By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - VGC Debate/Poll: The Death Penalty

Kasz216 said:
tombi123 said:
Under no circumstances should the death penalty be used. The state cannot decide to kill people. Although I am way way way more liberal on this particular debate then most people. I think 99% of criminals should be in rehabilitation not jail.

Anti death penalty to the max.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War

As for rehibilitation.  That's an interesting one.

Someone who kills their wife in a fit of rage because they catch them in bed with another man.

They aren't going to do that again obviously... unless there is the very rare chance they get another wife who cheats on them.

So what... Anger management?   How do you tell if someone is rehabilitated... if this is the only chance they've snapped?

You couldn't just have them get away with killing their wives could you?

I don't think that there should be war either, I think that no country should ever attack another - it can always be sorted out without weapons in the end. However defending your country once attacked is different, its the same as self-defence as opposed to assault.

Also I believe that rehabilitation is more important than punishment but both are nessecary. If somebody gets a 20 year jail sentence they shouldn't just be locked up for that time, during that time the prison system should make it as unlikely as possible that they re-offend once released.



Around the Network

i support the death penalty



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

MrBubbles said:
i support the death penalty

That makes me feel much better about the death penalty...the guy who thinks Obama is the anti-christ thinks it is a good idea...

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

anti



I'm pro death penalty. Anything over 20 years prison time should be commuted to death.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

Around the Network
Torillian said:
I am Pro, I believe that there are some people that are so evil and maladjusted that they will never feel remorse for their actions while rotting in prison, and don't deserve to be given free food and living. I am perfectly fine with these people being killed, and I understand that the system can't be perfect, there will be mistakes, but I'm willing to live with those.

 

WTF?! That's sick.



Tyrannical said:
I'm pro death penalty. Anything over 20 years prison time should be commuted to death.

 

That is possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard someone say.  Many non-violent crimes such as possession of certain drugs can get you more than twenty years in prison.  Are you suggesting that people who pose no real threat to society should be arbitrarily sentenced to death simply because they are sentenced to 20 years in prison?

There is a little thing called the Constitution that would make what you suggest unconstitutional.

Amendment 5:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

What you are suggesting is about as far from due process as you can get.  Its simply an arbitrary decision to choose whether or not people live or die.

Amendment 8:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Its pretty cruel and unusual for the punishment to so excessively outweigh relatively minor crimes.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
tombi123 said:
Under no circumstances should the death penalty be used. The state cannot decide to kill people. Although I am way way way more liberal on this particular debate then most people. I think 99% of criminals should be in rehabilitation not jail.

Anti death penalty to the max.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War

As for rehibilitation.  That's an interesting one.

Someone who kills their wife in a fit of rage because they catch them in bed with another man.

They aren't going to do that again obviously... unless there is the very rare chance they get another wife who cheats on them.

So what... Anger management?   How do you tell if someone is rehabilitated... if this is the only chance they've snapped?

You couldn't just have them get away with killing their wives could you?

I don't think that there should be war either, I think that no country should ever attack another - it can always be sorted out without weapons in the end. However defending your country once attacked is different, its the same as self-defence as opposed to assault.

Also I believe that rehabilitation is more important than punishment but both are nessecary. If somebody gets a 20 year jail sentence they shouldn't just be locked up for that time, during that time the prison system should make it as unlikely as possible that they re-offend once released.

It's cool to be against war in theory.  In practice it ends up with you being invaded though.

 



Its pretty cruel and unusual for the punishment to so excessively outweigh relatively minor crimes.

You don't get 20 years for minor crimes. It would be like those "three strikes" laws, except you get 20 years and you're out.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

akuma587 said:
Tyrannical said:
I'm pro death penalty. Anything over 20 years prison time should be commuted to death.

 

That is possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard someone say.  Many non-violent crimes such as possession of certain drugs can get you more than twenty years in prison.  Are you suggesting that people who pose no real threat to society should be arbitrarily sentenced to death simply because they are sentenced to 20 years in prison?

There is a little thing called the Constitution that would make what you suggest unconstitutional.

Amendment 5:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

What you are suggesting is about as far from due process as you can get.  Its simply an arbitrary decision to choose whether or not people live or die.

Amendment 8:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Its pretty cruel and unusual for the punishment to so excessively outweigh relatively minor crimes.

Not only that, but in most cases the death penalty ends up being considerably more expensive than putting a person in a cell for the rest of their life.

I'm in no way trying to reduce this serious punishment to a mere economic matter. Its just that killing everyone who has a sentence of over 20 years would costs states a massive amount of money.

For the record I'm against, but not just because I'm a cheapskate.