Would you do the same if you had some time to reflect? If you'd read in the evening paper that the guy had been arrested, would you go to the police station and organize a lynch mob?
A solid reason for being against capital punishment, methinks.
Would you do the same if you had some time to reflect? If you'd read in the evening paper that the guy had been arrested, would you go to the police station and organize a lynch mob?
A solid reason for being against capital punishment, methinks.
Anybody who is of sound mind would be repulsed by stuff like that, but for whatever reason it seems I have more of a detachment from those sorts of events than you do. I'm not suggesting that I'm especially cool or aloof - a lot of things make me angry (especially corruption and injustice), I just don't ever really "see red". Or at least not when presented with situations that don't personally affect me. Anyway it's probably getting a bit off-topic to dwell on deep personal feelings or reactive behaviours.
Well, only you know which one is the stronger motive for you, but it's very honest of you to admit that revenge is a part of it.
Anyway, it's 8:25, and I've got an appointment in the pub at 9pm to argue with a friend of mine about probably much more trivial issues, so I'd better get my skates on.
when was the last time youve been to a prison in the us ?
theres a solution to that and its called a life sentence which works just fine all around europe
last time i checked the amount of homicides in the old world was a lot lower then in the new one ... there definitely something wrong over there and self contradictory moral values is one of them
last time i checked the most well known self proclaimed civilized country in the world that still still 'lawfully' kills people and afaik the only first world country that still practices the death penalty was the one with more or less the worst social security
how is it ideal to contradict all of your moral values ?
if everyone worked like that youd be killed next by his wife or mom or whatever which then inevitably will lead into a downward spiral with an obvious end considering were all somewhat related
Wow. Just read through this thread and found the debate fascinating, and all your points have been presented excellently with little to no flaming! 
My stance on the issue is somewhere approaching that of Ball Bearing Turbo. Having said that, I'm not entirely comfortable with it due the ethical ramifications which have been discussed at length here, whilst I am also not happy with the other side of the coin. So called 'rehabilitation'.
Perhaps there should be a half way house between prison and capitol punishment.. Maiming perhaps..?!
Anyway, kudos to you all on an amazing thread.
My stance on the issue is somewhere approaching that of Ball Bearing Turbo. Having said that, I'm not entirely comfortable with it due the ethical ramifications which have been discussed at length here, whilst I am also not happy with the other side of the coin. So called 'rehabilitation'.
Perhaps there should be a half way house between prison and capitol punishment.. Maiming perhaps..?!
Anyway, kudos to you all on an amazing thread.
Anyone else think there are surprisingly few details about the actual cases on that website? What is the record of the appeals cases? They only offer a very short explanation of what actually happened, saying that he was indeed at the scene of the crime and assisted the murderer. Why should we believe he is innocent when they offer no evidence to prove that?
Are people going to say that if someone is driving the getaway car for a bank robbery then that person shouldn't also be charged with bank robbery?
Are people going to say that if someone is driving the getaway car for a bank robbery then that person shouldn't also be charged with bank robbery?
It was in jest....
Really, it was...Honest.
I'm sure the comment was made in jest, Albeig 
I agree with the sentiment that neither quite work; rehabilitation is not perfect, nor is the death penalty. Of course, the whole situation of having to deal with the criminal in the first place is imperfect, we shouldn't have to debate about this kinda stuff. I suppose that's the world we live in...
...Damn, now I sound apathetic and disbonded.. what the hell is wrong with me now? :P
I agree with the sentiment that neither quite work; rehabilitation is not perfect, nor is the death penalty. Of course, the whole situation of having to deal with the criminal in the first place is imperfect, we shouldn't have to debate about this kinda stuff. I suppose that's the world we live in...
...Damn, now I sound apathetic and disbonded.. what the hell is wrong with me now? :P
I understood this was a possibility, but you know, sometimes you just have to raise an eyebrow
Yeah it's weird. The only threads that need closing in this forum tend to relate to what the developers are doing or personal attacks against server operators. We seem to manage "big issues" quite civilly.
I think it's a general respect people have for their fellow racers. LFS requires a bit more dedication than most games, so you get more fraternity than you do on most gaming forums. Plus of course racing is something of a co-operative activity - everybody needs to play ball to make a race work properly. I think that helps to build trust between people.
In fact... That might be the big difference between racers and drifters, but I'm not willing to take that train of thought any further.
Indeed, there has been "discussions" on this board about trivial things that turn into flamewars, but many discussions such as this that, though may be heated, are respectable arguments from both sides.
I live out in the middle of no where, where 6 miles down the road is "right down the road" to me rather than 2 blocks would be "right down the road" for some of you. Ironically the morning I saw this thread and opened it to read, my wife was going to her mom's house. She couldn't get on mom's road because it was blocked with countless police cars, marked and unmarked. She had to detour the 15 miles around to come in the other side. There is this moron who has a farm there, 6 miles away. He is just a simple moron, he mows his fields, makes bales of hay from it, then stacks them and burns them all around his property. It stinks up the entire area, and by that I mean for 10 miles all around. The smoke from it comes into my house and stinks it up from 6 miles away. Just a moron who always has done moronic stuff like that.
Anyways, that day, the reason cops were unusually all over the place (closest "city" where a police station would be is 40 miles away, this is way out in the country...) is the wife announced she is leaving him with someone whom she was cheating with for years. She threatened to take his farm and every thing else of his away, which in this messed up country, would happen. It doesn't matter why 2 married folks separate, the wife will be awarded nearly whatever she wants. This day, he came home from work to find her cleaning out the house with her "boyfriend". He shot and killed both of them.
Now this is where the death penalty debate comes in to play. No, I do not feel that this situation would/should result in a sentence to death. This was a crime of passion and rage, rather than cold blooded murder. This was not the kidnapping, raping, and killing of an unknown child or woman. This debate of the death penalty isn't about "an eye for an eye" or "kill and be killed". I'm sure everyone who is on the side of the death penalty speaking up here does not agree that everyone who kills should be sentenced to death as the opposer's of the death penalty seems to like to argue. It isn't black and white like that. Each situation is different, there are many types of killings that happen on a daily basis and many situations that caused someone to kill someone else. But when the death penalty comes up, it is the cold blooded murderers that we talk about that deserve the death penalties. Those such as the Virginia sniper that was happening back a few years ago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks). This is the kind of stuff that is what the death penalty is debated for by those who support.
I live out in the middle of no where, where 6 miles down the road is "right down the road" to me rather than 2 blocks would be "right down the road" for some of you. Ironically the morning I saw this thread and opened it to read, my wife was going to her mom's house. She couldn't get on mom's road because it was blocked with countless police cars, marked and unmarked. She had to detour the 15 miles around to come in the other side. There is this moron who has a farm there, 6 miles away. He is just a simple moron, he mows his fields, makes bales of hay from it, then stacks them and burns them all around his property. It stinks up the entire area, and by that I mean for 10 miles all around. The smoke from it comes into my house and stinks it up from 6 miles away. Just a moron who always has done moronic stuff like that.
Anyways, that day, the reason cops were unusually all over the place (closest "city" where a police station would be is 40 miles away, this is way out in the country...) is the wife announced she is leaving him with someone whom she was cheating with for years. She threatened to take his farm and every thing else of his away, which in this messed up country, would happen. It doesn't matter why 2 married folks separate, the wife will be awarded nearly whatever she wants. This day, he came home from work to find her cleaning out the house with her "boyfriend". He shot and killed both of them.
Now this is where the death penalty debate comes in to play. No, I do not feel that this situation would/should result in a sentence to death. This was a crime of passion and rage, rather than cold blooded murder. This was not the kidnapping, raping, and killing of an unknown child or woman. This debate of the death penalty isn't about "an eye for an eye" or "kill and be killed". I'm sure everyone who is on the side of the death penalty speaking up here does not agree that everyone who kills should be sentenced to death as the opposer's of the death penalty seems to like to argue. It isn't black and white like that. Each situation is different, there are many types of killings that happen on a daily basis and many situations that caused someone to kill someone else. But when the death penalty comes up, it is the cold blooded murderers that we talk about that deserve the death penalties. Those such as the Virginia sniper that was happening back a few years ago (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks). This is the kind of stuff that is what the death penalty is debated for by those who support.
I mirror your sentiments about the wife getting everything these days; 'tis true in Canada as well. My next-door neighbours (I don't live out in the middle of nowehere like you do Mike :P) recently moved out, and the guy who moved in there is a friend of a guy who lives across the cul de sac from us. This guy recently got divorced; his wife had multiple long-term affairs, treated him and his kids like complete crap, etc etc. She got the house, custody, and nearly all his worldly possessions.
I guess it's easier to find a good divorce lawyer if you are a woman.. ?
I guess it's easier to find a good divorce lawyer if you are a woman.. ?
so basically youre saying its ok to kill someone if they did somthing immoral that really pissed you of prior to you killing them with the degree of okness depending on the exact circumstances ?
by that logic if i happen to know that the guy who just stole my parking spot is cheating on his wife i wouldnt have to fear the death penalty for shooting him
you appear to suffer from the same thinking that bbt did (or still does) in that youre diven by emotions rather than equality
mrodgers, those who oppose death penalty don't do it on a case per case basis. All of your post refers to thoughts that might interest people who support death penalty. You say each situation is different, but when it comes to capital punishment for those who oppose it each situation is equal, and the answer is always "no".
One thing I would prefer over death sentence is to make prisoners build roads instead of death sentence, well actually that should be done for anyone that has longer sentence that a year or so.
Naturally they should not be paid, giving tools, food and shelter should be what they get from working.
Sure there would be expenses (guarding for example, but today we could place some gps etc to them), but also it would be lot cheaper than normally doing roads.
There could be also some other form of work.
I would believe that would also make it easier for them to get back in society later, maybe would also turn someone to good again, but that is not really important point, imo. Loitering in jail is not really going to help anyone.
If someone commits murder or rapes or anything like that he loses status of humanity at that moment, imo.
Naturally they should not be paid, giving tools, food and shelter should be what they get from working.
Sure there would be expenses (guarding for example, but today we could place some gps etc to them), but also it would be lot cheaper than normally doing roads.
There could be also some other form of work.
I would believe that would also make it easier for them to get back in society later, maybe would also turn someone to good again, but that is not really important point, imo. Loitering in jail is not really going to help anyone.
If someone commits murder or rapes or anything like that he loses status of humanity at that moment, imo.
This issue (dehumanisation) has been debated widely in the previous page. For the sake of my humanity I prefer to accept the responsibility of having to deal with another human being, no matter how hideous his/her nature may be.
Edit: with nature, in this case, I mean "disposition".
I think you are wrong in thinking that you would need to dehumanize someone to sentence him to death, at least for me it is same, animal or human.
That is why I mentioned human life rated too high lot earlier too.
Well, I'm no vegetarian
Again please tell me how it's civilized to keep these murderers alive and deny closure for the victims? And I like how you compare injecting serial killers in Texas with Stoning adulterers in Saudi Arabia. That's like saying since the UK issues traffic tickets, their police forces are as nasty as Indonesia because they do it too.
Is that what you're saying?
But that's OK I guess since it seems anything that's done contrary to what you think it should be is obviously wrong, huh?
"The absence of the death penalty is accepted as one of the basic markers of a civilized society" Who accepts this? Lemme guess, people that live in ivory towers and have never been victimized?
Is that who "accepts" that load of b.s.?
Hey, maybe you could e-mail a pair of those rose colored glasses you have so I can see this perfect world too
Kinda reminds me of Rosie O'donnell. She is all for gun control yet she gets upset one day because the school she sent (subjected) her kid to wouldn't allow her to have personal armed guards escort her in class.
LOL I'm against capital punishment as it's a form of oppression and I'll kill anyone who disagrees......(wishing for that "imminent" second depression on a people that don't agree with you pretty much said that guy
)You're wrong about this. It should be pretty clear now that I believe that supporting death penalty suppresses part of my perceived humanity, so I refuse it totally. I offer this refusal as the absolute guarantee that I won't kill anyone just because he has different opinions.
There used to be a law here that stated when you caught your spouse cheating on you - it had to be red handed - that you could kill them and it would be a justifiable homicide. LOL i guess I see why they had that one one the books...
Sorry, but he killed two people maybe if got a really good lawyer, he might could twist it to manslaughter, but I doubt it.
You know, it sounds like the woman was just as stupid as the the husband. if he only had a couple a more IQ points, he could've waited it out and probably kept his farm.
Actually I don't see this becoming a capital case. I'd "bet the farm" that the district attorney will go for a life sentence, especially due to the circumstances.
If you are convicted of a crime, it is the law you have offended against, and society as a whole which has convicted you. The victim is merely a third party - the legal process involves the criminal and the state. The judicial process in a constitutional society doesn't exist to satisfy the desires of the victim, but to enforce the rule of law.
The crime is irrelevant, as is the method employed to carry out the sentence. Killing someone in a "humane" way is still killing someone, and thus not in any way "humane".
That is the basis of opinion, yes. I'm glad you've managed to grasp what an argument is - it will help immeasurably in your future contributions in public forums.
That's twisting it around and up and down a bit, isn't it?
Well, I'd guess she is quite stupid as her "boyfriend" is registered with the state per the Megan Law (previous sexual offender) since he's been out of jail. I don't justify the fact that they were both killed over her cheating on the one that shot them, but it is nice to know the "boyfriend" isn't near my children since we found out a year ago that the neighbor 2 houses away from me is also registered with the state per the Megan Law.
If you are convicted of a crime of the nature we are discussing, murder, then the victim is indeed who you have offended against. If your young daughter is kidnapped and brutally raped and killed, what do you say? "Eh... He broke the law. What ever...." I do believe you would feel different.
As for the difference between what happened down the road from me and something like pre-meditated cold blooded murder is I do believe in temporary insanity. I'm not saying that is what went on 3 days ago, but I can see that happening. But when a woman individually carries each one of her 5 children up to the bathroom and drowns each one in the bathtub, then sits at her court hearing with an attitude of indifference a year after the fact, that is different. A year after you just drowned and killed your 5 children, I would think with temporary insanity, you would feel just a bit [/sarcasm on the just a bit] of remorse over what you did. Or if you were the sniper who over the period of several years, shot and killed 15 random people pumping gas, mowing their yards, walking to and from stores, was found sleeping in the car loaded up with the guns that match to the shootings, I can't see how someone like this would be allowed to live the life of luxury in prison, minus the fact that he just can't leave the enclosed compound.
It's like Racer Y said. It's closure for the victims. The murderers take the decent lives of society for absolutely no reason and you feel that it is ok for them to go on and be "rehabilitated". He gets to go on with free room and board, free meals, doesn't have to work, watch TV, has recreation time, etc while the family of the victims have to grieve and mourn the loss of someone for the rest of their lives, AND pay for the one who victimized them through their taxes.
Does that mean that the irony of the subjective pre-determination on punishment methods and their subjects was grasped by you or lost on you?
And yes, anyone who doesn't share my opinion is wrong. If it were any other way, it wouldn't be an opinion worth holding. I hope you feel the same about your own opinions. It doesn't mean that exposure therapy to other opinions won't transform your own flawless opinion into something different, flawless and irrefutible.. with exposure to good and reasoned opinions, this should happen often.
If it doesn't happen then there is a problem with your own ability to think and apply logic and reason. Think about it..how often do your opinions change by hearing the opinions of others? For me, it happens all the time, I'm delighted to say. It happened a lot to get to where I am on topics such as the death penalty and eating meat. Oh, and religion. My opinions on religions and atheists are crackingly good.
intentionally to show you how twisted your logic is
GAH
the point is that your feelings towards him are irrelevant and in fact counterproductive in reaching a decision on how to deal with what happened in court
how is permanent insanity any different ?
in fact wouldnt the temporary kind be worse on grounds of unpredictability ?
as ive said before ... when was the last time youve been to a us prision ?
for the 100th time
if killing someone brings you closure or you think it is in any way right under any circumstances youre putting yourself in the murderers shoes
Innocent man sentenced to death in Texas.
(273 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG