Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > Politics

View Poll Results: For or against Death Penalty?
Yes 22 88.00%
No 3 12.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 05-02-2009, 12:57 PM
rearnakedchoke
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-03-2009, 04:16 PM
Bonnie Bonnie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Where the bluebonnets bloom
Posts: 6,639
Default

This is not about "casting stones". You have to have law and order so that civilization is not thrown into chaos and lawlessness. I believe GOD covers this when he speaks of "man's law" here on earth. Maybe one of our more learned members can speak to this.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-03-2009, 06:51 PM
rearnakedchoke
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnie
This is not about "casting stones". You have to have law and order so that civilization is not thrown into chaos and lawlessness. I believe GOD covers this when he speaks of "man's law" here on earth. Maybe one of our more learned members can speak to this.
you can have law and order without the death penalty ... creating a law to kill someone if they committ a crime doesn't make it okay ... there are plenty of countries with low homicide and crime rates that do not have the death penalty, so it really isn't a detterent ....
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-03-2009, 07:53 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke
you can have law and order without the death penalty ... creating a law to kill someone if they committ a crime doesn't make it okay ... there are plenty of countries with low homicide and crime rates that do not have the death penalty, so it really isn't a detterent ....
I don't get the whole "deterrent" argument, as that is just silly. No law is going to be an ultimate deterrent to ANY crime. The death penalty is about practicality in my opinion. People who commit crimes that are worthy of the death penalty are not people that are ever going to be allowed to live in society again, that is plain and simple.

Keeping them locked up for years and years is not only a financial burden on the rest of society, but also a grave injustice to the victims and their families. As now the families tax dollars have to go into a system that pays to harbor a person who victimized them in a horrible way.

I get why some people are against the death penalty, I completely do. However, I just don't agree that some people should get to keep on living after committing some of the heinous crimes I hear about on the news all the time.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-03-2009, 10:01 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,956
Default

Famously during my time at Bradford University, there was a great debate about State Execution.

England used to Execute prisoners all the time, but it abolished it not to long after the second world war.

I've always been pro-death penalty.

Someone challenged me and said that perhaps I oughta get in touch with some people in America on death row, get to know them, and see if I still was pro death pentalty. So I did.

I spoke to two guys in two different states for a number of years, through an agency known as "Human Writes" One of the guys probably didnt committ the crime, and during the time I wrote to him he won an appeal and had his sentance reduced to life encarceration. The other guy certainly did what he was charged with. He seemed a pleasent enough guy...but it hasnt changed my mind.

However...I go further then just being pro-death penatly.

I dont see why we offer to prisoners Execution, and then keep them waiting for years. Sorry but one appeal, and then kill them. They deserve minimal rights, but not being kept forever, using up resources.

Secondly...I think you should either hang them or fry them. DONT give them a leathal injection...thats what you do to beloved pets!! its too good for them!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-03-2009, 10:03 PM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,956
Default

I hasten to add, they should bring it back in England...and forget a private execution.

Executions should be a spectator Sport. They should bring back the gallows at Tyburn, and we should all watch the procession and the hanging...they'd put PPVs like the UFC out of business if they charged...not joking...they used to get 50 THOUSAND live attending Tyburn
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-04-2009, 12:02 AM
ufcfan2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm for it simple as that. It may not be a 'deturrent',but gosh darn it think its a system that is needed.
Our jails are way overcrowded for various of reason and having guys whos fate is sealed take up valuable resources and draing the systems money..I think more than anything it kindof gives the victims families sometype of relief and justice.
What about 'lifers' their never gonna see the light of day what about them they are wasting valuable resources as well. What should be done with these guys?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-04-2009, 12:13 AM
Tyburn's Avatar
Tyburn Tyburn is offline
Angry @ Injustice!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 16,956
Default

This explains nicely what used to happen in England.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_sM86GnH7A

We should bring it back

"There. At the very core of London, in the heart of its business and animation, in the midst of a whirl of noise and motion, stemming, as it were, the giant currents of life that flow ceaselessly on from different quarters and meet beneith its walls, Stands, New Gate...!"

NewGate Prison Wall still exists...the funny thing is that Its the wall that backs onto Amen Court (the place where the Clergy of Saint Paul's Cathedral live! I've walked on the plot that was part of New Gate countless times. Its now reduced to a small Court House. YES, the bells you here at the 59 second mark are Saint Paul's! its THAT close!!

"Doctor Johnson told me "The age is running mad after innovation, Tyburn is not safe from the fury of innovation, Sir it is NOT an improvement"

Yep...they banned the public hangings because they attracted to much attention, and started to interfere with the cities expansion. Tyburn is now in the Centre of the city...where it had existed for hundreds of years outside the urban area, I doubt even the UFC could control 50 thousands blood thirsty fans...neither could Central London in the late 1700s :'(

First the hangings went back to Newgate...then they went inside Newgate...then they kinda stopped altoghether...
__________________

Last edited by Tyburn; 05-04-2009 at 12:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-04-2009, 12:21 AM
Hughes_GOAT
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

kill them all, let God sort them out.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-04-2009, 12:49 AM
mscomc
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hey guys, I've been a way from the forums for a while, but i get I found a doozy to get myself back into the swing of things , so heres my two cents.

I am for the death penalty....but I dont beleive that the day you are convicted of heaven forbid a crime like rape and murder or something else that is heinous that you are put to death the week after, for the simple reasons as follows:

1) The canadian law system (very similar to US law) in my oppinion is flawed big time. Heres why, from what i have seen attending court sesions (for my own education purposes) and ones that I have seen in Phildadelphia when visiting relatives; rather than seeking justice, it appears to be this a"arch-rival" game of chess between the prosectuor and the defense...who is the better lawyer. The prosecutors job is simply to get convictions, and defense is make the burdon of proof harder for the prosectuor. And then, after it all, we have to give if off to a jury....who many times cant help but bring their personal beleifs into the matter or sometimes (and its not THEIR fault), they dont understand certain aspects of the law, or the criteria that need to be met for conviction. I mean lets face it, these guys havent gone to law school for 4 years and studied this.

2) The old phrase, it is worse to convict 1 innocent person then let 10 guilty ones go free. I personally beleive this. I'll give you an example that really swayed me. As a scientist, i get all excited about the use of all these new DNA tools in crimefighting and all these other great techniques, as you can imagine I salivate when CSI comes on . But, DNA evidence is not the end all be all. Heres an example, and this truly made made my stomach turn. There was a case here in Canada many years ago in the west part of the country. I beleive the case went something as follows..... So there was this women who was sexually assaulted by a man. Durring the horffic ordeal, he never used a rubber and for lack of a better word( please forgive me) ejaculated on her many times. When she reported this to the police, she first gave the name of a man she had been seeing, and the man was married (they had been having an affair). They brought the guy in and he denied it. Now I dont know all the details, but her assualt was sooooo gruesome that anyone one woulda probably want to break this guy in half who this to her. Anway, the guy VOLUNTEERD his DNA, thats how confident he was that he would be vindicated. But apparently, the medical examiner had herd of this gruesome tail and only swabbed a few parts of the woman that would be really easy to test, he later admitted in a deposition that he thouhgt he too could speed the whole process up as it were. So he did the mouth, hands, neck etc Basically places that could be explained by kissing or fooling around. The DNA test obviously came back positive for the accused man. Who still swore he did nothing, and that it was true he had kissed the woman that day, he never slept with her. Long story short, he gets convicted, and gets 20 years if i recall. After 10, in some kind of appeal (im not good on law terms) they get another medical examiner to do the test. It turns out the samples that were taken from the womans clothes were DNA of another man...who they eventually caught and he actually admitted to it. So the other guy was let go. BUT here is the crappy part, the other guy spent 10 years in jail. He was raped, now has HIV, his family wants nothing to with him as the re-located and he cant find them, professionally he is ruined, he didnt even know how to use the transit system as it had changed in the 10 years he was locked up, TV, internet, getting a loan etc etc....... I only know this because he came to speak at my intro to criminology class when i was an undergrad.

So my point is, if you want to kill someone for a very henious crime, then i think its justified. But, if you want to deprive someone of their liberty and kill them as an act of justice, then I think you need to be damn sure you have the right guy. I would suggest that after a conviction of your peers (the jury) the courts spend a good 2-3 years solidy re-investigating every aspect of your case...with trained law professionals and forensic analysts only, not with the bias that "its my job to convict you" or "i have to defend you cuz im getting paid to do so", but to investiagte if you are innocent, in any way. And i think that these cases should get priority in a court system because of the aformentioned. If after all this effort, they still cant find ANYTHING to imply thtat you may be innocent, then I think death is justified. Just my oppinion, have a good night all.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.