• 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!

Death Penalty, for or against

Do you support the death penalty?

  • Total voters
    134
ChrisL said:
Because my above comment is true, and you can't refute it, so now you are going to pout. Okay, pout away.
Click to expand...
Este no es el sotano.

Ce n'est pas le sous-sol.

Dies ist nicht der Keller.

Questo non e il seminterrato.
 
NoC_T said:
Preferably? The manner of his demise would be wrought of every protracted agony as ingenuity can conceive of. Consider it a preview of what some believe could well be his eternity.

You know what amuses me most about you enablers? The fact that, despite your teary histrionics, you don't actually give two ****s what happens to these ****bags. No one does. You merely affect concern, in some contrived pretence of enlightened social comment.

I'm the guy you don't fool.
Click to expand...
what like you have special powers to bore people into submission:liar2:kissass
 
B.L.Zeebub said:
what like you have special powers to bore people into submission:liar2:kissass
Click to expand...
If only. Were it so, I might be spared the impediment of encroaching witlings like yourself.
 
ChrisL said:
You know, you're really letting emotion overtake logic here. The only logical reason you would have for supporting the death penalty would be overcrowding in prisons. THAT is the only logical argument for it; every other argument for it is laden with emotion and knee jerk responses.
Click to expand...

The emotional argument in this case would be that society "should" let a man who raped and killed a 6 month old live, because of an obligation to treat him humanely. He did not act humanely when he raped and killed a baby, thus deserves no humane treatment. The logical response would be to kill him. Logic implies that equity would be utilized.
 
lizzie said:
The emotional argument in this case would be that society "should" let a man who raped and killed a 6 month old live, because of an obligation to treat him humanely. He did not act humanely when he raped and killed a baby, thus deserves no humane treatment. The logical response would be to kill him. Logic implies that equity would be utilized.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. The logical argument is that to get rid of the death penalty saves money, and again there is the potential of executing innocent people. Why spend this money on executions when it could be spent in much more productive manner?

Death Penalty*:*Cost

Since 1977, California has had 13 executions at a cost placed by
federal Ninth Circuit Judge Arthur Alarcon and Loyola Law School
Professor Paula Mitchell at $4 billion. That amounts to about
$300 million dollars per execution, or 20 times what seemed to
Magagnini and others a reasonable estimate in 1988. A report by
Natasha Minsker at ACLU of Northern California nicely sums up the
question of costs, "And today, with California's urgent budget crisis in law
enforcement and victims' services as well as other vital areas,
we simply can't afford this kind of extravagance!"

Getting more cops and homicide investigators on the beat, solving
more "cold case" homicides and improving on the clearance rates
for murder now at only around 50% in many of our counties,
keeping services for victims adequately funded, and "connecting
the dots" to prevent some of these homicides and other violent
crimes -- these are agendas the public can understand. And SB 490
gives them the opportunity to rethink priorities in a situation
the voters didn't have before them in 1972, 1978, or 1986.

Finally, there's a third trend that's been quietly percolating
over these eventful decades: a recognition that LWOP actually
means what it says in California! Over 3700 California prisoners
have received this sentence, with only a handful released because
of the one "escape clause" we should want to keep: later it had
been discovered that they were actually innocent of the offenses
for which they had been convicted. LWOP, like the death penalty,
spells permanent incarceration and death in prison -- but allows
room for correcting the rare but not unknown miscarriage of
justice.
Click to expand...
 
ChrisL said:
No it isn't. The logical argument is that to get rid of the death penalty saves money, and again there is the potential of executing innocent people. Why spend this money on executions when it could be spent in much more productive manner?

Death Penalty*:*Cost
Click to expand...

Logic has nothing to do with money. Logic is about making judgements based on facts and circumstances.
 
lizzie said:
Logic has nothing to do with money. Logic is about making judgements based on facts and circumstances.
Click to expand...

Yes, and the amount of money spent is a fact and a circumstance.
 
ChrisL said:
Yes, and the amount of money spent is a fact and a circumstance.
Click to expand...

But that is not what logic is about. Logic pertains to judging the action committed, and the logical response to that action, not based on money, but on the appropriateness and the balancing of the action itself.
 
NoC_T said:
Fools, reason, intellect. A frightful nuisance they are. lulz
Click to expand...

Look, go bother someone else with your ridiculousness. I'm trying to discuss the topic like an adult.
 
ChrisL said:
Look, go bother someone else with your ridiculousness. I'm trying to discuss the topic like an adult.
Click to expand...
Indeed. That was a contribution of rare insight.
 
Alyssa said:
Some people need to be put out of their misery. These arguments about "civilized people don't do that" and "we need to set an example" are ridiculous. Clearly, these people have never been affected by violent crime. As for the examples posted where victims of violent crimes are against the dp.. i don't care. This isn't about them and their revenge or healing process-- whatever it may be. It is about getting rid of people who are not worthy to exist.
Click to expand...

Some people need to be put out of society's misery, these criminals have not only committed crimes against another individual (or individuals), but against society itself. Society has every right to decide these people who have committed these crimes have lost their right to breathe the same air as decent people. It's about justice, not revenge.
 
ChrisL said:
Of course you do, it's not YOUR arse on the line. These appeals are in place for a reason. They are there to protect US, the United States citizen, to make sure we are not being railroaded, etc. It's like one of OUR rights to protect us. Sorry that so many of you don't understand that concept.
Click to expand...

Sure, I know better than to commit these crimes! The people on death row for capital crimes are not law-abiding citizens, they almost always have a rap sheet as long as your arm, in and out of prison for their entire lives, they are a threat to the United States Citizen, even if they didn't commit murder. I don't have to worry about that because I'm not a criminal. Too bad you don't understand that concept.
 
ChrisL said:
You know, you're really letting emotion overtake logic here. The only logical reason you would have for supporting the death penalty would be overcrowding in prisons. THAT is the only logical argument for it; every other argument for it is laden with emotion and knee jerk responses.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. And overplayed. Every time someone uses an example of the type of people who should receive the dp due to horrific crimes, those against the dp chime in with "you're just being emotional." That's their only retort. It's simply untrue. People who would rape and murder infants should not exist in the first place. But there's nothing that can change what they did, so erasing their existence is the closest option. If these individuals did not exist, the world would be a better place. And no, overcrowded prisons are not the only logical argument for the dp. Try a little harder.. seriously. Even I wouldn't argue that people should die because prisons are overcrowded.

Secondly, those against the dp try to appear enlightened while arguing that those who support the dp are barbaric. Don't be so sure. These same people value worthless, depraved individuals. That, in no way, makes them enlightened.
 
Alyssa said:
Nonsense. And overplayed. Every time someone uses an example of the type of people who should receive the dp due to horrific crimes, those against the dp chime in with "you're just being emotional." That's their only retort. It's simply untrue. People who would rape and murder infants should not exist in the first place. But there's nothing that can change what they did, so erasing their existence is the closest option. If these individuals did not exist, the world would be a better place. And no, overcrowded prisons are not the only logical argument for the dp. Try a little harder.. seriously. Even I wouldn't argue that people should die because prisons are overcrowded.

Secondly, those against the dp try to appear enlightened while arguing that those who support the dp are barbaric. Don't be so sure. These same people value worthless, depraved individuals. That, in no way, makes them enlightened.
Click to expand...

I don't think that anyone who is against the DP "values" these kinds of people. It is just extremely ineffective in every realm, as a deterrent, as being cost effective, etc., etc.
 
ChrisL said:
I don't think that anyone who is against the DP "values" these kinds of people. It is just extremely ineffective in every realm, as a deterrent, as being cost effective, etc., etc.
Click to expand...

The DP isn't meant to be a deterrent...
 
ChrisL said:
I don't think that anyone who is against the DP "values" these kinds of people. It is just extremely ineffective in every realm, as a deterrent, as being cost effective, etc., etc.
Click to expand...

Yes, they do value them. They act concerned about these individuals being treated with dignity as if that should matter. They are not people. They are empty vessels which is why they suck the life out of others.
 
ChrisL said:
No it isn't. The logical argument is that to get rid of the death penalty saves money, and again there is the potential of executing innocent people. Why spend this money on executions when it could be spent in much more productive manner?

Death Penalty*:*Cost
Click to expand...

Wrong. The logical argument is to reduce cost and only execute those that are guilty beyond a doubt. This can be done too.
 
Alyssa said:
Yes, they do value them. They act concerned about these individuals being treated with dignity as if that should matter. They are not people. They are empty vessels which is why they suck the life out of others.
Click to expand...

No, the point is that the government should not be given the power to take human life at it's whim. It really has nothing to do with the individuals unless there is the chance they could be innocent like this guy. EVERYONE thought this guy was guilty. Thankfully, there was no death penalty in RI at that time, but if he had been in a death penalty state, his "alleged" crime most certainly could have been a death penalty case, and if the guy who truly was guilty never came forward Mr. Hornoff would probably STILL be in jail today. Thankfully, he was alive to be freed and try to live out his life.

Scott Hornoff | The Story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom