happened many times before and where the death penalty exists it
will happen many times in the future. If you follow the logic that
what has occured before gives some indication of what can happen in
the future.

Then you have a very rosy view of criminals then, sure their human, but only in a physical sense, they tread all over our morals and values, yet expect us to save them with them.
Don't take this personally, because I only think your abit naive about them, but to them you would be a gullible target and a sucker.


I have no rosy view of criminals. I can barely comprehend them
but they remain human in every sense and if you have any belief
that life is valuable and that no one has a right to end anothers life,
which you pretty much have to believe to believe that murder is wrong
then execution is no different.

They want you to believe above all else, that they are good people just like you are, then when you are relaxed or not paying attention, they strike in how they want to, this is what disgusts me about them more than anything, not the actual crime, but how they take advantage of you in committing it.

Yes with murder or any other crime that would attract the
death penalty the most disgusting thing is the way they take advantage
of a persons trust???


Its not murder, its justice.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet and
the same follows for manure.

Life is life
taking life is murder whether you like the person you are killing or not.

The law is above murder.

My concept of law is definitely above murder
but your entire argument is that your concept of law is not.

It is in how it treats those in its power that a society shows its nature.
A respect for human life can only be shown by being utterly opposed
to anyone taking it from anyone else.
It can never be okay to do, whether the law, god or your mother says it is .

Even if a society is barbaric enough to believe there are circumstances,
(when there are other options) that it is okay to cold bloodedly murder
another human being I notice that no such society has a rule whereby
anyone has to take responsibility for any error.
Perhaps if the judge sentencing or the executioner paid with their life
for an error those societies would be less keen to have the death penalty
or at least less able to find people to facilitate the process.

Two hundred years ago England had public floggings and executions. As a result England had no crime back then and Australia was never settled due to the lack of convicts.

Two hundred years ago England had public floggings and executions. As a result England had no crime back then and Australia was never settled due to the lack of convicts.That, my friend, is an awesome 666th post! :D

i dont think it should be public but i do think that if u kill someone you should die and i think that the victims family gets 2 do it shooting 'em,injecting posins,or be able 2 kill them how they were killed(torture is good 2)

i dont think it should be public but i do think that if u kill someone you should die and i think that the victims family gets 2 do it shooting 'em,injecting posins,or be able 2 kill them how they were killed(torture is good 2)

A suggestion not unlike the situation in some Arab countries.

it would make being a cop more fun

Were missing seeing justice being dealt out up close and personal. I would like to see public floggings bought back for minor crimes such as theft, fraud and assault. Anyone seeing this, and hearing the screams of say a civil servant, or insurance agent, or politician even after they have had their tie removed and shirt ripped from their back, then given a good twenty lashes with the knotted cat o nines, will think twice about committing the same crimes themselves. A good lesson for the kiddies too, who should be bought to wittness true reality which will make them look at crime in a new light.
Also public execution down at the local shopping centre square, gilluotine(sp) is still the most painless and humane way to execute a criminal.
Your thoughts?
In general I am against the death sentence - I am for true life sentences for serious crimes - life in solitary with no TV, books or human contact for extremely serious crimes.

So someone robbing someone is equal to 25 lashes? Sounds more like 25 lashes for a theft than eye for an eye...

Okay okay, violent robbery 100 lashes, nonviolent 50.

Simple theft 25.

Even if a society is barbaric enough to believe there are circumstances,
(when there are other options) that it is okay to cold bloodedly murder
another human being I notice that no such society has a rule whereby
anyone has to take responsibility for any error.
Perhaps if the judge sentencing or the executioner paid with their life
for an error those societies would be less keen to have the death penalty
or at least less able to find people to facilitate the process.


This has always been my take on it; you want the death penalty? Fine. Have it. And if it turns out that it was inflicted in error, the judge, the jury and the prosecutor who called for it are executed the same way. This usually at least stops the argument, even if it doesn't win it.

I think I first starting using the position after a boss of mine asked me if I was sure about something. Yep. Sure? Yep. So if you're wrong I can rip your arm off and beat you on the head with the wet end? OK, maybe I'm not sure.