The Death Penalty

[CopperGoat]

I personally don't believe in the death penalty, because I don't think that punishment does not work. Therefore by saying that the death penalty is not working in the US, because it has been occuring for a long time now, and people are still doing murderous crimes. I would rather have crime to be prevented, than it to be fixed by punishment. Am I right or wrong?

[bluerev002]

in my opinion the death penaltly is wrong, very very wrong. over half the time the person is innocent, and whne they used to use the electric chair the ppl would be electrecuted and not die!

although, death by firing squad (same thing i guess) can sometimes work, it is there for the public to see.

the US deaht penalty accomplishes nothing.

[Akbar]

yes you are wrong

i fill the pity for you

[Behind enemy lines]

I also believe the death penalty is wrong. For anyone out there who disagrees with this; Who gave you the right to impose your beliefs on others. People may argue that it is politically necessary and that maybe so, but I would love to hear how someone morally (excuse spelling) can justify it.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I agree, the death penalty is the most primitive thing! It's hypocritical and revengeful. How can you kill someone for killing? Wouldn't that just perpetuate the violence? Does any man have the right to judge wheather or not another man has the right to live? I'm not a pacifist, but once peace is attained, why do we need to kill people? Why do people have impulses to commit crimes? People have impulses to commit crimes because they have no place in society. That is another faulty point of Capitalism!
(I am aware that the lack of a place in society is not a motive that accounts for all crimes, but many.)

[Blasphemy]

i stronly oppose the death penalty, but disagree with some of the reasons people gave here for that.

we should not judge the death penalty according the the results it have managed to achieve. even if it did deter people, and the murder rate would have dropped, i would still oppose it.

the state can lock people in prison, because they can give them their freedom back. no one should take what they can't give back. the state cannot bring a person back from the dead, so it shouldn't take him there.

[Ari HR]

Alltough I agree that DP sucks, I would like to mention euthanasia. Those two are similiar on first glance, but I strongly support the later one. Everyone has the right to die like a human, instead of living like a fucken flower.

[Pete]

I am right with Ari HR. Suicide is illegal in Canada. Really, how can that work? Although I do strong disagree with the logic behind the death penalty, in the revolution some people will have to die.

[Sinistra]

i would like to say that i oposse the death palenty , who are we to deside who can live and who can die .?

[hawarameen]

ok so we are all against the death penalty, is there anyone who agrees with it?

[Umoja]

Don't agree for previously stated reasons.

Where is Mazdak or Thursday or some other wacked out Stalinist?

[socialist ballistix]

i am against it because it is very counterproductive to loife on this planet. What if this guykilled somebody, got convicted, was killed, so his son went out looking for revenge, killed somebody, got convicted, was killed, its like a cirlce around and around it goes.

[Panamarisen]

DP should be ILLEGAL all over the world for a very simple reason: the "State" shouldn´t ever be able to decide who should be alive and who shouldn´t.
To have a "legal" death is a real madness; it´s a way to demonstrate how uncivilised are all these today´s "civilised" countries.

We all could kill someone else because of a lot of reasons, but it´s a very different stuff to be killed by some abstract idea as the such called "State"...

HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!

[Len]

I'm for it. Not under all conditions. If you kill a crap load of people then you should die. George Bush should die. I think it's productive.

[ratm545]

im not going to repeat what all you said, im going to offer a solution to the problem.

torture. the severity of the crime, the severity of the torture. i really think that that would solve the crime. not the insane torture big brother put on the criminals. get the people's vote on what crimes deserve what punishments. its a lot more harsh then just being killed. or hard time which angers the tax payers because they're giving the prisoner free room and board.

[Behind enemy lines]

Tortue is even more insane, especially the way you want to see it done. To my understanding (since you stated that hard-time costs to much) you want to tortue criminals(Half of which could be innocent) and cause major psycholocigical problems to them, then release them back into society.

If that was the way I guess we could release them in Washington and London. That way your system might be beneficial if they kill rich people.

Are you serious about torture ratm545?

[commie kg]

I don't believe in the death penalty. It's like our morbid need to see "bad people" die stays with us even though we are now considerd "civilized". In the middle ages tons of people turned out to see public executions, we should be past that now. In the Timothy McVeigh execution, the Texas gov. considered putting it on public access television. sick.
On the tourtue thing, that shouldn't be used either. More money needs to be invested into treatment programs and the like.

[IRANeAZAD5]

I disagree with it also
I dont understand how this country brags to other countries about human rights here when they have the death penalty

[bluerev002]

ok, so you are all against the death penalty. what about death by firing squad fo being an anit-revolutionist? i am for killing those who faught against the revolutions and the chivatasos (the snitchs). and those who are against the revolution.

agree w/ me? or disagree?

[Palmares]

Killing of any kind is inhumane. It is not wise to "beat someone at their own game" as such. It is obvious how stupid and backward the death penalty really is, but think about related issues. Euthenasia is one that has been mentioned, a somewhat difficult issue. Personally, I think that it should be legal (only to the terminally ill or similar), but the individual must be made fully aware of the situation (which would include councilling, in depth information on their illness from a doctor and so forth), so pretty much try to talk them out of it. But fundamentally it is their choice. Then there is also abortion, which I am less vocal on. I very much dislike the taking of a life, so I am partially bias. I think it should be allowed, but only in extreme circumstances. So if an abortion is being aplied for by an individual who can comfortably care for the child (economically, etc), then they should be disallowed. I am sorry if that offends anyone. In conclusion, I ask, why does George Dubya Bush uphold the death penalty, while also upholding christian (I'm an athiest) virtues with regards to abortion? I think he has it the wrong way around. Just remember, NOONE is born evil. Nor is anyone immune to change.

[nz revolution]

Thats what I can't get my head around.

Is killing people who are counter-revolutionary and snitching.

What if the current government comes after you with a death warrant for your execution because you are fighting against the industrial or borgeoisie revolution?

Will you give up like a *****? OR JUMP THE FUCK UP!!?! sorry just some soulfly...

I have mixed feelings about this.

If you look at it objectively, it is necessary to get rid of scum,
but then again who decides who is scum? Stalin? I don't think so.

America having the death penalty is the most hipocritic thing, as someone pointed out they preach human rights but then dont practice them.

age old saying "practice what you preach"

[peaccenicked]

Interesting link.
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~marto/adpp/cuba.htm

[Zippy]

Quote: from ratm545 on 2:35 am on Nov. 27, 2002
torture. the severity of the crime, the severity of the torture.
Why is pain better than death? I'd like to think humanity can find a new way of dealing with its problems than going back to the medieval methods. Why not start witch hunts again? It'll give the fat kids at school an excuse to go running.


Quote: from nz revolution on 4:38 am on Nov. 27, 2002
America having the death penalty is the most hipocritic thing [...]
Che practiced the death penalty aswell. Injustice can occur on any side.

Zippy.

[Panamarisen]

Che executed traitors (which actions ended in the death of innocents and revolutionaries), criminals, rapists and such, and all of them knowed very well what would be their fate if they commited what they did. This is different from approving legal death from the State.

Torture is another stuff. It´s such a criminal behavior in itself that it doesn´t deserve a single comment, at least from me. No way. Che, indeed, never did it, and never ordered anybody to do it.

Maybe a single reason is enough to be against DP: Bushy guy supports it.

HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!

[Ari HR]

Quote: from ratm545 on 2:35 am on Nov. 27, 2002
im not going to repeat what all you said, im going to offer a solution to the problem.

torture. the severity of the crime, the severity of the torture. i really think that that would solve the crime. not the insane torture big brother put on the criminals. get the people's vote on what crimes deserve what punishments. its a lot more harsh then just being killed. or hard time which angers the tax payers because they're giving the prisoner free room and board.


Are you serious 'bout this "solution". This solution as you call it was practiced in dark midle ages, and by half-witted barbarians. Che didn't do it, like no normal human being will. That is sadistic, contraprodactive, perverse way of "solving" things. It actually doesn't solve anything, but even if it does there is no excuse to do it!

[Umoja]

It doesn't matter if a person is a traitor. Being the Socialist that we are, we are traitors. Should we all be hunted down and killed? No. When a person decides they have the best world view, it leads to conflict, and problems! That's what the Death Penalty seeks to remedy.

It's Ironic because I'm listening to "Wolves" By Dead Prez.

[Zippy]

Quote: from Panamarisen on 5:21 pm on Nov. 27, 2002
Che executed traitors [...] This is different from approving legal death from the State.
Garbels my dear, big juicy garbels. Death is death is death is death is death. End of story.

Zippy.

[Panamarisen]

Death is death.
Assasination is killing, but not all killings are assasinations.
DP is "legal" assasination.

HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!

[ratm545]

my opinion is, if the person is innocent but the crime they are charged with is one that they think deserves the death penalty. wouldnt some sort of torture be a worse mistake to make? if they kill an innocent man, nothing can be done, he cant be brought back to life. there could be help after they realize they tortured an innocent man.

i know the torturing methods would be taken out of hand and is not a real answer. just a thought

(Edited by ratm545 at 3:58 am on Nov. 28, 2002)

[Behind enemy lines]

I think the question of killing snitches is a hard one. I don't think I would kill them, just imprison them. That's not to say I would let the government fuck with me. I would kill anyone who came after the revolution or myself with lethal intentions. I wouldn't feel good about it and it would only be my last resort

[Conghaileach]

In a number of countries that still practise capitali punishment, it's being pushed that the jury should be allowed to decide the sentence instead of the judge. It's based on a theory that a jury would be less willing to kill another individual.

Whenever a crime is committed, justice is carried out by balancing two factors: rehabilitation and punishment. Obviously if the punishment is death then there is no chance for rehabilitation.

All I can say is that I don't like capital punishment, but here at home I'd shed no tears if a joyrider was executed. So, before I go over the border of hypocrisy, I'll just stop.

[ratm545]

its been proven that rehabilitation works for drug offenders vs. time

[Nickademus]

time for me to get my voice in here. the death penalty is wrong. Why? Because its punishing someone for doing something that is immoral by the varies means that the accused committed the immoral act. State-sanctioned murder. Hypocritical. (not to mention the fact that human life in all forms is sacred)

To who ever said Che executed (a more seemingly just word for killed or murdered) people....so what if he did? do we have to follow in che's exact footsteps to be revolutionaries? NO THINK FOR YOURSELF! Yes you can believe that the taking of life is wrong and be a revolutionary. I live with that idea every day of my life. It is possible.

And i agree with the statement that was made that the killing of traitors or snitches isn't ok. Hell that's how the jewish holocaust started --> by killing all the political dissidents. dissent and discussion is healthy and necessary.

Torture as a solution.--> againt hat falls pray tot he same problem as the death penalty. The state is sanctioning what it forbids. NOT A SOLUTION. And the scars of torture are absolutely horrible. No one and i mean no one deserves that. And yes i can think of some of the most horrific stories of murders, rapes, genocide etc. and still argue against the death penalty.

[Sinistra]

Well , I am against DP ( i have already mentioned ) , but all of you others , i understand that you are all against DP , but i also understand that you are all che edmiorers . do you what che did to the "sniches" that he found????

[Panamarisen]

Che executed people, as I said before. And I stated that this is different from a legal death by the State. He did it specially during warfare; later on it was a hard matter for him to do it, even in the cases of the traitors responsible for the death of many people. Besides, it doesn´t mean I personally approve it. I have written very clearly my points of view about DP and torture.

HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I still dont know my real opinion about the death penatly. If someone gives himself the right to kill someone it would be useless to punish him with a few years jail if he just took someone's whole life away. And what would give us the right to kill him.

You could say that they just had to be punished longer then,but they cant rehalibate then becuz they are adapted to the rules of the prison and not the community.

And someone is a pure criminal, chances to rehalibate are slim. What must you do then?? Lock him up for the rest of his life where he lives unhappily or you kill him.
After all the thing worser than death is unhappyness.

In afganistan they just hung up a while ago a talibancommander who had raped women and young girls, had killed dozens of ppl just for fun or in battle. So what are his chances to rehalibate and wouldnt it be better to spend that money that is needed to rehalibate a criminal on other projects that are good for all ppl of afganistan (like factories and schools). Especially in a poor country like afganistan it would be better and the chances that he again decides to kill ppl are quite big.

[Sinistra]

I still cant understand how can you deside , who shouled live , and who must die ... you are no god ...
as long you are not threatened , you cant kill any one .

[suffianr]

The Malaysian government is going to table a proposal to enforce the death penalty on child rapists, soon.

Since I personally know someone who was sexually molested when he was a kid, and what he's gone through all these years, I say hang the motherfuckers. :(

Fuck it, victims don't deserve to re-live their experiences in their heads for the rest of their lives...So, no offense to anyone, but I honestly think that the death penalty is the realistic & pragmatic solution, perhaps in this specific case. This isn't really a case of a wholesale slaughter of innocents, is it?

What else can you do? Castrate the bastards? Do you know what psychologically happens to men after they are castrated? Do you know what the suicide rate is for these type of people? Do you want entire neighbourhoods of androgynous (cross-dressing?) ex-criminals populating the country?

Do you cane them, instead?

Well, most hardcore criminals in Malaysia get 3-15 strokes of the cane (a three-pronged solid bamboo pole) across their backs & buttocks before they carry out their life sentences...So, that isn't much of a deterrant, is it?

I'd be all for rehab, but does rehab really work for child rapists/paedophiles? What are the stats to show that these wankers really rehabillitate and are re-accepted unconditionally by society?

Till then, I say hang every last one of them...

[Palmares]

Che was a good man, but was far from as great as many of you seem to think. If you loved your wife, then she killed your son, would you think it was okay?

[nz revolution]

Cthenthar

Im not very patient at the mo, Im cleaning out my room cos I have to move tomorrow but what do your riddles mean?

[apathy maybe]

Cthenthar's riddles mean, if your wife killed your son (or some one you loved lots killed someone else you loved lots) would you kill them? Or something like that. Now my 4 1/2 cents, (round up Chris).
The Old Testament of the Bible says something like ""an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth. If someone kills someone illegally they are to die"". My emphases. However, the New Testament says that that is wrong. The USA claims to be a Christian society (don't jump on me for that remark.) many states don't follow what is written.
Now on alternatives, for murder 'life' imprisonment (I mean life, not 20 years) should be it, with labour to work for the state. Not mandatory after all, if you came home and found a mad person ruining you stamp collection that you have had since you were a child would you kill them. Many people would, and then feel immediate remorse. We need punishment but for those people maybe not life.
In countries were there is no death penalty even where there is, many murders who kill with deliberate intent in cold blood if you like are allowed out, in some cases after 5 years. What price.
Sorry for the ramble.

[Iepilei]

the theory 'killing is wrong' would be an interesting slogan for a revolution, no?

well i disagree with the death penalty, but for a different reason than just "killing is wrong". i disagree with it because it accomplishes absolutly nothing. it's like euthinasia for the criminals of the world! putting them out of their pain their mind places them in.

take the murders rapists thieves and rehabilitate them for start. if it's shown that they're beyond rehabilitation, lock em away... let them work their own problems out.

[Kows]

I cannot condone the death penalty.
How can good christian people go along with this blatant use of hate, racism, and anger? It's just not right. Yes, the people who did something wrong deserve to be punished; but what does death do?
a) spends MORE money
B) puts blood not only on the killer but then on society
c) Doesn't deter criminals
d) Kills innocents
e) Degrades our society, makes people think that it's 'OK to kill'.

Then again, all the same could be said for war, too ('Cept C, I guess :-_-: )

[suffianr]

OK, let's simplify this:

If killing paedophiles and serial rapists is not a deterrant, and if rehab doesn't work, what rational, logical choices do we have? Overpopulate jails? Send them to the Seychelles? What do we do?

[hXcPetey]

this is a complicated subject. I dont believe in state sponcered death penalty. however it is up to the people to bring justice

there is no justice.
JUST US!!!!!!!!!!!

[ratm545]

is there a solution? there may not be. and us as a civilization not think of one. the only thing that would work is something that could tell the innocence of a man. so nobody would be unjustly put to death or anything else.

[apathy maybe]

Instead of the death penalty, we have imprisonment, however for some crimes, we can (also) use sterilisation. Now I don't mean cut men's balls and such, but rather vasectomy and the female equivalent. This way for violent offenders we don't pass on those genes. If they have already had children, we also sterilise them so that if they inherit their parent's bad genes they cannot have children. This would also serve as a preventive measure. Most people want to be immortal. If the offence were proven, (I don't mean court of law proven, half the time that means nothing.) not to have any relationship with the family history, (say someone had been feeding them drugs) then they wouldn't be sterilised. For a certain type of crime, (not for me to decide which type) we could use invisibility. Not real invisibility but a pretend one where a mark on the forehead means that people will ignore them (under threat of a similar punishment) for a period of time. They will in the eyes of society be invisible for so long. Of course it would not do for violent or compulsive robbers or the like but.

[Sinistra]

What about putting them in a turkish prison , they will understand what being raped is like . I am sure that they will never rape anyone again .

[Conghaileach]

from apathy maybe:
Now I don't mean cut men's balls and such, but rather vasectomy and the female equivalent. This way for violent offenders we don't pass on those genes. If they have already had children, we also sterilise them so that if they inherit their parent's bad genes they cannot have children. This would also serve as a preventive measure.

I can't support eugenics. How do we tell "bad" genes from "good" genes?

I personally don't think that there's a gene that makes people commit crimes, rape, murder etc.


For a certain type of crime, (not for me to decide which type) we could use invisibility. Not real invisibility but a pretend one where a mark on the forehead means that people will ignore them (under threat of a similar punishment) for a period of time.

I don't think that would work. If you tell most people not to look at something or someone, they'll look.

[Blasphemy]

Quote: from suffianr on 2:17 pm on Nov. 30, 2002
OK, let's simplify this:

If killing paedophiles and serial rapists is not a deterrant, and if rehab doesn't work, what rational, logical choices do we have? Overpopulate jails? Send them to the Seychelles? What do we do?


until we find a way to rehabilitate those offendors, society should be protected by them, and they should be sent to prison. if jails are being overpopulated, build more.

when someone kills another person out of rage, that is, at some level, understandable, but not necessarily forgievable. when a group of people get up in the morning, have coffee, wear their suites and ties, go to court and decide to kill a person. that is just utterly sickening.

[Iepilei]

well this has always been my motto.

druggies go to rehab. aggressors go to prision. in our society, we send both the the same place, and it's not rehab - a major reason why we are running out of prision space as of right now.

now don't get me wrong, i'm not against sending aggressors to rehab. try to help them work through anything that might be causing them grief - and if nothing can be done, well they can sit it out.

[ratm545]

i completely agree Iepilei

the 'prison song' by soad exlpains the drug thing.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from Iepilei on 8:18 pm on Dec. 3, 2002
well this has always been my motto.

druggies go to rehab. aggressors go to prision. in our society, we send both the the same place, and it's not rehab - a major reason why we are running out of prision space as of right now.

now don't get me wrong, i'm not against sending aggressors to rehab. try to help them work through anything that might be causing them grief - and if nothing can be done, well they can sit it out.


i don't know where you are from, but i would suggest you read a book by rupert ross called returning from the teachings. its about a new type of criminal justice that actually works much better at rehabilitating and healing the community. its based on north american aboriginal ideas of justice. it is an excellent read and really makes you think about the prison system in general.

[Sinistra]

I have to say , that the best way of punishment , is reiducation . were we make the criminals better human beings . so our society can be much better .

and I also have to say that i agree with blasphemy about the death palenty Issue .

[Raffa]

hey, coppergoat how in the world do you think you are going to prevent crime, how can you ever stop humans from murdering themselves. crime has always been a part of society and always will. there must always be a punishment that meets the severity of a crime. even che sentenced people to death. not everyone is going to follow the rules. death is not unhumane, to some its a favor.

[Raffa]

rehab does not work. however minor drug offenders should never be housed with violent criminals. its like sending them criminal university, where they learn how to better feed their addictions. all prisions are full of drugs and are so overpopulated that "rehab" is just a word used to make the public happy.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Prevent is better than to heal.

The death penalty doesnt avoid criminality, look at the stats of american states who have introduced it.

If rehab doesnt work death penalty is better i think. And if someone has been busted for the 3th time for some crime let say molesting ppl without reason and any other rehabs didnt work what should we do then?? Kill??

[Nickademus]

Quote: from CCCP on 11:04 pm on Dec. 4, 2002
Prevent is better than to heal.

The death penalty doesnt avoid criminality, look at the stats of american states who have introduced it.

If rehab doesnt work death penalty is better i think. And if someone has been busted for the 3th time for some crime let say molesting ppl without reason and any other rehabs didnt work what should we do then?? Kill??

i have to disagree with your idea that the death penalty is best if people can't be rehabilitated. what about the peopl ewho are on death row because of 1 incident. we dont give them a chance to be rehabilitated. and what the criminal justice system currently offers is not really rehabilitation in anyway shape or form. i mean ocme on, years ago we tried to 'rehabilitate' homosexuals. we really have to understand why they do what they do.......see my other thread in the politics topic on the value of our criminal justice system

[bombeverything]

Killing those who kill others does NOT teach that killing is wrong. Morons.

[Santa Clara]

The death penalty is fundamentaly wrong. As for all you people saying, well, Che killed people during the revolution, yeah, during a revolution things change, it doesn't make it right. You need to think for yourselves.
No-one has the right to take the life of a fellow human being, isn't that why murderers are punished in the first place. The death penalty is one of the most hypocritical things in our society. The US calls itself the most advanced state in the world economically and shit and they use the most barbaric form of punishment ever invented. As for the idea of using torture instead, did you even think about that, I mean, torture?
Anyway, the point is, the death penalty is fundamentally wrong, and we should always make our voices heard in opposition to it.

[Ari HR]

Quote: from bombeverything on 5:22 am on Dec. 6, 2002
Killing those who kill others does NOT teach that killing is wrong. Morons.


So simple, but so true!

[Blasphemy]

communism is all about equality. taking someone's life makes you superior to him, and therefore defeats the porpuse of equality.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Nickadamus

In ur other forum "criminal justice system" I have wrote a piece. But still I dont know my real opinion about "death penalty". One of the things that I am scared of is abuse by governments.

[ADIDAE]

Yes, but wouldn't death penalty be a good deterrent for the further crimes? Everyone is afraid of dying? rite? Any comments?

[Iris]

Nope, I don't think cold blooded killers will stop murdering people because they are afraid to die.
Firstly, they aren't excactly what you could call logical, so they dont really think about the consequences when they re commiting their crime
Secondly, there's always loop-holes and bureacracy involved so you'll probably end up killing more innocents and letting more killers walk around free.
The death penalty isn't a solution, it just makes civilians feel safe for a little while, thinking their problems have been solved. At some point they (hopefully) realise that killing killers and criminals just brings you down to their level.

[new democracy]

Quote: from Blasphemy on 5:00 pm on Dec. 8, 2002
communism is all about equality. taking someone's life makes you superior to him, and therefore defeats the porpuse of equality.

so people that committed crimes against humanity(Pol Pot, Nazis)deserve to live? i think that when someone has committed that awful crime, they should be in their graves.
edit: and when i say Nazis i mean people that committed crimes during WW2, not those idiot young nazis of today.

(Edited by new democracy at 3:39 am on Dec. 10, 2002)

[Iris]

Dying is to good for the Nazis, I think they should be looked up in dark cells to go mad. Hell, they deserve worse!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Making someone more suffer than they lett us suffer.

What does it make of us?? If they are animals ,we should be called beasts.

Ppl arent really afraid of death penalty, in american states where its introduced ,crime hasnt stopped or beeing reduced ,it just increased.

[Valkyrie]

Informative article from a report from Amnesty Internatal about the U.S. use of the death penalty.. the only nation to still use it on crimes committed when people were youthful offenders, under legal age or children.

Scroll down to article.
www.oneworld.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi?root=1680&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eamnestyusa%2Eorg%2Fnews%2F2 002%2Fusa12092002%2Ehtml

(Edited by Paris at 9:12 pm on Dec. 10, 2002)


(Edited by Paris at 9:13 pm on Dec. 10, 2002)