Eventually death penality abolished

[questor]

someone please tell me why they are against executing a killer who has admitted his crime, about whom there is no doubt, like Richard Dahmer ? this guy killed around 6 people. cut them up, ate parts of their body. no question he did it.

[CraigD]

someone please tell me why they are against executing a killer who has admitted his crime, about whom there is no doubt, like Richard Dahmer?

I disapprove of this because my personal moral system forbids the intentional taking of a human life, other than when the failure to do so would result in the near certain loss of more human life. Jeffrey Dahmer ceased to be a threat to human life when he was imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole.

 

My personal moral system does not permit me to dehumanize people (declare them not-human-life, permitting me to kill them) because of their actions, even when those actions are horrendous. While my moral system may not place me in a clear majority of people in the US or the world, it is one shared by at least a sizable minority.

 

I think its important to understand that morality, while feeling absolute and certain to us who use it in forming opinions and making decisions, is actually mutable and tentative. Centuries ago, many reasonable people found little wrong in killing one another over disagreements of issues as abstract as Math, and enjoyed legal sanction to do so (legal dueling). In past and present times, people who believed themselves morally comfortable with sanctioned or unsanctioned killing have discovered they actually opposed, and people who believed themselves opposed, that they were actually comfortable with killing. Just as it seems there will always be many different moral systems held by people, it seems to me that there will always be people on opposite sides of the debate over capitol punishment.

 

:eek: Please answer me this question, questor: if someone you loved became mentally unbalanced and brutally murdered two or more people, would you be for their execution?

 

This is not a hypothetical question for me, as a long-time friend, and former classmate and lover of mine actually did just that. I remain relieved that she was not executed, and may in the future overcome her mental illness and be allowed to return to society as a productive member, which she was for several years before her breakdown and crimes.

[Boerseun]

let's bring it close to home. if a criminal broke into your home and raped your wife or daughter then stabbed them repeatedly severing their head from their body and you happened to arrive as he was finishing the job, so there was no doubt of the identity, you would still vote for incarceration, so this monster could perhaps be paroled to do this to another family?

Actually, yes. I would go for incarceration. I cannot see any instance which would give a State the power to decide which individual should live and which should die. Judging purely from my personal set of morals, of course. You should not kill. And, in consequence, the government you elected, should not have the power to kill, either. No wars. No executions.

 

Peace, brother...

[goku]

Great reply, Craig.

 

Texas and Bush have still been very vocal and active advocated of the death penalty. Bush refused many stays of execution for juveniles while gov, and even went on TV mocking Carla Faye Tucker prior to her execution. Bush also likes to kill the retards too.

another bush basher?

[CraigD]

another bush basher?

I wouldn’t call myself a Bush basher – there seem to be plenty of people interested in that job, with no need of my help. Having voted against him twice in an all-or-nothing state he lost both times, I think I’ve pretty much exhausted my avenues of political expression for now.

 

I just don’t much like the Kenebunkport, Andy, Yaley, fake hayseed son of a… woman named Barbara. :confused:

[goku]

the only problem with the death penality is that it isn't used enough.

you say let them be raped in prison for life, that's cruel. kill'em and be done with it.

[goku]

Actually, yes. I would go for incarceration. I cannot see any instance which would give a State the power to decide which individual should live and which should die. Judging purely from my personal set of morals, of course. You should not kill. And, in consequence, the government you elected, should not have the power to kill, either. No wars. No executions.

so the killers have the power to take a life?

no wars?

no executions?

snap back to reality, oops there goes..................the whole nation.

evolution says the strong will survive, evolutionists say can't we all just get along.

do they not hear what they're preaching?

 

you're right, everyone should be able to get along, but we can't. therefore it's kill or be killed, henice war!

 

 

ecclesiastes 3:1

to every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven

ecclesiastes 3:8

a time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

:confused:

[questor]

Craig, if your friend was as fiendish as Dahmer, i would certainly send her to her reward.

in fact, Dahmer got his reward when a fellow inmate beat him to death. if she was acquitted because of mental problems, that is usually extenuating circumstances. each case must be considered on its own merit. i am not for war or

executing for the pleasure of it. i am for getting rid of monsters and barbaric murderers.

only those who are guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt.

[Fishteacher73]

another bush basher?

I had to deal with the moron destroying Texas Schools and executing mentally retarded people for four years before he took the presidency. Yes, I bash Bush. He is a tool and oblivious to the consequences of his actions. An bull in a china shop has better chances in succeeding than this putz in the presidency...and with more finesse. His roll in hellping move Texas into the forefront in the states as executioner was unprecidented. Harris county (the county in which Houston is in) has a higher number of executions than most STATES. Dallas had the highest crime rate in the US for 2004.

 

For a man that feels we should "Err on the side of life", he sure liked to kill...

[questor]

Fish, i can see that you like many criminals more than you like Bush. that seems to be a statement of the liberal community. i think a lot of people would prefer not to have police protection or military protection ( unless of course they are attacked), in which case i would assume those of you who hate police would expect them to take the bullet for you. would one of you anti-capital punishment folks explain how you justify killing innocent fetuses, but can't bear to execute a vicious murderer?

[Rincewind]

so the killers have the power to take a life?

Everyone has the power to take a life. Choosing not to do so is what makes us civilised human beings. If the State takes a life on my behalf, it demeans itself and me.

[IrishEyes]

would one of you anti-capital punishment folks explain how you justify killing innocent fetuses, but can't bear to execute a vicious murderer?

They are two totally different subjects, and should be addressed as such. If this is actually something that you would like to pursue, please start a topic on this. Do NOT get this thread any more sidetracked by dragging in abortion. :confused:

 

(And yes, this is me acting as an ADMINISTRATOR right now! :confused: )

[questor]

Rincewind, would you let someone kill you without defending yourself? would you kill rather than be killed?

[Rincewind]

Rincewind, would you let someone kill you without defending yourself? would you kill rather than be killed?

Sorry, I thought this discussion was about capital punishment. You could hardly call capital punishment self defence, unless you subscribe to the theories of the Welsh art of Llap-Goch* as our current world "leaders" seem to do.

 

But, to answer your question fairly; as a young man, I would have given you an unequivocal "yes" to that question.** Now I'm older and a father, I'm not so sure.

 

 

*Monty Python reference there.* :confused:

 

**Edit for clarification of my rather ambiguous answer: my "yes" is meant to address the issue that I would rather be killed than kill another. I would, however, defend myself, although not intentionally lethally.

[questor]

do i understand that you would kill someone to save yourself or your child ? you might say you would be executing someone for ''just cause'' ?

[Rincewind]

do i understand that you would kill someone to save yourself or your child ? you might say you would be executing someone for ''just cause'' ?

That's why I said I'm no longer so sure. I really don't know. My mind says I wouldn't, but then my natural protective reactions may take over under the duress of a real threat; "in the heat of the moment" if you like.

 

And it wouldn't be execution. Execution is the deliberate, premeditated taking of a life, and, in my opinion, not the action of a civilised person or society.

[questor]

this always seems to devolve into semantics.

if you kill in self defense, the agressor dies. you made a chioce that your life was worth more than his. you had to make an instant decision, but someone dies.

the state also has a decision to make. a person kills another from rage, greed,accident or meanness. the act of murder was premeditated. the dead person had no chance to choose to defend himself. does the state have the right to execute the murderer for the crime as you had the right to execute (kill) someone in your own defense.?