Moderator: coldharvest
patriot wrote:Yes, quite convienant...
So, Patriot. Lets say we caught Osama Bin Laden alive.
You are saying that it would be immoral to sentence him to death and execute him?
Rob, you are saying it would be immoral, because Osama might actually be innocent?
In answer to your question Rob, I think the burden of proof should be higher in death penalty sentences than in life imprisonment.
Are there any actual statistics to show that capital punishment deters crime?
And Kilroy -- the reason it DOES need to be answered is due to two important points:
1. Discretion has increasingly been expunged from the US judicial system due to mandatory sentancing laws.
2. The reason why tougher sentances have been pushed on juvenile offenders has largely been because they ostensibly realize what comprises right and wrong. Understanding what is right or wrong is something that is not limited to just juveniles -- children are fairly capable moral beings too, thus in principle could be executed if undertanding of right or wrong is the standard we are using to determine if execution is appropriate.
Tarkan wrote:Like, if you take the two 11 year olds in Britain that lured the 4 year old away from the mall then bashed his head in with a rock, I have to wonder how you think society benefits from them being released at 18, which they will be. And if they are never released, how society benefits from permanently locking up two horrible victimizers in a juvenile institution where they will undoubtedly victimize other juveniles who haven't committed murder and are rehabilitatable, and then graduating to adult prison where they will get to do the same. Some people, children even, really do deserve to die for their actions.
if this is the question you're talking about rob, here's my take. capital punishment is not necesserily about detterence. it's about punishment.
Kilroy wrote:i am in favor of having incredibly strict standards before one is made eligible for execution, and even stricter ones for juviniles. however, i feel the option for the ultimate punishment must be left open.
patriot wrote:I think it is foolish to let them out or to try and reabilatate them. They don't deserve to be reabilitated
Quote:
if this is the question you're talking about rob, here's my take. capital punishment is not necesserily about detterence. it's about punishment.
So it's about punishment? Or revenge? I heard you say earlier that these people have no chance of becoming functional members of society, so they deserve to die
Kilroy wrote:
i am in favor of having incredibly strict standards before one is made eligible for execution, and even stricter ones for juviniles. however, i feel the option for the ultimate punishment must be left open.
Why? What purpose does it serve?
My point (for people who actually want to debate MY point) is that sometimes they get it wrong. Getting it wrong even once on a capital punishment crime is too many.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests