Just easily reply "yes or no" ? Iam against it. Because we´re not living in the ancient Rome Empire or in the Medieval period anymore. If the policy is: "Who killed people, and then he must be killed again". It is only the thoughts of the bullock law makers.
It is a similarity that we would go back together to the12th century, where Richard The Lionheart or the Chinese Emperor SHI HUANG DI will surely behead your heads.
You understand ?
2006-12-16 13:13:22 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Iam not idealistic,
The lawmakers or the states who kill the murders, are murders too. Violence rages against violence, it would have no final solution. You dope !!
2006-12-16 13:34:13 · update #1
I think murder is murder regardless of who commits it.
That would make the government muderers.
They're already killing thousands per year overseas, so what difference does murdering a few more at home make.
2006-12-16 13:22:28 · answer #1 · answered by Garry H 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No.
I agree with the "not piss about" man wholeheartedly - and his reasons should be enough.
I would like to emphasise also though the notion of suffering - how do you suffer when all that happens is that you are killed? Surely life (meaning life) in prison is far greater punishment?!?!? If I had raped, tortured and killed someones 5 year old daughter, I would look forward to the death penalty compared with a life in prison
2006-12-17 03:26:59 · answer #2 · answered by AlexChappel 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let us not piss about.
Is it right to kill someone in the name of justice?
No.
Why not?
Because "justice" is not infallible. It has made, and always will make, mistakes, because humans, who are fallible, administer it.
It follows that, if "justice" kills people, it will, occasionally, kill innocent people
Is it OK for mistakes to happen that result in innocent people dying?
No it is not.
Dead simple.
Unltil you can bring back from the grave the innocent people you have killed in the name of "justice", you cannot kill them.
No caveats, no "in certain circumstances", no "if the evidence is overwhelming", no "but DNA proves", nothing justifies killing in the name of justice as long as any level, at all, of human judgement, fallible, is involved in the reckoning, because mistakes will always occur.
What is the State if it says "you cannot kill" and then kills?
Keep them in jail forever, if need be, but kill them and you are only one step away from trying to resurrect the ones you make a mistake about.
2006-12-17 00:16:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are people out there who have killed children and adults, in the most horrendous way, but at the end of the day these people shoud be sent down for life, yeah life, not 25 years, translation, 5 years, so if you kill sumone, you should have your freedom taken away from you, coz if you have the death penalty, then that makes us no better than you, the killer, does it? And if you are put down then you don`t suffer for what you have done, do you?
2006-12-16 21:51:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with asblatcher. It's not as simple as "yes" or "no". It REALLY depends what the crime is. For some crimes where it has been proven beyond doubt (D.N.A evidence etc) then yes. For paedophiles/sex offenders/serial killers and other horriffic crimes like that I'm all for it. Ian Huntley, Myra Hindley, Peter Sutcliffe etc should all have been executed. People like that have no place in society. Either that or LIFE really does mean LIFE with NO chance of parole, but that's never going to happen because the emphasis in the penal system is on reform and not punishment. In saying that though I doubt if any of the people I named above will ever see the light of day again. Ask yourself this, If you are so in favour of the current penal system and so confident that it reforms people, would you be happy with a convicted serial sex offender moving in next door to you? I doubt it, but I do see what you're getting at, however idealistic it may be.
There are some really sick individuals out there who simply do not deserve the same rights as you or I. If it makes me a murderer (I don't think it does but never mind) to execute a paedophile then I'm certainly not going to loose any sleep over it. I'd do it all day long. It would benefit society as a whole which is more important.
EDIT: erm, no it's IDEALISTIC to believe that the current penal system (U.K) works and that the majority of violent prisoners do not go on to re-offend when they are released. Tragically we hear almost daily about convicted sex offenders who are released and almost immediately attack someone again and if you had actually read what I had said you would see that I also advocated, as a compromise, life imprisonment to mean life. There's no point in posting questions and then calling people names if they don't agree with you. You've obviously already made your mind up, however idealistic it may be......dope.
2006-12-16 21:26:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Yes. Eye for an Eye, tooth for a tooth. Seriously, if we gave harsher punishments for crime then it will not be commited. I live near New Orleans and I'm sick of turning on my news at night and morning and hearing about seven murders over night. How some were released because the prisions are overflowing. More over, the death pentalty now is too soft on the issue.
2006-12-16 21:56:34 · answer #6 · answered by Reannon L 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes. I am for the death penalty. There are some people that have committed crimes so heinous that they do not need to be breathing air at all. Imagine the terror of a kid being raped then strangled. Imagine the horror of a woman being stalked by a man she loved then discovered he is a totally horrid man bent on terrorizing and killing her. There are some criminals who never should have the chance to grow old. To be taken care of by the public for the rest of their lives. Why should killers and rapists have ant pleasure in life when their victims will never have the pleasure of walking a beach or sitting at home with their families. Why should we, the taxpaying public have to support these criminals all their natural lives? When they are convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, execute them within 90 days. Give the families of the victims the justice they deserve
2006-12-16 21:24:05 · answer #7 · answered by asbratcher 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
What I find very interesting is the number of people who are anti-death penelty, but pro-abortion.
2006-12-17 02:07:22 · answer #8 · answered by MrsC 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ok Im for it as long as its hang drawin an quarterin in public
2006-12-16 21:36:33 · answer #9 · answered by pigeon 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No! killing some one is murder no matter how you try to justify it.
(An eye for an eye, and the whole world would go blind) "Mahatma Gandhi"
2006-12-16 21:25:37 · answer #10 · answered by azman5998 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋