Death sentences....

[rckclmbr]

how about the right to life?

i think that he was talking about the right to be alive. i might be wrong. but yea i like this right. i like living.

 

[red91]

Arent you Jewish? Thought you didnt believe in Jesus.....

1. Yes I am.

2. Not all Jews are stuck in the "Torah" mentality.

3. Most all of the writings would be considered of historical value / evidence.

4. I use them simply to make a point my little GOYIM friend.

 

[red91]

i knew that was going to come up...i am pro choice, but only within the first few weeks...i am very oppossed to partial birth abortions...


but that is not the topic at hand

it is if you feel the death penalty is wrong.

1. Should someone be fortunate enough to conceive, wouldn't it be MORALLY responsible to see that child through to birth? (you did bring up morality, not I)

2. If you are pro choice what you are implying is that it would be alright to take the life of an unborn child that has no blemishes ( that would be outside influences of the world) but you would leave people like Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Susan Smith, and others...alive and in jail even though they have commited some of the most horendous crimes in american history?

That my friend is hipocracy....

eace:

 

[Starscream]

ah...he was there to fullfill Prophecy. He represented the law that his Father would institute.

There would have been many changes... (I.E. the Jewish religious hierarchy to start with)

Okay, this isn't going anywhere - it's becoming a battle of which religion is right. Hopefully I phrase this correctly - but he was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice to end blood sacrifices required by law. Therefor, to a point, he was fulfilling the law. Old testament -> new testament.

 

[0313]

Here is an interresting find.

 

[red91]

Okay, this isn't going anywhere - it's becoming a battle of which religion is right. Hopefully I phrase this correctly - but he was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice to end blood sacrifices required by law. Therefor, to a point, he was fulfilling the law. Old testament -> new testament.

There ya go.....he was there to end atonement, through sacrafice, for sin. (according to the bible)

:thumbup:

it is going somewhere, just not where you thought it would go.

 

[Starscream]

it is if you feel the death penalty is wrong.

1. Should someone be fortunate enough to conceive, wouldn't it be MORALLY responsible to see that child through to birth? (you did bring up morality, not I)

2. If you are pro choice what you are implying is that it would be alright to take the life of an unborn child that has no blemishes ( that would be outside influences of the world) but you would leave people like Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Susan Smith, and others...alive and in jail even though they have commited some of the most horendous crimes in american history?

That my friend is hipocracy....

eace:

Agree completely - another one, pro war and pro life? That doesn't work.

 

[Starscream]

There ya go.....he was there to end atonement, through sacrafice, for sin. (according to the bible)

:thumbup:

it is going somewhere, just not where you thought it would go.

Word, I didn't want it to turn into a religious squabble.

 

[rock rash]

it is if you feel the death penalty is wrong.

1. Should someone be fortunate enough to conceive, wouldn't it be MORALLY responsible to see that child through to birth? (you did bring up morality, not I)

2. If you are pro choice what you are implying is that it would be alright to take the life of an unborn child that has no blemishes ( that would be outside influences of the world) but you would leave people like Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Susan Smith, and others...alive and in jail even though they have commited some of the most horendous crimes in american history?

That my friend is hipocracy....

eace:

no i only agree with pro life before the unborn is a fetus...that provides 6 weeks i believe before a fertilized egg is a fetus. after those weeks, i believe it is wrong.

oh, and that is why i do not strongly oppose letrhal injection, i still dont like the thought of it, but it is used.

 

[RichP]

no i only agree with pro life before the unborn is a fetus...that provides 6 weeks i believe before a fertilized egg is a fetus. after those weeks, i believe it is wrong.

oh, and that is why i do not strongly oppose letrhal injection, i still dont like the thought of it, but it is used.

I feel the criminal should have the same 'taste' of fear and terror he or she gave their victims.

 

[red91]

I feel the criminal should have the same 'taste' of fear and terror he or she gave their victims.

'xactly.

Dont do the crime if you can't do the time ( or take the punishment )

Beretta

 

[5-90]

May as well weigh in...

"Pro-Choice/Pro-Life." Since methods of contraception can be had readily and (relatively) inexpensively, I do have some opposition to the idea of abortion as a form of "retroactive birth control." There's certainly not "I didn't know" ability here - I think everyone in this country above the age of 10 knows that screwing can lead to kids.
On that note, I also disagree with the people who say that handing out condoms to teenagers is an "endorsement" of teenage sex. Sorry gang, but they're going to do it anyhow, whether we try to help them or not (I know that, because it's what I was doing years ago. I just looked old enough to not be questioned when I went to buy condoms.)
I guess that puts me squarely in the middle - if you have a medical/psychological reason, then abortion should be an option (they find out you can't carry to term, child conceived as a result of rape, or something,) However, I see no reason to use it as "birth control," when you could have taken steps BEFORE it became an issue.
(My wife takes a different view - it's a privacy matter to her. I can also understand that.)

Capital punishment? I think we should bring back stoning and crucifiction (sp?) - and televise them. Don't make them PPV - put them on public airwaves for free! You can always change the channel...
"Cruel and unusual" punishment? Punishment is, by definition, cruel (to a degree.) It must also be sufficiently "unusual" to merit deep personal attention, elsewise it just won't work. Period.
If you are sentenced to die, you should be given ONE FULL YEAR to make any appeals, and this year may be extended by an appeal IN PROGRESS. Given the number of wrongful convictions happening, something must be done to create a stopgap - and a year should be enough to be practical. This would also allow for rounding up witnesses and evidence, and further investigation as warranted.
If there is conviction without any doubt at all, or if someone is truly unrepentant and truly guilty, then the year should be waived and the convict executed immediately (say, within a week.) This has happened before - someone who used to kill people in men's rooms (I don't remember the whys and wherefores of it all) actually went into open court and said "I did it, and I'll do it again if you ever let me go." His attorney (a Public Defender, as I recall,) fought to get him something like 10-20 years instead of execution. How's that work, again?

Methods of execution? How about the following:
Stoning
Firing Squad
Hanging
Electric Chair
Cyanide Poisoning

Those should do for starters.

While we're on the subject of the penal system, I'm not entirely sure incarceration is working in general. Granted, I'm fairly sure it's warranted in some cases, but if the individual convicted is somewhat repentant, locking him up is probably not going to help, and cause some resentment. Then, there's a record that follows him around everywhere, and makes it harder to get straightenet out.
How about this - put that individual to work for the county/city/state/whatever (something like Sheriff's Work) or simply deliver a number of lashes, then close the record. The only marks made will be something that the individual will remember, and the record is "closed" except to courts (if you screw up again, you get both records following you. If you get straight, you don't have anything after you - a reward for repentance.)
In all honesty, that's got to work better than what we're doing now. Witness the rates of recidivism and the amount of money spent on prisons and jails - I'm sure there are programmes that could better use the funds...

5-90

 

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

While I am not a advocate of blanket capital punishment calling lethal injection cruel and unusual punishment is just plain BS....Personally I think that the if you blew someones face off with a shotgun you should go the same way.... If you raped them then killed them you should go the same way [hell, use a modified kitchen aid sex machine] then blow their head off...

An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind.

Of course, if someone you knew was murdered (etc), you would most likely want the killer dead as well. But, how does that teach the world to not be violent and stop killing? "If you kill, we'll just kill you." Even though it seems fair in a sense, like they cancel each other out... they don't. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It seems hypocritical of our government to think that the death penalty will help our world if you really look at the morality of it. Is the person who injects someone any better than the person being injected? The cycle will never end if anyone thinks we are getting anywhere with this. :banghead:

 

[rocklandxjer]

did anyone visit that site that was just posted before, its pretty crazy, some of those guys' last statements were nuts "lets do it man, lock and load.. aint life a bit*h"

some of them were pretty good though,

im for the death penalty, and also for the more cruel of ways to do so, depending on the, for wont of a better word, "badness" of the crime.

as for the whole abortion thing, i agree with rock rash, if a person notices the pregnancy early enough, they should be able to decide whether or not they want to have a child. other wise, using the "pro-life" ideology, condoms are murder and infertility pills too because they stop potential life. before it becomes a fetus it is no more living than skin cells and organs. however i do agree that if some one is 4 months in and realizes "hey i dont really want a kid anymore" then no, that is not right, however it is very hard to have an "in between" decision, usually they need to be one way or the other. and if they want to get technical, until the baby is born, it is still "part" of the woman, still connected and being "grown" by the woman, so, really, until the baby is born and cut loose, it is still the womans"body" is it not, and the constitution grants everyone privacy of ones self.

and what about those who have been raped, should we force them to birth the child and take care of a child who they can neither take care of, nor want.

this seems to big an issue to be decided upon, i dont know who or how, anyone will.

 

[red91]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind. Cute. I saw that on a bumper sticker just this week.

Of course, if someone you knew was murdered (etc), you would most likely want the killer dead as well. But, how does that teach the world to not be violent and stop killing? "If you kill, we'll just kill you." Even though it seems fair in a sense, like they cancel each other out... they don't. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It seems hypocritical of our government to think that the death penalty will help our world if you really look at the morality of it. Is the person who injects someone any better than the person being injected? The cycle will never end if anyone thinks we are getting anywhere with this. :banghead:

ok...lets play....John Wayne Gacey kills your son. He has killed many others as well, and show absolutly no signs of remorse, and laughs at you in the court room saying he would gladly do it again, and kill you in the same incident.

You'd do nothing? You'd sit there, passivly and say go ahead? I think not.

Hipocritical of the government that funds abortions all across our land, and in other countries, and then lets convicted murderers live in jail, with all of the amenities they get, until they die of old age...while the families of the loved ones who have been killed do not get to see true punishment bought to those that have commited the most hanious of crimes against those who were the most important people in their lives?

Someone touches my son or daughter, or any other family memeber and I tell you what I tell everyone else.....

It will be a cold day in hell that I do not get revenge....I don't care if I have to go through all kinds of security to get to that kind of bastard. (Hey 5-90...I'd get past you too... )

I'd lose my life in the attempt to get to them if thats what it took.

Standing idly by why others are slaughter against their will is not permissable.

I suppose if we would have sent cookies, and valentines day cards to all of those killed in the Serbian wars, they would have stopped?

I guess in your opinion Genocide is fine.

The right to self defense, and the right to defend those who cannot defend themselves are of the highest priority. AND it is the governments first and formost job to protect its citizens from those who would do us harm.

They cannot come back and exact revenge from the grave. And that, young lady, is exactly where they belong.

Don't fire me up...it will only get ugly.

 

[5-90]

One thing I'd forgotten - "The man who eats the meat is brother to the butcher." Those who benefit from an act are as morally responsible as those who commit the act.

Therefore, I pose this question:
"Those of you in favour of capital punishment, would you be able to be selected at random and kill someone adjudged a 'threat to society' in open court"

Choose your answer carefully - because this means you could be called upon to kill someone you've never even met socially, or (worse,) you end up being called upon to kill someone you DO know socially, and who has never done anything to you. Either way, it means to kill someone without personal provocation, without remorse, and with government or social sanction.

CAN YOU DO IT?/I]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my person. I think I could kill someone if called upon to do so as a result of judicial action, but I've not been placed in that situation, so I'm not sure. However, I cannot support capital punishment, in good conscience, if I am not willing to make that effort. Examine your minds, and see if you cannot come to a similar conclusion...

5-90

 

[red91]

One thing I'd forgotten - "The man who eats the meat is brother to the butcher." Those who benefit from an act are as morally responsible as those who commit the act.

Therefore, I pose this question:
"Those of you in favour of capital punishment, would you be able to be selected at random and kill someone adjudged a 'threat to society' in open court"

Choose your answer carefully - because this means you could be called upon to kill someone you've never even met socially, or (worse,) you end up being called upon to kill someone you DO know socially, and who has never done anything to you. Either way, it means to kill someone without personal provocation, without remorse, and with government or social sanction.

CAN YOU DO IT?/I]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my person. I think I could kill someone if called upon to do so as a result of judicial action, but I've not been placed in that situation, so I'm not sure. However, I cannot support capital punishment, in good conscience, if I am not willing to make that effort. Examine your minds, and see if you cannot come to a similar conclusion...

5-90

Well considering all the reg and requirements to be in a position to kill someone in that type setting (death penalty) it is highly unlikely that you would.

That is why hanging is rare anymore. There are only a handful left that are certified to properly do it. And leathal injection would be administered by a state certified physician.

but i digress...

 

[IXNAYXJ]

One thing I'd forgotten - "The man who eats the meat is brother to the butcher." Those who benefit from an act are as morally responsible as those who commit the act.

Therefore, I pose this question:
"Those of you in favour of capital punishment, would you be able to be selected at random and kill someone adjudged a 'threat to society' in open court"

Choose your answer carefully - because this means you could be called upon to kill someone you've never even met socially, or (worse,) you end up being called upon to kill someone you DO know socially, and who has never done anything to you. Either way, it means to kill someone without personal provocation, without remorse, and with government or social sanction.

CAN YOU DO IT?/I]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my person. I think I could kill someone if called upon to do so as a result of judicial action, but I've not been placed in that situation, so I'm not sure. However, I cannot support capital punishment, in good conscience, if I am not willing to make that effort. Examine your minds, and see if you cannot come to a similar conclusion...

5-90

I have a similar take on execution.

If we as a society decide to have capital punishment (I am for it), then we should have to be aware of just what that means. We can't just shut people in a little room and give them a shot to make them go to sleep. We're not putting down a sick animal.

It should be swift, it should be public, and it should be like jury duty. If you get a "Executioner Summons" in the mail, and aren't prepared to pull the trigger/lever yourself, then I submit that you can't support the comcept of capital punishment. My $.02.

-----Matt-----

 

[JoesXJ]

I'm 100% for it!!!! I worked for a crazy bitch that killed her husband (read about it HERE) Oh, its been 3 years since the murder and its still not gone to trial, what a bunch of crap!!

 

[5-90]

I'm 100% for it!!!! I worked for a crazy bitch that killed her husband (read about it HERE) Oh, its been 3 years since the murder and its still not gone to trial, what a bunch of crap!!

What the fsck? I've seen some hairy custody battles, but that definitely takes the taco.

Gawd, and I thought I was nuts!

5-90