• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Convicted Terrorists Be Executed?

Should Convicted Terrorists Be Executed?

  • Total voters
    40
Capital Punishment is state sanctioned murder.
 
If we kill them, they will be considered martyrs by their fellow terrorists.

We must never allow them to achieve this.

Prison for life without parole is better.
 
Vader said:
If we kill them, they will be considered martyrs by their fellow terrorists.

We must never allow them to achieve this.

Prison for life without parole is better.
Click to expand...

Don't forget a life time of Happy Meals, just to add to the deterrence.
 
Vader said:
If we kill them, they will be considered martyrs by their fellow terrorists.

We must never allow them to achieve this.

Prison for life without parole is better.
Click to expand...

Why is that? I've got no problem with a thousand dead martyrs. It's certainly better than a thousand living slimebags we've got to feed.
 
B L Zeebub said:
Capital Punishment is state sanctioned murder.
Click to expand...

It is not murder. :roll:

Murder:

–noun 1. Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
2. Slang. something extremely difficult or perilous: That final exam was murder!
3. a group or flock of crows.

–verb (used with object) 4. Law. to kill by an act constituting murder.
5. to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.
6. to spoil or mar by bad performance, representation, pronunciation, etc.: The tenor murdered the aria.

–verb (used without object) 7. to commit murder.

—Idioms8. get away with murder, Informal. to engage in a deplorable activity without incurring harm or punishment: The new baby-sitter lets the kids get away with murder.
9. murder will out, a secret will eventually be exposed.
10. yell or scream bloody murder, a. to scream loudly in pain, fear, etc.
b. to protest loudly and angrily: If I don't get a good raise I'm going to yell bloody murder. - Murder Definition | Definition of Murder at Dictionary.com

Murder is always killing. Killing is not always murder under the law.

An appeal to emotion on your part is a useless fallacy.
 
Apocalypse said:
No those are Obama's words.
Click to expand...

No they are my words as far as I know. What does it have to do with President Obama?

I am missing the joke and/or sarcasm ain't I?
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
Murder is always killing. Killing is not always murder under the law.

An appeal to emotion on your part is a useless fallacy.
Click to expand...

Hence my problem. It's okay for the government to extinguish life, but if we do it, it's murder.
 
I am not for the death penalty, but state sanctioned execution under rule of law is not murder.

It is killing, but it is not murder. Murder is illegal killing, law sometimes sanctions killing, if it does, it is not murder.

Abortion for instance.
 
Last edited:
EgoffTib said:
Hence my problem. It's okay for the government to extinguish life, but if we do it, it's murder.
Click to expand...

It depends on the circumstance. Killing in defense of one's person or in some states property is acceptable under the law. The law also understands accidents happen and people die hence manslaughter charges rather than murder.

So your premise is flawed which leads to a flawed conclusion. People can certainly extinguish life under certain conditions just like government within the boundaries of the law.

Killing is not always murder in the eyes of the law and society who makes the laws. In the end the government only has the rights the people allow.
 
EgoffTib said:
Hence my problem. It's okay for the government to extinguish life, but if we do it, it's murder.
Click to expand...

Then every member of our armed forces who has ever killed the enemy in combat would be a murderer because they carried out state sanctioned killing?
Were the cops who killed the 2 bank robbers in the infamous LA shootout (with AK-47's) murderers?
 
Last edited:
EgoffTib said:
Hence my problem. It's okay for the government to extinguish life, but if we do it, it's murder.
Click to expand...

To take this to a deeper level.......I think you are miss-defining all killing as murder, which it is not. Some killing is justifiable (self-defense, war etc) Murder is never justifiable or legal.

If you're argument is that all killing is immoral, then that is your right to have that opinion but I simply disagree.
 
EgoffTib said:
Hence my problem. It's okay for the government to extinguish life, but if we do it, it's murder.
Click to expand...

It's not always murder if we do it either. Soldiers can kill in a war and it's not murder. You can kill in self defense and it's not murder. You can kill accidentally and it's not murder. There are plenty of cases where killing isn't murder, you're just exaggerating.
 
Devil505 said:
To take this to a deeper level.......I think you are miss-defining all killing as murder, which it is not. Some killing is justifiable (self-defense, war etc) Murder is never justifiable or legal.
Click to expand...
No, the concept of "murder vs. killing" is not lost on me.

If you're argument is that all killing is immoral, then that is your right to have that opinion but I simply disagree.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree. The only time I would kill anyone would be in self-defense, and I still think I would have trouble dealing with the ramifications of that action.
 
Cephus said:
It's not always murder if we do it either. Soldiers can kill in a war and it's not murder.
Click to expand...
Essentially employees of the government.

You can kill in self defense and it's not murder.
Click to expand...
Sometimes. Other times you can kill in self defense and get charged.

You can kill accidentally and it's not murder.
Click to expand...
True, that would be manslaughter, which is still a crime.

There are plenty of cases where killing isn't murder, you're just exaggerating.
Click to expand...
Right, and anytime the government kills, it's never murder. That's the problem.
 
EgoffTib said:
Essentially employees of the government.
Click to expand...

So? Stop moving the goalposts.

Sometimes. Other times you can kill in self defense and get charged.
Click to expand...

Not with murder.

True, that would be manslaughter, which is still a crime.
Click to expand...

But it's still not murder.

Right, and anytime the government kills, it's never murder. That's the problem.
Click to expand...

If done within the confines of the law, then certainly it would never be murder, why is that a problem?
 
Cephus said:
If done within the confines of the law, then certainly it would never be murder, why is that a problem?
Click to expand...
Because the "confines of the law" are not set in stone. Take a look at the Patriot Act(suspension of habaeus corpus) as an example of the government changing laws to meet it's desires.
 
EgoffTib said:
Because the "confines of the law" are not set in stone. Take a look at the Patriot Act(suspension of habaeus corpus) as an example of the government changing laws to meet it's desires.
Click to expand...

And that is where, in a representative republic, we need to hold our elected representatives responsible. Funny how we never do it, we just point fingers and complain.
 
Cephus said:
And that is where, in a representative republic, we need to hold our elected representatives responsible. Funny how we never do it, we just point fingers and complain.
Click to expand...
Speak for yourself. I'm doing as much as one person can do to get my incumbents out of office and get this country back on the tracks.
 
EgoffTib said:
Speak for yourself. I'm doing as much as one person can do to get my incumbents out of office and get this country back on the tracks.
Click to expand...

Great, but unless you can convince others to do the same, you're still not making a bit of difference. This is a representative republic, not a "Represent EgoffTib" republic. It's got to be something that the people, as a whole, are willing to stand up for or it doesn't work.

And politicians know that.
 
Cephus said:
Great, but unless you can convince others to do the same, you're still not making a bit of difference. This is a representative republic, not a "Represent EgoffTib" republic. It's got to be something that the people, as a whole, are willing to stand up for or it doesn't work.
Click to expand...
Again, you're operating under the premise that I am not actively trying to do this.

And politicians know that.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom