Does anyone agree?

Question

I think that people who are convicted of heinous murder without a single doubt to their innocence should be dealt with according to their crime?

For example. You have a 14 year old daughter who is abducted, tortured and raped and the killer is arrested. Should'nt you as a parent be given first right as to how the killer will be dealth with? (not to exceed the crime.)
If the killer is found guilty (or pleads guilty) with absolutley no chance that he may be innocent, shouldnt the parent get to torture and kill him in return (if he so chooses to?)

Or perhaps your spouse is murdered during a home robbery. Shouldn't you as a spouse get the right to execute the killer in the same fashion as he chose to murder?

I think if criminals knew that it was leagal to eliminate them the same way they choose to kill innocent people, then they would think twice about some of the crimes they commit.

I hear too many stories of mothers drowning their children, father microwaving their infants.

I strongly believe that if we as humans had the right to fight back, crime, especially the heinous crimes, would not be commited as often.

I have not lost (or know) anyone due to these crimes.

But if I did, I would like to be given the choice to enact punishment. I understand that it makes me no better then the murderer, BUT, it saves the next potential victim and their families of the heartache.

Answer 1

I agree with you 100% ... there shouldn't be endless appeals for heinous criminals and jail should involve hard labor. And in serious crimes like rape, murder and child molestation the death penalty should be the only option. I fully support allowing the victim or their family to execute that penalty in any way they see fit

Answer 2

Biblical, 'An eye for an eye,' means punish no more drastically or horribly than crime. Missouri just passed law removing any crime attending to deadly force against a criminal entering property-car, home, but I don't know about boat, trailer, etc.. I could torture anyone injuring my family, children, any innocent. I'd leave them alive, but torn up so badly they wouldn't have physically ability to harm anyone. Violent criminals need to be pounded and beat down, and left to their families. If families, Jeffrey Dahner's, didn't want to attend their criminal, I guess they would just die.
I talk to property criminals, and tell them to stop. No sense getting yourself killed over property. No sense killing over it.
Problem with determing guilt, and what if some body gets in wrong car, like in the KIA commercial?
Other than that, if a grizzly bear is in my neighborhood?????
"an old liberal,' silly people who confuse one thing with 100 other things.

Answer 3

But then does the spouse of the executed murder have a right to kill the executioner? And what if the spouse doesnt want to have to chose, what if she/he cant deal with it, or kills him in rage and then cant live with herself over it, or even worse gets a liking for it. Once more how would society look on those people, a killer could almost ruin two peoples lives with one stone, killing one and morally scarring the other.

Answer 4

i think its a wonderful idea to create a stable productive culture....but lots of people mess that up, like the criminals. and our efforts to create and abide by these civilized laws take something away from our human instinct. the prison program isnt hard enough,the worst thing criminals face is boredom, i do believe in the death penalty and exact punishment for the crime. then they'd know how it feels. kinda like what jack nicholson does in Ghost Rider!

Answer 5

I understand where you are coming from, but I think that it is the hallmark of a civilized society to NOT respond to crimes in this manner. Something we should be doing is preemptive treatment such as providing adequate education, homes, and families to all children, and effective treatment of early offenders, and thereby preventing a lot of crime in the first place.

Answer 6

i feel very strongly about bringing back the death penalty but that is because i have had people in my family heinously murdered.....it hurts my family to this day even though these events happened over 30 years ago....the point is people can do whatever they want if it hurts others, the "criminals" who are being severely punished aren't even criminals IE: some kid with a dime bag

I live in MI we were the first state to abolish the death penalty in 1847.....and what do people know us all over the world for is it the motor city? no its murder capital of the world!


Get it together Detroit because my heart is with you!

Answer 7

No. We have given up the right to exact revenge in the name of creating a stable system where everyone is (theoretically) accountable under the law.

So, we have the govt define what are crimes, and have the govt punish criminals, to ensure consistency.

Answer 8

I totally agree with you . My mom told me once that when she was a girl they lived in a small town in north carolina and she heard about some guy molesting a girl back in the 1940 s and they tied him to a tree near an ant hill and they poured honey all over him and left him there and he was stung to death by the ants . dont know if it s true or not but some of my moms relatives swear it is true . and the sheriff helped them do this . backwoods justice i guess you could say . but yeah i agree with you . good luck .

Answer 9

Look up the 8th Amendment to the US constitution.

It calls for freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.

Answer 10

does that not make you as bad as them??
i think if the justice system worked as it was intended to THEN criminals would think twice about their crimes