How do feel about corporal punishment, and the death penalty?

1235»

Comments

  • edited December 2014

    Story of my life(on the forums at least). The moment I tell myself to just leave something alone is usually when I end up not being able to leave it alone. Or I want to put my opinion out there and leave it at that, but it doesn't ever turn out that way. I say I'm done with long posts, and a few minutes later I post an essay. So yeah, you're pretty much preaching to the choir here lol.

    You're most likely right, I've only had one other conversation with the guy, so I can't really judge him from this.

    Belan posted: »

    Yeah, that's understandable, I was a little annoyed as well. I didn't really even want to get into it, it just kinda happened. I just wanted

  • Decency went out the window the minute they committed a crime heinous enough to earn them a death sentence.

    So we should throw away any decency and make convicted criminals feel agony before they die?

  • @Belan

    Don't stop the long and opinionated posts, you guys have at least one fan who enjoys them. I mean me, in case that wasn't clear.

    Tinni posted: »

    Story of my life(on the forums at least). The moment I tell myself to just leave something alone is usually when I end up not being able to

  • I don't think I could stop even if I wanted to tbh. You should start posting ridiculously long essays so you can join the club~

    @Belan Don't stop the long and opinionated posts, you guys have at least one fan who enjoys them. I mean me, in case that wasn't clear.

  • It doesn't mean we should act like savages. Just because they did it first makes it no less horrible when we do it to them. What if this person that did a really bad thing could be rehabilitated to contribute to society. You're killing someone who could be rehabilitated to change some things for the better.

    Decency went out the window the minute they committed a crime heinous enough to earn them a death sentence.

  • Oh don't worry, it will probably never stop lol.

    @Belan Don't stop the long and opinionated posts, you guys have at least one fan who enjoys them. I mean me, in case that wasn't clear.

  • edited December 2014

    Yepp, that's exactly the way it goes lol. I will more than likely be continuing the above conversation later on even though I really kind of don't want to.

    Tinni posted: »

    Story of my life(on the forums at least). The moment I tell myself to just leave something alone is usually when I end up not being able to

  • I guess all I can do is wish you good luck if that ends up happening.XD

    Belan posted: »

    Yepp, that's exactly the way it goes lol. I will more than likely be continuing the above conversation later on even though I really kind of don't want to.

  • Laws created by people give an appointed judge the right to decide who lives and who dies. People live within and makeup their respective societies, and a basic part of every society is its laws. These are created by people within a society, and are useful in governing a society. Laws are made with the intention of disallowing people from performing certain activities, like the murder of an innocent civilian or twelve. In order to enforce the restrictions that laws create, laws are accompanied by punishments that are carried out for people commonly referred to as lawbreakers. Some of these punishments are minor, like a fine (the transfer of wealth from the lawbreaker to the governing body), and some are major, such as the death penalty (a penalty designed to remove evil and otherwise dangerous people from a society with the guarantee that they will no longer harm innocent members of said society). As a person grows up in a society, they learn about the laws their society enforces, and they also learn the consequences of breaking those laws. So when someone breaks a law, and commits a crime that is punishable by death (if you want to get technical here, you can say that knowingly committing a crime that is punishable by death means that the criminal is giving the governing body their consent to end their life), they have to accept the consequences of their actions, just like the minor felon (lawbreaker) that had to pay a fine.

    Now not all societies have the same punishments; this can be referred to as a difference in culture, and in some cases just political stances. Some societies do not permit the death penalty for even the most heinous of crimes, and in those societies a criminal would instead face alternate consequences, such as a lifetime sentence to prison. Just like in the example society from the previous paragraph, the one where a heinous criminal would face the death penalty, the criminal in the society that does not permit the death penalty will still have to face the consequences of his or her actions. The right of a governing body's justice system to hold them accountable for their actions comes from the same place in both scenarios. If you're having trouble coming up with the answer, please continue reading, because as you may have guessed (though I put no faith in that assumption), the right to hold them accountable comes from each society's laws.

    thatguy97 posted: »

    Who gave you all the right to decide who deserves to live and die? Who gave you all the right to pick and choose the definition of "good" and when it applies to you? I don't even know any of you, why would I respect you, especially hypocrites.

  • I just wrote a really patronizing post on this subject, and I don't feel like editing it. I'm going to post it here for your convenience, but don't take offense, because I'm not trying to patronize you. The post just holds the key to my reply to your own post.

    "Laws created by people give an appointed judge the right to decide who lives and who dies. People live within and makeup their respective societies, and a basic part of every society is its laws. These are created by people within a society, and are useful in governing a society. Laws are made with the intention of disallowing people from performing certain activities, like the murder of an innocent civilian or twelve. In order to enforce the restrictions that laws create, laws are accompanied by punishments that are carried out for people commonly referred to as lawbreakers. Some of these punishments are minor, like a fine (the transfer of wealth from the lawbreaker to the governing body), and some are major, such as the death penalty (a penalty designed to remove evil and otherwise dangerous people from a society with the guarantee that they will no longer harm innocent members of said society). As a person grows up in a society, they learn about the laws their society enforces, and they also learn the consequences of breaking those laws. So when someone breaks a law, and commits a crime that is punishable by death (if you want to get technical here, you can say that knowingly committing a crime that is punishable by death means that the criminal is giving the governing body their consent to end their life), they have to accept the consequences of their actions, just like the minor felon (lawbreaker) that had to pay a fine.

    Now not all societies have the same punishments; this can be referred to as a difference in culture, and in some cases just political stances. Some societies do not permit the death penalty for even the most heinous of crimes, and in those societies a criminal would instead face alternate consequences, such as a lifetime sentence to prison. Just like in the example society from the previous paragraph, the one where a heinous criminal would face the death penalty, the criminal in the society that does not permit the death penalty will still have to face the consequences of his or her actions. The right of a governing body's justice system to hold them accountable for their actions comes from the same place in both scenarios. If you're having trouble coming up with the answer, please continue reading, because as you may have guessed (though I put no faith in that assumption), the right to hold them accountable comes from each society's laws."

    It doesn't mean we should act like savages. Just because they did it first makes it no less horrible when we do it to them. What if this per

  • Thanks, I got this. Unless of course you wanted to take over for me <_<

    Tinni posted: »

    I guess all I can do is wish you good luck if that ends up happening.XD

  • I''ll probably end up chiming in, but double teaming might be a bit unfair.:P

    Belan posted: »

    Thanks, I got this. Unless of course you wanted to take over for me <_<

  • Probably, but that's okay. Show no mercy ;)

    Tinni posted: »

    I''ll probably end up chiming in, but double teaming might be a bit unfair.:P

  • I'm not saying there shouldn't be consequences for heinous crimes, if that's the impression I gave you. I was simply saying that we should try to rehabilitate convicted felons who feel guilt or remorse over their actions, or at least understand what it would be like being given months to think about being killed. It's torture no matter what you've done.

    I just wrote a really patronizing post on this subject, and I don't feel like editing it. I'm going to post it here for your convenience, bu

  • Never show mercy...verbally of course.

    Belan posted: »

    Probably, but that's okay. Show no mercy

  • Isis members should be shot on sight...

  • Cope49Cope49 Banned
    edited December 2014

    No . Your gonna need those brain cells.

    -Kenny posted: »

    I think they need to legalize Marijuana.

  • This is a little bit abstract.

    I didn't get that impression at all, it was just late and I didn't want to write out a reply. My point that I would have conveyed more concisely had I not been going to bed would have been this. Rehabilitation over execution is a noble idea that leaves a lot to chance. Execution ends the problem maker permanently. I think that when a person, just for an example, murders twelve people on a whim, that they have given up their right to not be punished in accordance with the law. In some cases, that means they are to be executed.

    I personally think that the consequences of laws should be left to individual groups and cultures. Executing heinous criminals, or not, really just stems from how people feel. I see no problem in ending the life of someone who has earned that punishment, and I don't even see it as stooping to their level. To me it's just a solution to a problem. Others such as yourself would prefer rehabilitation. In our own individual areas that we live, a State in the U.S. and wherever you're from, it really comes up to the people within that area to decide what punishment is just. There is no right or wrong answer really, there's just a difference in feeling. If one State does not support the death penalty, then that is within their rights. Just as it is within the rights of the people who feel differently to express their difference in opinion.

    With that in mind, I'm not entirely against the idea of rehabilitation, but in most cases with criminals such as child molesters, they generally become repeat offenders (I'd look for a statistic on this but I'm running out of time). It's hard for me to get fully behind rehabilitation as a consequence for that reason. It's not a situation where you are punishing people because they might commit a crime, it's a situation where you are punishing people because they already have. Whether or not rehabilitation might work in some of these cases I don't know for certain, no one does. I do know that removing them entirely will stop them.

    Just as an addendum, I want to say that I highly favor the "innocent until proven guilty" principle. Doling out punishments under this system is far fairer than in the reverse. There can be and have been errors, but no system can be perfect.

    I'm not saying there shouldn't be consequences for heinous crimes, if that's the impression I gave you. I was simply saying that we should t

  • I've written a few long ones lately. Before I ever talked to you guys I used to write them a lot, but it seems like no matter how much I write, and no matter how much my opposition writes, we never reach an accord. So I stopped, but I've been enjoying you and Belan's thought out posts for a while, so I'm getting back into it.

    Tinni posted: »

    I don't think I could stop even if I wanted to tbh. You should start posting ridiculously long essays so you can join the club~

Sign in to comment in this discussion.