View Poll Results: Should Capital Punishment be supported?

Voters
90. You may not vote on this poll
  • It should be supported in both principle and practice.

    43 47.78%
  • Yes in principle, but not in practice due to the ambiguity of social bias.

    14 15.56%
  • It should be opposed both in principle and practice.

    33 36.67%
Page 26 of 42 FirstFirst ... 16242526272836 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 416

Thread: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

  1. #251
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    This depends.
    Is capital punishment a means thru which the government protects the rights of people, either directly by killing someone that has shown that he is a threat to society, or as a deterrent to those that might otherwise be a threat to society, or both?
    How is this different from life in prisonment? And deterrence isn't a good argument because firstly it is punishing one person for what another may do, which I don't think is a route justice should go down, and also because why stop at simple lethal injection? If you really want to deter people surely public hang, drawing and quartering or some other kind of grotesque public spectacle would be even better?

    If so - and I'd argue that it is indeed the case - the government is merely exercising the right of the people to act in their own self-defense.

    Given that, we are not then granting the government a power that we, the people, do not individually posess as a right.
    However the state is not the people, it often acts in their interest but it is not them. I'd be loath to grant the state the power and fear and awe that comes with executing people. If you were talking about local, highly accountable and democratic gov't I might feel differently but not anything beyond that.
    Last edited by Wessexman; 12-02-08 at 06:47 PM.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  2. #252
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bonnie1988 View Post
    Government has vast rights citizens don't have. Government can tax you. Government and regulate your conduct. Government can arrest you, take any possessions and even your children away from you. Send you to war. Gun you down. Premise 1 is just false.
    Premise one is a statement about what should be, not what is right now. If it is false, it is because you think the government should do all of the above for any other purpose than in direct defense of an imminent threat.



    Premise 2
    Some of your logic actually doesn't work - I think - for your views. A person is drawing a gun down on me, but I shoot first and kill him. Absolutely, my murder was 'premeditated." Push that back in time. Running towards me with gun-in-hand etc.
    However, you can oppose pre-meditated killing. At least circumstantially, that also means you must accept that there are circumstance that I must accept that people must die for your ethic. However, I suppose you can claim the government's hands are clean of innocent victims lives on the theory of no-action, no-fault. I don't believe inaction against evil to others when only you have the authority or power to act is inaction. I believe it is collaberation with the evil.
    Premeditated meaning planned. Any action in direct defense of one's life is by necessity not of their own planning. They may have the means of protecting themselves, but they didn't plan on having to do so.

    I acknowledge that sometimes peopel arte within their rights to kill, but only in direct defense against an imminent threat.

    That is when I believe the governemnt should also have that right.

    Premise 3
    I agree that the death penalty is pre-meditatively killing someone.

    I doubt we'd every agree on the question of "punishment" as a justification - where I see a murderer who killed a family then laughing over cards and having sex with his prison "wife", living a full live in a full counter prison culture in a life of being provided for by a pure welfare system for him as the most fundamental injustice.
    Again, not to belabor the point, but reformation of the prison system is a separate issue.

    So you would not allow putting the word "justly" in front of "pre-meditative."
    Any use of "Justly" would need multiple premises to determine what a just homicide is, and then it would need to be shown that this is a right that the govenrment should have while the people do not.


    But I also would put the words "to save the lives of others" at the end of your premise 3.
    Defense from imminent danger does not qualify as pre-meditated homicide. That is something I have no problem with. The way you write it though is circular logic. You are adapting the premise to suit your conclusion.

    You need a separate premise to determine what constitutes "saving a life" and when lethal force is necessary ion order to do so. How imminent is the threat to the life, etc.

    What if the govenremtn decides to start trying people who have Schizophrenia in capital cases because tyhey have a high propensity for commiting homicide? Is that justified in order to potentially save lives?

    The only response you have to that is because you also want a perfect (in that regards) prison system. YET YOU DON'T HAVE THAT AS A CONDITIONAL PREMISE!
    Because that is a separate issue entirely. It has no bearing on the death penalty becasue they are unrelated issues. And a perfect system is unnecessary. Just a separated system.

    What's the saying? "If if's and buts were candy and nuts, what a Merry Christmas we'd all have."
    Its a good thinkg I'm not basing my argumetn on the state of the prison system. It is a totally separate issue. Your arguemtn is liek throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The prison system doesn't work, so lets killl them instead of prison.

    I could use that logic to say "The adoption system doesn;t work, so we should abort all unwanted babies."


    I could use your logic to argue that no one should ever be put in prison:

    Premise 1: The government should not have a power than the power of its citizens.

    Premise 2: Citizens do not have the right to involuntarily imprison another citizen.

    Premise 3: Therefore, government does not have the right to involuntarily imprison another citizen.
    The problem is that premise 2 is technically false here. You technically do have the right in the case of a citizens arrest. Bounty hunters do it all the time.


    I believe in the most real terms, it comes down to not if someone is "pre-meditatively" killed. That is a factual certainty. Rather, it is who is pre-meditatively killed." In terms of current reality, I believe those killed under your system are generally far more innocent that those killed in my system.
    Aside from the fact that you have 0 evidence to support that claim, it still doesnt justify granting the government the authority to commit homicide.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  3. #253
    Dream Walker
    Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Seen
    07-16-15 @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,265
    Blog Entries
    10

    Animals

    "Animals"
    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Well firstly Orwell was close to anarcho-communism secondly you are hardly examining it in close detail but that is another topic.
    The word libertarian comes from the French word libertaire meaning anarchism or specifically anarcho-communism.
    Libertarianism seeks to establish the individual; an extreme form of individualism is anarchism.

    Authoritarianism seeks to establish the collective; an extreme form of collectivism is communism (forced egalitarianism).

    Given the two extremes of I* - individualism and *C - collectivism there exist golden means (ln) *i* and *c*.

    I*-----*i*-----*c*-----*C


    The reality of anarcho-communism is that it is a paradox which leads to a contradiction.
    That is, if there is communism (collectivism) then individualism ceases to exist, and if there is anarchism (individualism) then collectivism ceases to exist.
    The paradox can be resolved if both extreme elements exist concurrently, which is only possible within a utopia of unlimited resources.
    Thus, anarcho-communism is hypothetical, a fantasy, whose impossible implementation is asserted with deception.
    Last edited by Monk-Eye; 12-02-08 at 06:54 PM.

  4. #254
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: Animals

    Quote Originally Posted by Monk-Eye View Post
    "Animals"
    Libertarianism seeks to establish the individual; an extreme form of individualism is anarchism.

    Authoritarianism seeks to establish the collective; an extreme form of collectivism is communism.

    Given the two extremes of I* - individualism and *C - collectivism there exist golden means (ln) *i* and *c*.

    I*-----*i*-----*c*-----*C


    The reality of anarcho-communism is that it is a paradox which leads to a contradiction.
    That is, if there is communism (collectivism) then individualism ceases to exist and if there is anarchism (individualism) then collectivism ceases to exist.
    The paradox can be resolved if both extreme elements exist concurrently, which is only possible within a utopia of unlimited resources.
    Thus, anarcho-communism is hypothetical, a fantasy, whose impossible implementation is asserted with deception.
    I'm not intending to discuss the ins and outs just the historical usage of the terms and my posts were correct in that.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  5. #255
    Student Pinu7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    In your kitchen, drinking all your kool aid.
    Last Seen
    09-04-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    196

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    That is true, but if the "greater good" is the goal, colateral damage is acceptable to many.
    Not when damage is measured in human life.


    I totally disagree with that statemnt. What logical reason do we have to protect all life? In fact, there are plenty of logical reasons to not protect all life.
    Yes, but those are very rare and uncommon cases except for stem cell research. Life should be protected in as many cases as possible. I will admit, my Pro-Life is based mostly on moral values. I also cite the line "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" from the declaration of independence to argue that the founding fathers made life an unalienable right.

    I'm on your side, and I oppose the death penalty, bu tthe reasons you give against it are of the same sort as the reasons for it. Purely emotional reasons.

    Teh only issue at hand is weather or not we think it is OK to give the governemtn this kind of power.
    ????
    Isn't that also a somewhat baseless reason. I agree that the government should not be executing its citizens.
    But what plausible reason would make it "bad" for the government to kill its citizens? It is only based on your own personal credo.




    I say my reasons were better and I deserve a hug.

  6. #256
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinu7 View Post
    Not when damage is measured in human life.
    I said acceptable to many.



    Yes, but those are very rare and uncommon cases except for stem cell research. Life should be protected in as many cases as possible. I will admit, my Pro-Life is based mostly on moral values. I also cite the line "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" from the declaration of independence to argue that the founding fathers made life an unalienable right.
    I agree with this.

    ????
    Isn't that also a somewhat baseless reason. I agree that the government should not be executing its citizens.
    But what plausible reason would make it "bad" for the government to kill its citizens? It is only based on your own personal credo.
    It's based on the idea that the govenremtn works for us instead of the reverse.




    I say my reasons were better and I deserve a hug.
    OK, but not in a gay way. You get the hug with the manly triple back pat and the uncomfortable handshake at the end.
    Last edited by Tucker Case; 12-02-08 at 07:11 PM.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  7. #257
    Dream Walker
    Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Seen
    07-16-15 @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,265
    Blog Entries
    10

    Stuck In Idle

    "Stuck In Idle"
    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    I'm not intending to discuss the ins and outs just the historical usage of the terms and my posts were correct in that.
    Well whoopie dooo...
    How is a superficial address (3 times, full citation, unsuccessful challenge) of a digressive term -- libertarian supposed to address the nonsense surrounding the misapplication of that term within modern politics as concerns Infinite Chaos?

  8. #258
    Dream Walker
    Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Seen
    07-16-15 @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,265
    Blog Entries
    10

    Deny Without Due Process

    "Deny Without Due Process"
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Incarceration for life is enough in and of itself to act in defense of society. You need to show a logical reason for the leap from "Incarceration of life" To govenremnt sponsored premeditated homicide not in direct defense of another's life.
    Since the killing is unnecessary for defense purposes, there hasn't been an argument given for why the government should have the right to kill its citizens.
    Oh, the leap is rather simple considering the potential for parole advocated by pacifists who feel pity for degenerates, at the neglect of victims, with the delusion that heinous crimes can be repaid in pennance through incarceration and rehabilitation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    The fact that it goes beyond what is necessary for pure defense is what makes the Death Penalty pure vengeance and retaliation.
    And it should be sweet -- to offset the bitter.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    This is regardless of the fact that the person does not have the right to live anymore.
    As I said to Monk-eye. If the penalty were given in a way that granted the right to kill to the victims family, I wouldn't oppose the death penalty. At least in cases with DNA eveidence and such.
    My issue is not with the act, it is with who carries out the act.
    In theory, illegal aliens are not under US jurisdiction, they have no rights, citizens should be able kill them without fear of prosecution.

  9. #259
    Student Pinu7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    In your kitchen, drinking all your kool aid.
    Last Seen
    09-04-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    196

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?


    It's based on the idea that the govenremtn works for us instead of the reverse.
    Really? I believe that hadn't been the case for decades with our "leadership".


    OK, but not in a gay way. You get the hug with the manly triple back pat and the uncomfortable handshake at the end.
    I tricked you! I am 15, so I will sue for your uncomfortable sexual advances. I demand compensation.

    In theory, illegal aliens are not under US jurisdiction, they have no rights, citizens should be able kill them without fear of prosecution.
    Legally, any human, citizen or not, that resides in the US of A, is under our jurisdiction.
    Last edited by Pinu7; 12-02-08 at 07:58 PM.

  10. #260
    Matthew 16:3
    Tucker Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,365

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinu7 View Post
    Really? I believe that hadn't been the case for decades with our "leadership".
    That's why it needs to change.

    I tricked you! I am 15, so I will sue for your uncomfortable sexual advances. I demand compensation.
    I said not in a gay way.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

Page 26 of 42 FirstFirst ... 16242526272836 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •