The death penalty - for or agains?
by 
- Shining_brow
- Posts：7773
- Emperor
Easy question, not so easy answer (sometimes).
I am (CONDITIONALLY) for it! Conditions being: virtually NO chance of it being the wrong person convicted, and it's a serious enough crime to warrant it.
Though, in saying that, I am uncertain about just how lax China seems to be in handing out the death penalty willy-nilly. Unfortunately, though, it doesn't seem (IMHO) tough enough on other crimes (nor, obviously, in trying to do anything about other crimes... also IMHO, all law-enforcement is about here is the occasional bit of face... or subjugation of people).
So, since we have a long-running thread on prostitution, I thought I'd put this one up as well!
Never argue with fools or idiots - they will only bring you down to their level.
Re: The death penalty - for or agains?
hehe, when I first read this I thought it said "The death penalty - for orgasms?"
And yes, I support it!
"People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage. Intellectual myopia, often called stupidity, is no doubt a reason." -- J.K. Galbraith
Re: The death penalty - for or agains?
No way. History has shown that many innocent people have been wrongly sentenced to death and I'm only talking about the West. We have no idea how many people get wrongfully convicted here because everything's behind closed doors. And the question isn't just whether they committed the crime or not, the real question is whether many of the crimes here are even serious enough to justify taking away someone's life. People with a few grams of heroine for personal use could get the death sentence for example which I really don't think justifies killing someone. I am against it as two wrongs don't make a right.
Re: The death penalty - for or agains?
For it
and as you say CONDITIONALLY
for example that nasty piece of work in Norway
or anyone who kills a police officer
a person or persons who plot or carry out a terrorist act
there a few others that pertain to despicable acts toward children that I'm not going into
however it should be proven beyond all doubt.
and this is what happens when I drink
Re: The death penalty - for or agains?
>Redaria wrote:
No way. History has shown that many innocent people have been wrongly sentenced to death and I'm only talking about the West. We have no idea how many people get wrongfully convicted here because everything's behind closed doors. And the question isn't just whether they committed the crime or not, the real question is whether many of the crimes here are even serious enough to justify taking away someone's life. People with a few grams of heroine for personal use could get the death sentence for example which I really don't think justifies killing someone. I am against it as two wrongs don't make a right.
I do agree that killing is wrong Redaria! God should be the judge! What happened already happened and history cannot rewind itself and make changes. Nobody has been able to build a time machine so killing someone for killing another just seems farfetched. Afterall someone has to kill the killer so that makes two killers the only difference is one is on the law which is not always right. You know what they say once you do something once people are people and they too can get an addiction and enjoy doing it. It could probably even cause the person that has to kill the killer to be disturbing in the public. Afterall if someone asks that person that has to pull the switch or has to shoot the gun etc., what they do for a living then of course they have no other choice but to say they kill convicted killers.
Leo