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

Forums - Politics Discussion - Death sentence. Yes or no?

Tagged games:

Qwark on 31 July 2015
generic-user-1 said:
Qwark said:
Puppyroach said:
Qwark said:
WoodenPints said:

I'm for it. letting them jail out will likely cost more innocent lives and keeping them in jail can cost a lot which could be put into benefiting the general population.


As an European )Dutch' where the death sentence is forbidden for quite soe time I completely agree, why would you want to keep an insane serial killer or psychopatic terrorist alive, just because he is a human.

If another animal so much as touch or is suspected to have hurt another human being it is getting killed, so if some sick bastard kills, torture and rapes multiple humans or children I don´t see a problem, evidence must be hard and cristal clear. 

So you think it is justified to take lives? Teaching people that killing is wrong by killing people?


Well some psycho's are to far gone, take mr Breivic for instance or Sadam Hussein. Mr Assad and leaders of IS have caused to much pain. And I would rather see serial killers and psychotic terrorist and mass pedophiles dead than coming free. Lifetime doesn't exist in the Netherlands 30 year tops, less with good behaviour. It shouldn't be a regular penalty by any means, but I believe that in a few cases the dead penalty is the best penalty.

 

Btw if a dog bites someone, even out of self defense or someone during tresspassing it gets put down. Is that any bit fair.

 

It's not okay to take lives and doing so multiple times will put your own live at risc.

People fear dead, and fear is as pain an excellent teacher dead so killing them is a good method or shouldn't we lock kidnappers, same principle. 

well, death penalty in extrem cases is maybe a okayish idea, some people deserve it. BUT, it shouldnt be part of the normal law.

killing people just doesnt work...  look at crime rates in the us and in europe, the us has death penalty, europe hasnt. and its the us with huge gang problems and millions of prisoners, not europe...


I am saying it should only be used in extreme cases. But the crime rated in US would be much lower with fewer Guns,  I should make a forum about that some day.  Back to topic it should only be allowed in extreme cases and can only be given by the highest judge, and the prime minister and the minister of just ice. Not by any judge.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Around the Network
NoGenlefBhind on 31 July 2015

ACE, it ties into the death penalty where personal morals are concerned, so it's very much on topic. When someone chooses to argue with you, obviously the more you know about 'why' they think what they do, the better prepared you are to answer them and assert your own, differing viewpoint.
I believe, as I do with most people, that yours and Sundin's anit-death penalty position, is partially based on some religious or spiritual underpinnings. And I still do. People who state they are agnostic come from religious backgrounds and still struggle with religious principles, they were taught to believe but now, being older, find themselves having a real hard time with the common sense of it all. That pretty much explains you.
I stated you were religious or at the very least spiritual, you said I was wrong about that.. which led me to ask you directly. So while you may not follow or practice any type of organized religion presently, your claim to being agnostic betrays the religious background you're now at the crossroads of explaining with reason, a place where people go,... "Well, I'm really not sure if there's a god, I mean it doesn't seem possible, but again, I just don't know".. that's what an agnostic is.
So as much as it annoys you, because we don't know each other, I'm gonna go ahead and stick with my assertion that the religious sludge still adhering to the various parts of your brain is partially responsible for your opinion on the death penalty, as in..
'What if there IS a god and I've been running around advocating the murder of people'
Now you wanna try telling me I'm wrong again, feel free, but that honestly is a pointless endeavor because I'm not. There's a reason people think the particular way they do and, depending on the subject, it's often pretty easy to find the solid mathematics behind it..



WC4Life on 31 July 2015

This is such an interesting question. I'm not in the mood to think it over but it always comes down to this conflict for me...

I feel some people should be punished with death
I feel some people should get lifetime prison instead of death sentence
I feel some people should get tortured instead of lifetime prison or death sentence
I feel some people should get second chance at life instead of lifetime prison or death sentence

It depends a lot and I've noticed I cannot take this objective unbiased role in this, it is impossible to me as a human. It is easy to cling to human ethics when you are not part of the crime at all. What if something happened to you? What if you were tied to a post and had to watch someone rape your child and kill him/her right infront of your eyes? Then you somehow freed yourself and got a hold of shotgun? What would you do? It would take somes buddha level of acceptance to control yourself, beliefs and ethics would come crashing down in an instant, that's the real world. In the end human ethics are nothing but temporary artificial guidelines, for me.



I cannot imagine toilet-free life.

Kebabs have a unique attribute compared to other consumables. To unlock this effect you need to wolf down a big ass kebab really fast, like under 10 minutes or so and wait for the effect to kick in. If done correctly your movements should feel unbelievably heavy to the point where you literally cannot move at all.

-Downtown Alanya Kebab magazine issue no.198

A_C_E on 31 July 2015
NoGenlefBhind said:
ACE, it ties into the death penalty where personal morals are concerned, so it's very much on topic. When someone chooses to argue with you, obviously the more you know about 'why' they think what they do, the better prepared you are to answer them and assert your own, differing viewpoint.
I believe, as I do with most people, that yours and Sundin's anit-death penalty position, is partially based on some religious or spiritual underpinnings. And I still do. People who state they are agnostic come from religious backgrounds and still struggle with religious principles, they were taught to believe but now, being older, find themselves having a real hard time with the common sense of it all. That pretty much explains you.
I stated you were religious or at the very least spiritual, you said I was wrong about that.. which led me to ask you directly. So while you may not follow or practice any type of organized religion presently, your claim to being agnostic betrays the religious background you're now at the crossroads of explaining with reason, a place where people go,... "Well, I'm really not sure if there's a god, I mean it doesn't seem possible, but again, I just don't know".. that's what an agnostic is.
So as much as it annoys you, because we don't know each other, I'm gonna go ahead and stick with my assertion that the religious sludge still adhering to the various parts of your brain is partially responsible for your opinion on the death penalty, as in..
'What if there IS a god and I've been running around advocating the murder of people'
Now you wanna try telling me I'm wrong again, feel free, but that honestly is a pointless endeavor because I'm not. There's a reason people think the particular way they do and, depending on the subject, it's often pretty easy to find the solid mathematics behind it..

Nope. Never been religious, and have never had a religious or spiritual background. You are saying that my morals are tied to some religious beliefs but there is no evidence, literally zero evidence that suggests that morals are tied to religious beliefs. In fact its the people who are religious who think that if you are an atheist you have no moral values. This view of religion is a glove that fits you better my good sir.

I am not the one who came up with the ladder of religious terms, atheist, agnostic, ignostic etc...I only told you what society would classify me as. I don't believe there is a god and I don't claim to know the answer either but I am more than willing to bet that god does not exist. If I sound religious or spiritual then your kind of an amusing individual, lol.



generic-user-1 on 31 July 2015
NoGenlefBhind said:
ACE, it ties into the death penalty where personal morals are concerned, so it's very much on topic. When someone chooses to argue with you, obviously the more you know about 'why' they think what they do, the better prepared you are to answer them and assert your own, differing viewpoint.
I believe, as I do with most people, that yours and Sundin's anit-death penalty position, is partially based on some religious or spiritual underpinnings. And I still do. People who state they are agnostic come from religious backgrounds and still struggle with religious principles, they were taught to believe but now, being older, find themselves having a real hard time with the common sense of it all. That pretty much explains you.
I stated you were religious or at the very least spiritual, you said I was wrong about that.. which led me to ask you directly. So while you may not follow or practice any type of organized religion presently, your claim to being agnostic betrays the religious background you're now at the crossroads of explaining with reason, a place where people go,... "Well, I'm really not sure if there's a god, I mean it doesn't seem possible, but again, I just don't know".. that's what an agnostic is.
So as much as it annoys you, because we don't know each other, I'm gonna go ahead and stick with my assertion that the religious sludge still adhering to the various parts of your brain is partially responsible for your opinion on the death penalty, as in..
'What if there IS a god and I've been running around advocating the murder of people'
Now you wanna try telling me I'm wrong again, feel free, but that honestly is a pointless endeavor because I'm not. There's a reason people think the particular way they do and, depending on the subject, it's often pretty easy to find the solid mathematics behind it..


what kind of religion is against death penalty?   and no, god realy likes the stoning of people, did you know that it is a sin thats punished with death to wear cloth of to different fibers? or that you can sell your daughter?



Around the Network
NoGenlefBhind on 31 July 2015

ACE, here's a post of yours from 2013 where you talk about 'our souls':

This guy has issues. This guy thinks science states that the universe is perfect when in fact its the Bible that states that people's souls become perfect when they reach heaven. Where in any study of science does it explain the universe as being perfect and why does this guy keep mentioning that science says so? Entropy dictates chaos with no creater/controller, rather reaction. Entropy is a scientific study.
Then this guy starts talking about our souls as if there is an official scientific field that has ever found a soul. The soul according to science doesn't actually exist. How we think and feel and make decisions can all be explained in other scientific means.
There's so much I want to say and I wish I could talk to this fact/word-spinner in real life and just call out his fake ass. I would own this guy in a real discussion.

What you wrote more than contradicts your statement about not having a spiritual side, which in essence is no different than our species more conventional religious beliefs.
You said 'our souls', your words, those are your words ACE, whereas if what you're trying to tell me above were actually true, you would have disassociated yourself and said 'the soul'
I know this contingent on semantics, but either way, stop lying to me because I'm smart enough to catch you doing it.
You believe we have a soul, therefore you have a spiritually based belief to help explain our existence and that belief is a component of your viewpoint on the death penalty.
Exactly like I've already explained to you.



sundin13 on 31 July 2015
NoGenlefBhind said:
I believe, as I do with most people, that yours and Sundin's anit-death penalty position, is partially based on some religious or spiritual underpinnings. And I still do. People who state they are agnostic come from religious backgrounds and still struggle with religious principles, they were taught to believe but now, being older, find themselves having a real hard time with the common sense of it all. That pretty much explains you.


As you said in your first point, my position on the death penalty is based mostly in objective reasoning. I cannot see a logical reason to be pro death penalty, and I can see many reasons to be anti-death penalty. The only substantial pro death penalty argument is emotion or revenge, which I do not accept to be a valid argument in the discussion of legal matters. Religion has absolutely nothing to do my opinion on the matter.

As for your "proof" that Ace is religious, he seems to be quite clearly dismissing the concept of "souls". "The soul according to science does not exist". Are you even reading what you are posting? To imply that post has anything to do with Ace being spiritual is laughable.



Teeqoz on 31 July 2015
NoGenlefBhind said:
ACE, it ties into the death penalty where personal morals are concerned, so it's very much on topic. When someone chooses to argue with you, obviously the more you know about 'why' they think what they do, the better prepared you are to answer them and assert your own, differing viewpoint.
I believe, as I do with most people, that yours and Sundin's anit-death penalty position, is partially based on some religious or spiritual underpinnings. And I still do. People who state they are agnostic come from religious backgrounds and still struggle with religious principles, they were taught to believe but now, being older, find themselves having a real hard time with the common sense of it all. That pretty much explains you.
I stated you were religious or at the very least spiritual, you said I was wrong about that.. which led me to ask you directly. So while you may not follow or practice any type of organized religion presently, your claim to being agnostic betrays the religious background you're now at the crossroads of explaining with reason, a place where people go,... "Well, I'm really not sure if there's a god, I mean it doesn't seem possible, but again, I just don't know".. that's what an agnostic is.
So as much as it annoys you, because we don't know each other, I'm gonna go ahead and stick with my assertion that the religious sludge still adhering to the various parts of your brain is partially responsible for your opinion on the death penalty, as in..
'What if there IS a god and I've been running around advocating the murder of people'
Now you wanna try telling me I'm wrong again, feel free, but that honestly is a pointless endeavor because I'm not. There's a reason people think the particular way they do and, depending on the subject, it's often pretty easy to find the solid mathematics behind it..


No man, an agnostic is a person that claims that we cannot know if there is a God or not, but he also says he doesn't believe in a God, which makes him an agnostic atheist = "I don't believe in a God, but since it is literally impossible to disprove the existence of a God, I acknowledge that we can't know for sure". There is no such thing as just "agnostic", or just "atheist". You have to use both of those words to make any sense of it.

Also holy shieeeeet that was a lot of assumptions in one post. You're even saying you're sure you're right, which, if anything, makes you more likely to be a religious (gnostic theist) than ACE...

Also, the post you quoted where ACE talks about "our souls", if you'd actually bother to read the post, not just jump at the fact that he mentions "people's souls", you'd see that he actually denies the existence of a soul, and that he's arguing against it, which if anything, proves that he is not spiritual. Lol



slab_of_bacon on 31 July 2015

I don't think anyone has the right to decide if another dies. Maybe murders could be banished to Somalia or some other undesirable place.



Feel free to check out my stream on twitch 

NoGenlefBhind on 31 July 2015

sundin, you can keep trying to tell me different, but both you and ACE have either conventional, religious held beliefs or spiritually held beliefs that color your opinion on the death penalty. You know it, he knows it, and I know it.
You both think we, as individuals, have a soul.
Both of you do.
Did you take the time to read my post about Shasta Groene?
You believe that man should be kept alive??

you know what, better still.. don't.
this is all rather pointless.
we disagree and none of us are actually 'right'
far too often people treat message boards as a 'mental weight room' where no one wants to admit what exercises they can't do.
both you guys take care. enjoy the games.