Originally Posted by atomik_sprout

Time out is a good way of putting it, because when some of these cats get out of prison, they go directly back to doin' what they were in jail for in the first place.



Key phrase here: "HARDLY worked any better." With that being said, that means that if it hardly worked better, it still worked better, right? Right! So, what's the big deal. Stick with what works, that's what I say.

There's a very fine line between murder and execution. Most executions (not speaking of the side outside of law) are for justice. Anything in the name of justice is okay in my book. I look at it like this. We don't call people who are paid to put your dog "to sleep" killers, murderers or inhumane. We don't call exterminators muderers either. What's the difference between them and an executionist? There is none. An executionist is basically a human exterminator. They put people "to sleep". They're getting paid to do the same thing a human would do to any other animal, if need be.

It's not murder of murderers, it's wiping the slate clean of all that made it dirty in the first place. It's emptying our jail cells for the criminals who can be let out, due to smaller crimes. "He who kills by the sword shall also die by the sword." I read that in a bible once. "You must kill the spider in order to remove the cobweb" That's a Maltese proverb. My point is simply this: If it works, why not? I'm not the only one who thinks this way either. Go out and ask a bunch of random people you've never spoken with before and I bet 70% of them would say something similar to what Scourge and I said.

Originally Posted by BrightShadow_96

Hanging is stupid- But not just hanging, the death penalty itself is stupid.

Originally Posted by BrightShadow_96

We are not in the right position to judge who is innocent and who is guilty, and definitely not in the right position to judge who should live or die.

Originally Posted by BrightShadow_96

If someone commits murder, I think that they'll get what they deserve eventually.

Originally Posted by BrightShadow_96

There's also the problem of determining who is guilty or not. We may find someone guilty who is perfectly innocent. They could get the death penalty without doing anything at all. It's too big of a risk.

Originally Posted by Descended From Darkness

You don't have to pay for them to live anymore so why should you care?

Originally Posted by BrightShadow_96

We are not in the right position to judge who is innocent and who is guilty, and definitely not in the right position to judge who should live or die.

Originally Posted by Luminous

I hear using nukes to fight wars against foreign countries works better than actually fighting them. So what's the big deal? Oh right, you're nuking someone, and that's quite wrong.

I know that's a blown out of proportion metaphor, but it illustrates my stance I think. There are methods that will give a better/easier/efficent result, but the trade-offs aren't worth it.

The Assyrian Empire used to deport or brutally put them down newly subjugated people to ensure that rebellions wouldn't take place. This worked great for keeping civil uprising from occuring, but of course, the people in the coutnry didn't like it, and neither did anyone else, and their Emprie got in turn brutally smashed into a wall by various countries.

Just because something might work a bit better, doesn't mean its better. For example, Cyrus of the Persians was perfectly tolerant of anyone he took over, and left them be pretty much, and that worked just as well as the Assyrian method, perhaps better.

There are healthier alternatives to the death penalty. Hanging people would seriously be a lazy cop-out instead of actually trying to solve a problem a better and more morally acceptable way. As they say, "It is far easier to make war than peace". It's easier to kill people, than to put them back into society as nice people. Does that make it better?



I do.(although I think the Humans vs Animals thing is a whole other debate altogether)



And what of "Thou shalt not kill"?



I'd put it at around 40-50% personally, and even that I think would be a sad fact.



Executions are revenge. Revenge is not Justice. If the Justice system simply mimics back what someone has done back to them, then the Justice system is as bad as them. It stoops down to their level, rather then trying to bring them up. Beating up a bully doesn't make the bully a nicer person, or stop the problem of bullying.


I speak in metaphors a lot, I apologize for that.

Originally Posted by Akura13

Of course not! That is what they used back then in the times WITHOUT technology, but we're here in the future people! That's why we have the electric chair, police men, official courts, ect. We shouldn't go back to hanging, because we have much more efficiant ways of getting criminals.

Originally Posted by Luminous

I think a partial reason for this is because society shuns ex-convicts of serious crimes. Is a shop keeper going to hire someone who in the past has commited thievery? Probably not. Even if these ex-convicts have good intentions coming out of prison, they may be forced by circumstances to commit wrong acts again. Rather than a death penalty, I think we need to work more on assimilating ex-convicts back into positive influences on society. As it is now, in a lot of cases we are sending them back to commit crimes, but it's not entirely their fault in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Luminous

And what of "Thou shalt not kill"?

Originally Posted by Arrianna

this is not talking about thieves, thieves aren't put on death row. The punishment is for murderers and serial or mass ones at that. You know the ones that plan it out and kill a number of people for their own benefit or pleasure? They don't kill again after getting out because people don't trust them or give them a chance. They move to where no one knows who they are and then kill because they WANT to.

Originally Posted by Arrianna

Lets see. "Thou shalt not kill" (translation of original word meaning to unlawfully kill someone in an act that is not in self defense) and by the way if you do "Kill" then you will be executed (keep reading past the "10" that everyone concentrates on); it helps if you don't take it out of context. The command not to commit murder is actually one of many in a set of laws that included capitol punishment for just that and many other crimes. A lot of trouble has been caused by that one small mistranslation and taking it out of context.

Originally Posted by Arrianna

Now I am not for vengance but justice and I do believe that capitol punishment is justice for the crime of murder. I don't believe we should bring back hanging though, it is just sooo messy. However with all the complaints about injections being painful and inhumane perhaps we should take a serious look at using the guillotine instead. It's quick, painless, effective, and could be set up to be automatic so no one has to pull the "trigger". Instead you can have someone on a "safety switch" in case there is a last minute reprieve or something goes wrong.