Life sentence of 80 years for 1 inmate costs approximately $4,000,000 in taxpayer monies.

It's way too expensive to keep prisoners alive who are serving life sentences. They also get full healthcare.

Exterminate the cretins and do away with victimless crimes.

Just wasteful an unnecessary usage of tax dollars.

I said I would'nt argue but I'm gonna try to clear things up for you.

This is me trying to inform and teach you something from Christian perspective since you mentioned "An eye for an eye"

That concept is used in the context of Justice.... not in a general useage which you have done and even in general usage it makes sense.

Terms to know...

Kill = This is a word that is general. It has no indication of good of evil. It literally just meanings... taking away of life.

Murder = This word is a type of killing. It means taking away life for evil reasons.

Execute = This word is another type of killing. It means taking away life based on making justice and punishment.

The executioner isn't murdering or "killing" as you put it. The executioner is doing justice. Please keep reading as this next example will surely make sense if your still not understanding it...

Example

Remember the terms

Bob murders Tim because he wanted to steal Tim's money.

Bob has clearly taken 1 life for evil reasons. He is a murderer.

Bob gets caught and is ready to be executed as the evidence and legal system (ideally) has shown him guilty.

Taking an "eye for an eye" into account... Bob has murdered and is in debt of 1 life.

The executioner takes away Bob's life because this is what Justice demands. (Bob owes 1 life because of the concept of Justice, "An eye for an eye") The executioner (ideally) has no evil intentions. So he or she is executing, not murdering.

Keep in mind Bob owes one life.

Bob gets executed.

"An eye for an eye" has been fullfilled. Justice has been served.

Its actually very simple but people confuse what killing means with actual moral killing which is called execution. (also, I think its fine to kill or I suppose you can call it executing if your defending yourself from life threatening situations.. like from a murderer named Bob) So, you see the executioner was not murdering... he was giving Bob what he deserved.

I'd also like to comment on what you said... about people getting killed by mistake. I'll copy and paste what I said earlier to someone else....

"That's sad.

I think that problem is the legal system processing who is to be executed and who is not to be executed. Capital Punishment is not "something" to blame for mistakes like that. Capital Punishment isn't really a "something" at all. lol Its a concept, an idea... a tool.

Captial Punishment is a tool. And it is a tool in the hands of the legal system.

While the legal system will never be perfect because of human error... the goal should be perfection.

Anyways, I don't know a lot about the legal system but I would blame lawyers to definetly have a piece of the blame for that. I can't help but think that they can be serious key players in practicing justice by exposing tue criminals instead of defending them when the have the chance."

So, you see Capital Punishment is not to be "blamed" for mistakes the legal system makes... its the legal system's fault. I think the UK made a mistake in taking away Captial Punishment if that's the reasoning for the UK people's decision to get rid of Captial Punishment.

When you bring in money into this topic... I think that's very low of you or anyone to bring in money. This has to do with something higher than money. This is justice. And doing what is correct is much more important than money and what is a "humane" way to execute someone? There is no such thing as a "humane" way of doing things. Who defines "humane?" Considering the wording of that word, the "humane" way of doing something is whatever humans do. I can't help but think that concept literally came out of nowhere... and people out there use it. Its strange.

I think what you really looking for is... what is the correct way to execute someone. And for myself, God defines the correct way. And I think God would want us first to look inside ourselves. What are our intentions? So, executing someone should be done for completing justice... not the enjoyment of death. It should be done that kind of mind set. With the mind-set of doing what is correc which is to bring justice, to punish evil acts.

I'll leave it at that. I know I went into I guess "agueing" mode but I won't reply in this line of conversation to you anymore. I'm trying to avoid arguing in this thread.

I know it is your opinion but i don't agree with that mentality. Also, wouldn't you go to hell for killing someone (i presume you are Christian). 

1. You say the executioner isn't murdering the murder but they are doing the exact same action as a murderer. Killing. It's just if the executioner or even a soldier did the killing, it is somehow accepted by the law as right when it is still morally unjustified regardless in any circumstances. I know the executioner has no real evil intentions but seriously why would anyone in their right mind want to kill another person? In some ways, the state could be seen to enacting revenge

2. It doesn't matter if the death penalty remained, innocents will always be killed. It's just a fact of the matter, as humans don't know perfection. Also, you said in your first point that "justice would be served" but would it if you killed the wrong person? Also, something else to  consider is the fairness of the law system. In some countries, there is no consideration for human rights (you can't even speak out against the state in some countries) and the state has total control. There needs to a line somewhere and that's persuming the law is fair like it seems to be in the west. I think if anything, the UK got to a point where it's government didn't want to end people's lives anymore. It's not good to kill people if there is not a good enough reason for it

3. You may say that but why would spend a lot of money on something that will return nothing to the economy. Why spend so much on executing someone when that money can be used on education, healthcare or just the economic development of a country? The amount of crime is linked to the state of the economy and quality of people's lives, which is why you will find that the poor commit far more crimes as they are hit more by the economy. 

4. By "humane", i mean kill them in a way that is the least painful to them. Stuff like lethal injection and hanging if it's done right so it instantly kills them are what i would consider "humane". But if look at the history there are 100's of methods of capital punishment which are just horrible. Stuff like stoning and "hung, draw and quartered" are cheap to achieve but are sadistic ways to kill someone in the name of justice. Here are some others, some still used today ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_methods_of_capital_punishment. Also, who and where is this god? Sorry, i don't believe in it. It all seems made up to me. 

Overall, i don't agree with you as you can tell but i respect your opinion. I welcome debate 

Short of penal law abolitionism I don't think there's any legal system who follows relative punishment as you mentioned. Take civil law for instance - if you commit a civil offense, it will not be enough that the damage is properly restored and the whole thing brought back to its original state - you'll get a fine too. The legal system is avenged because otherwise there would be no reason for people to refrain from commiting illegal acts if the only consequence was the chance of failing. Basically penal law will follow the same line of reasoning except it will attack your freedom instead of your wallet.

Also, besides the fact there's often no way to return to the original state after a criminal offense, the penal law in theory should embrace the punishment of an outrage to the very social contract and that makes it even more serious. You could say there's a lot of things people take for granted and what threatens them is often held in check the subconscious effect of a punishing legal system.

It is more efficient (or it would be if we were committed to making it efficient. As Kasz pointed out, our current system of many appeals makes it costlier than just putting them away forever.

Ideally, the criminal system should be focused upon rehabilitation. Isolate the sociopaths, the really, incurably rotten people, have them classed as a mental disease and keep them interned for life or treated with medication as needed. The ones who aren't mentally problematic should just be re-trained.

I don't mind the idea of privatizing prisons, but even privatized (by having contractors manage them) prisons should absolutely *not* be working for a profit, but should rather be like "involuntary vocational rehabilitation" forcing the inmates (who aren't incurable sociopaths) to develop a skill that will allow them to live as productive citizens.

Punishments should be focused on real-world solutions, too, for non-violent or non-sexual crimes, like, say, Bernie Madoff, who should just be forced to give up all of his assets to the people he scammed, and to keep working for the purpose of repaying them rather than just being stuck in jail.

I'm completely against it. I find it to be hypocritical and useless, not to mention the fact that applying it means eventually killing an innocent, as the judicial system is inherently imperfect, as we all humans are. One innocent alone is too much for me.

It's hypocritical because the same system that defends the value of life, arguing that killing is wrong regardless of the reason (with the sole exception of self-defense), ends up killing people systematically in the name of "justice", with the excuses of "balancing things out", saving money and/or making an example of it. All excuses that many criminals could argue in their defense...

It's useless because it doesn't do anything to repair the damage done, just satisfy a (in my opinion, negative) desire of revenge people might have, with the notions of being a deterrent and/or a way to save money being rather questionable at best. And if the latter were actually true, it wouldn't be a valid excuse to me, as I don't put a price in someone's life. It really seems some people nowadays have forgotten that the economy is supposed to work for us, not us for it...

The way I see it, the purpose of punishment regarding the law should be to prevent further damage and rehabilitate the infractor as much as possible. To be positive and productive, rather than an institutionalized form of revenge to satiate society's bloodthirst. To lead by example, rather than by fear or force. And if the loss of freedom is not enough deterrent to prevent crime, then maybe it's time to truly focus on dealing with the actual issues that cause violence, instead of just continuing to follow the same tired strategy, trying to come up with more deterrents which end up inflicting as much pain and suffering as the actions we seek to end.

Wow, it's very clear you are governed by your emotions instead of rational thought.

Not really much more to say.

Execute murderers.

That used to happen here (South Africa) and since they've stopped (1994 - Apartheid ended) the country has turned to shit. Some places are so dangerous you can't go there.

Fucking idiots are too stupid and have too small balls to make the right decisions.

And for the love of God castrate rapists. JFC is it so hard to figure out.

Sterilize people with 2+ children from the ghettos while your at it.

One of the areas I really respect Arabian countries.

Sometimes I just want to gtfo of this god forsaken Africa.

why would you choose a random comment in the bible like "eye for an eye" over an actual commandment "though shalt not kill" ?

I'm sorry, but from my perspective to argue in favor of capital punishment by citing the bible is nothing but folly

And you people from Scandinavia and Germany can keep your opinions to yourselves. I've debated this enough with you, and you don't know jack shit about crime, so you have no right to say anything.

You come here to try and "save" Africa with your pathetic NGOs but just end up leaving after having fucked a few black girls/guys because you're so "open minded". You're just wasting your governments money.

The people here don't need education, they need to live in a crime free environment.