Why I support bringing back the death penalty...
-
Quote:
Because members of a civilized society don't kill each other.
Exactly. So, one someone is uncivilized enough to murder someone else, they should be kicked out of society (killed.)
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
So, one someone is uncivilized enough to murder someone else, they should be kicked out of society (killed.)
Being kicked out of society is something different from being killed. As soon as someone claims the right to kill, I'll *decide* I have the same rights.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
ryanb31 wrote:
So, one someone is uncivilized enough to murder someone else, they should be kicked out of society (killed.)
Being kicked out of society is something different from being killed. As soon as someone claims the right to kill, I'll *decide* I have the same rights.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Quote:
What's the point in killing them?
They are a waste of space? They have lost the right to be here? You pick. In a world where abortion is so widely accepted I am surprised so many people are against the death penalty. I am not suggesting it is the same people but it does seem odd to me.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
They are a waste of space?
In other words, "I don't like them, therefore ... REVENGE!"
ryanb31 wrote:
They have lost the right to be here?
That's a judgement which has to be made by society as a whole, and most civilised societies have decided that the death penalty is an overreaction.
ryanb31 wrote:
In a world where abortion is so widely accepted ...
Abortion is a completely separate argument which doesn't belong in this thread. Suffice it to say that it doesn't involve depriving a living person of life.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
ryanb31 wrote:
They are a waste of space?
In other words, "I don't like them, therefore ... REVENGE!"
ryanb31 wrote:
They have lost the right to be here?
That's a judgement which has to be made by society as a whole, and most civilised societies have decided that the death penalty is an overreaction.
ryanb31 wrote:
In a world where abortion is so widely accepted ...
Abortion is a completely separate argument which doesn't belong in this thread. Suffice it to say that it doesn't involve depriving a living person of life.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Quote:
In other words, "I don't like them, therefore ... REVENGE!"
No, in your words.
Quote:
That's a judgement which has to be made by society as a whole
I agree. So, let each society decide.
Quote:
that the death penalty is an overreaction.
But again, why keep them alive? What's the purpose? Just to remain "civilized"?
Quote:
Suffice it to say that it doesn't involve depriving a living person of life.
Did you really mean to say that?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Quote:
The death penalty is pure revenge
Perhaps from the point of view of the affected. But, from the point of view of the law it is merely the punishment. The problem with murder is there cannot be any restitution made. The murderer can never fix the problem. Is it revenge when we punish someone for stealing? No, of course not. It's not revenge to kill a killer, at least not in the court's eyes.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
Perhaps from the point of view of the affected. But, from the point of view of the law it is merely the punishment.
If law stated that they should be celebrated, it'd still be merely the point of view of the law. The death-penalty has been chosen as a punishment and put into law by people.
ryanb31 wrote:
Is it revenge when we punish someone for stealing?
Stop playing wordsmith. You could argue that the death-penalty would be appropriate for shop-lifting using that line of argumentation.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Perhaps from the point of view of the affected. But, from the point of view of the law it is merely the punishment.
If law stated that they should be celebrated, it'd still be merely the point of view of the law. The death-penalty has been chosen as a punishment and put into law by people.
ryanb31 wrote:
Is it revenge when we punish someone for stealing?
Stop playing wordsmith. You could argue that the death-penalty would be appropriate for shop-lifting using that line of argumentation.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
My point is, it is not revenge. As someone else pointed out, perhaps we should torture them, bring them close to death, rehabilitate them, and continue repeating that process. THAT would be revenge.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Quote:
In other words, "I don't like them, therefore ... REVENGE!"
No, in your words.
Quote:
That's a judgement which has to be made by society as a whole
I agree. So, let each society decide.
Quote:
that the death penalty is an overreaction.
But again, why keep them alive? What's the purpose? Just to remain "civilized"?
Quote:
Suffice it to say that it doesn't involve depriving a living person of life.
Did you really mean to say that?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
No, in your words.
Well how else would you define "that person's a waste of space, so lets kill them"?
ryanb31 wrote:
But again, why keep them alive? What's the purpose? Just to remain "civilized"?
Well, if you don't care about being civilised, then lets go back to being aggressive primates who kill each other over the slightest disagreement.
ryanb31 wrote:
Did you really mean to say that?
Yes, but as I said, this is a different argument which doesn't belong in this thread, and possibly not even in this forum.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
ryanb31 wrote:
No, in your words.
Well how else would you define "that person's a waste of space, so lets kill them"?
ryanb31 wrote:
But again, why keep them alive? What's the purpose? Just to remain "civilized"?
Well, if you don't care about being civilised, then lets go back to being aggressive primates who kill each other over the slightest disagreement.
ryanb31 wrote:
Did you really mean to say that?
Yes, but as I said, this is a different argument which doesn't belong in this thread, and possibly not even in this forum.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Quote:
Well how else would you define "that person's a waste of space, so lets kill them"?
I would say it is a crying shame they made the choice they did. Now they suffer the consequence. We can only control our choices, not our consequences.
Quote:
Well, if you don't care about being civilised,
I didn't say that. But why aren't you answering the question?
Quote:
Yes
Then clearly you do not know what abortion is. You are OK with killing babies just because someone doesn't want it but you can't condone killing a gruesome murderer? Your priorities are way out of whack. There is no excuse for that.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Quote:
Well how else would you define "that person's a waste of space, so lets kill them"?
I would say it is a crying shame they made the choice they did. Now they suffer the consequence. We can only control our choices, not our consequences.
Quote:
Well, if you don't care about being civilised,
I didn't say that. But why aren't you answering the question?
Quote:
Yes
Then clearly you do not know what abortion is. You are OK with killing babies just because someone doesn't want it but you can't condone killing a gruesome murderer? Your priorities are way out of whack. There is no excuse for that.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
I would say it is a crying shame they made the choice they did. Now they suffer the consequence. We can only control our choices, not our consequences.
That doesn't match your statement that we should kill them because "they're a waste of space".
ryanb31 wrote:
But why aren't you answering the question?
For the same reason that you're not answering my question: what's the point in killing them?
ryanb31 wrote:
You are OK with killing babies just because someone doesn't want it
You really want to drag this thread down? OK. :suss: No, I'm not "OK with killing babies". There's a significant difference between abortion and killing babies. If there wasn't, then every man would be crushed by guilt for every time he ejaculated and didn't have 10 billion healthy children as a result. And every woman would be suicidal at the though of each menstrual cycle which passed without producing a child. There's a difference between "a baby" and "a collection of cells with the potential to become a baby". Once again, it's up to society to determine the point at which one becomes the other. At any point before that, aborting the collection of cells is perfectly acceptable.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I would say it is a crying shame they made the choice they did. Now they suffer the consequence. We can only control our choices, not our consequences.
That doesn't match your statement that we should kill them because "they're a waste of space".
ryanb31 wrote:
But why aren't you answering the question?
For the same reason that you're not answering my question: what's the point in killing them?
ryanb31 wrote:
You are OK with killing babies just because someone doesn't want it
You really want to drag this thread down? OK. :suss: No, I'm not "OK with killing babies". There's a significant difference between abortion and killing babies. If there wasn't, then every man would be crushed by guilt for every time he ejaculated and didn't have 10 billion healthy children as a result. And every woman would be suicidal at the though of each menstrual cycle which passed without producing a child. There's a difference between "a baby" and "a collection of cells with the potential to become a baby". Once again, it's up to society to determine the point at which one becomes the other. At any point before that, aborting the collection of cells is perfectly acceptable.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Quote:
That doesn't match your statement that we should kill them because "they're a waste of space".
Quote:
For the same reason that you're not answering my question: what's the point in killing them?
So, what is it? Did I answer or not?
Quote:
If there wasn't, then every man would be crushed by guilt for every time he ejaculated
That's not even relevant. Sperm by itself does not make a baby. You know that so why would you try that as an example?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Quote:
That doesn't match your statement that we should kill them because "they're a waste of space".
Quote:
For the same reason that you're not answering my question: what's the point in killing them?
So, what is it? Did I answer or not?
Quote:
If there wasn't, then every man would be crushed by guilt for every time he ejaculated
That's not even relevant. Sperm by itself does not make a baby. You know that so why would you try that as an example?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
So, what is it? Did I answer or not?
You haven't managed to justify killing someone as punishment for a crime yet. Keep trying.
ryanb31 wrote:
Sperm by itself does not make a baby.
So you're claiming that there's no difference between a zygote and a baby? That the moment that egg is fertilised, it becomes a person? I'm starting to suspect that there's a bridge somewhere with three billy-goats gambolling across it without a care in the world.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
ryanb31 wrote:
So, what is it? Did I answer or not?
You haven't managed to justify killing someone as punishment for a crime yet. Keep trying.
ryanb31 wrote:
Sperm by itself does not make a baby.
So you're claiming that there's no difference between a zygote and a baby? That the moment that egg is fertilised, it becomes a person? I'm starting to suspect that there's a bridge somewhere with three billy-goats gambolling across it without a care in the world.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
Quote:
You haven't managed to justify killing someone as punishment for a crime yet. Keep trying.
No, I haven't managed to convince you, which I am not trying to do. I stated earlier that the death penalty should be put to a vote. Whatever the people want. But you still refuse to answer. Is this because you have none? Why leave someone alive and with the potential to kill again? What's the point?
Quote:
So you're claiming that there's no difference between a zygote and a baby?
Way to deflect.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Perhaps not for the mother, who no doubt was also a victim of sorts, but still rightly in jail, but for the partner who brutally destroyed a young life... clickety[^]
Quad skating his way through the world since the early 80's... Booger Mobile - My bright green 1964 Ford Falcon - check out the blog here!! | If you feel generous - make a donation to Camp Quality!!
- death is just an occupational hazard for murderers, kill all of them. - throw them in prison, stand back, and let them kill each other. In fact, give them some cars to make it more interesting[^]. - if you kill a killer, are you really any better? - it wouldn't really be killing anyway, we'd just euthanize them. - murderers might as well be useful and "donate" their organs. - murderers aren't people in the first place, so who cares what happens to them? - death isn't good enough, force them to kill their own children so they can share the experience. - prisoners are useful for all sorts of things, like slave labour[^] and drug testing, so throw those murderers in prison. - no sane person would commit murder, so murderers must have a dangerous psychological disease which should be eradicated. I'm sure that for each of these opinions, at least one person could be found who holds them.
-
Quote:
You haven't managed to justify killing someone as punishment for a crime yet. Keep trying.
No, I haven't managed to convince you, which I am not trying to do. I stated earlier that the death penalty should be put to a vote. Whatever the people want. But you still refuse to answer. Is this because you have none? Why leave someone alive and with the potential to kill again? What's the point?
Quote:
So you're claiming that there's no difference between a zygote and a baby?
Way to deflect.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
I stated earlier that the death penalty should be put to a vote. Whatever the people want.
Trial by popularity contest? People wouldn't hesitate a moment to vote "death" for someone they just don't like. There will be an enormous bias against ethnic minorities, and against men (well, there already is). People who are good at faking regret would have a big advantage (that's nothing new, though). The media would essentially be handed the vote, given that they get to determine what the people know (also not new, but it would actually make a difference). I'm not saying that's either a good or a bad thing, just that that's what would happen.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
I stated earlier that the death penalty should be put to a vote. Whatever the people want.
Trial by popularity contest? People wouldn't hesitate a moment to vote "death" for someone they just don't like. There will be an enormous bias against ethnic minorities, and against men (well, there already is). People who are good at faking regret would have a big advantage (that's nothing new, though). The media would essentially be handed the vote, given that they get to determine what the people know (also not new, but it would actually make a difference). I'm not saying that's either a good or a bad thing, just that that's what would happen.
I wasn't implying that. Vote as in for law. Not vote for each individual incident. :) That could be a pretty popular realty show though. It would make a lot of money.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
I wasn't implying that. Vote as in for law. Not vote for each individual incident. :) That could be a pretty popular realty show though. It would make a lot of money.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Quote:
Being kicked out of society is something different from being killed.
Not really. Society is everywhere. But why keep them alive?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
Not really. Society is everywhere.
Society everywhere? Sorry, you'll need more than a single human to call it a society.
ryanb31 wrote:
But why keep them alive?
Why keep anyone alive? ..would you support extra torture for every prisoner that's currently alive, killing them in a week time? No? Why not, speeding on the highway is dangerous. Walking drunk on the street is dangerous. Where do you draw the line?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
My point is, it is not revenge. As someone else pointed out, perhaps we should torture them, bring them close to death, rehabilitate them, and continue repeating that process. THAT would be revenge.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
ryanb31 wrote:
My point is, it is not revenge. As someone else pointed out, perhaps we should torture them, bring them close to death, rehabilitate them, and continue repeating that process. THAT would be revenge.
Ah, so it's not revenge simply because it's not cruel enough to your liking?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
ryanb31 wrote:
Not really. Society is everywhere.
Society everywhere? Sorry, you'll need more than a single human to call it a society.
ryanb31 wrote:
But why keep them alive?
Why keep anyone alive? ..would you support extra torture for every prisoner that's currently alive, killing them in a week time? No? Why not, speeding on the highway is dangerous. Walking drunk on the street is dangerous. Where do you draw the line?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Quote:
Sorry, you'll need more than a single human to call it a society.
Not sure what you mean. My point was we can't exile people because society is everywhere. So, to kick someone out of society you can only kill them.
Quote:
Why keep anyone alive?
That's totally irrelevant and just plain silly.
Quote:
Where do you draw the line?
Simple. As stated before, when the murder was premeditated and there is no doubt they are still a threat. But I have asked several people and so far no one has answered, including you. Why keep them alive? They could kill again, is that something you want to risk?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
ryanb31 wrote:
My point is, it is not revenge. As someone else pointed out, perhaps we should torture them, bring them close to death, rehabilitate them, and continue repeating that process. THAT would be revenge.
Ah, so it's not revenge simply because it's not cruel enough to your liking?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
No, it's not revenge because it is not revenge. That's why. Disagree, I don't care, but revenge is motive based and you are not qualified to determine the motives of people other than yourself.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
