The Death Penalty - Why Not?

[sniffy]

I didn't realised I'd expressed a personal opinion on the law. I just expressed a personal opinion on your personal opinion.

In the USA certain states have the death penalty. It doesn't seem to prevent murder but it's there anyway just in case, eh? So if some gun toting noob crosses your path as you're wandering through Texas on your mustang (cars being so dangerous and all) and doesn't like the way you shaved that morning and shoots your head off you can die knowing that at some point down the line said noob will be executed in the sate of Texas. How comforting for you.

People get killed in road accidents too and indeed there are measures in place to minimise road accidents such as speed laws/drink driving laws/the wearing of seatbelts, etc. Interestingly these measures do seem to have reduced the number of road accidents in comparison to times when no such measures were in place. Of course if you decide to use your car to randomly mow down pedestrians I expect there are laws in the US which will see you prosecuted for reckless driving/manslaughter or some such similar crime/misdemeanor.

Of course the best way to reduce the number of car deaths would be to limit their speed but that would bring the gun-toting, freedom loving noobs onto the street mewling about their freedom to drive dangerously fast becoming all threatened.

Hey I'm getting to enjoy Baron Max style debate and reasoning. It's fun!!

 

[11parcal]

What about the Prime directive? The good of the many outweighs the good of the few. Ergo, killing a mass murderer and avoiding countless other deaths by his hand and risking the death of an innocent in the end ends up with less innocent death, and the two strikes rule enforces this, if the person kept commiting the crime after the first time there is no reason to keep him alive.

 

[Enmos]

What about the Prime directive? The good of the many outweighs the good of the few. Ergo, killing a mass murderer and avoiding countless other deaths by his hand and risking the death of an innocent in the end ends up with less innocent death, and the two strikes rule enforces this, if the person kept commiting the crime after the first time there is no reason to keep him alive.

You don't have to kill him to prevent him from killing.

 

[Baron Max]

I didn't realised I'd expressed a personal opinion on the law. I just expressed a personal opinion on your personal opinion.

I can't figure out who you're talking to or what post? Not that it matters a lot, but...., well, it would have been nice to know.

In the USA certain states have the death penalty. It doesn't seem to prevent murder but it's there anyway just in case, eh? So if some gun toting noob crosses your path as you're wandering through Texas on your mustang (cars being so dangerous and all) and doesn't like the way you shaved that morning and shoots your head off you can die knowing that at some point down the line said noob will be executed in the sate of Texas. How comforting for you.

People get killed in road accidents too and indeed there are measures in place to minimise road accidents such as speed laws/drink driving laws/the wearing of seatbelts, etc. Interestingly these measures do seem to have reduced the number of road accidents in comparison to times when no such measures were in place. Of course if you decide to use your car to randomly mow down pedestrians I expect there are laws in the US which will see you prosecuted for reckless driving/manslaughter or some such similar crime/misdemeanor.

Innocent dead people are, strangely enough, innocent dead people. I just can't, for the life of me, see any difference between innocent dead people and innocent dead people. And y'all ain't helpin' educate me at all.

Of course the best way to reduce the number of car deaths would be to limit their speed but that would bring the gun-toting, freedom loving noobs onto the street mewling about their freedom to drive dangerously fast becoming all threatened.

I suspect that the numbers of innocent people killed by those gun-totin', freedom-lovin' noobs would be far, far less than the number of innocent people killed in car accidents. So, .....which approach is better if y'all want to limit the numbers of innocent dead people?

Hey I'm getting to enjoy Baron Max style debate and reasoning. It's fun!!

I agree! But answer me this: Are all innocent dead people the same as innocent dead people? Or is there some difference that I'm missing?

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

What about the Prime directive? The good of the many outweighs the good of the few. Ergo, killing a mass murderer and avoiding countless other deaths by his hand and risking the death of an innocent in the end ends up with less innocent death, and the two strikes rule enforces this, if the person kept commiting the crime after the first time there is no reason to keep him alive.

Interesting. But all of the mass murderers that have ever existed on the planet have killed far, far less than are killed in car accidents or other similar accidents.

So ....perhaps we should execute all drivers??

Baron Max

 

[Cellar_Door]

No, my response was intended for your entire post, and I indicated that with the use of ...., after the quote. I just didn't want to repost the whole thing.

And as I see it, there's no reason to resort to personal insults. Please try to control that urge if you can.

Baron Max

My insults are justified; justified insults are merely observations.

You many have included an ellipsis but you still only included the 'DP has no point' quote in your reply. What do you say to the part describing an 'antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge'; the sentence, "The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off." or the fact this comes from a man who has witnessed this process in incredible depth?

What do you have? Your own uninformed opinion where prisons are holiday camps and the Death Penalty is the perfect solution; your lack of knowledge blares out like a foghorn with your selective replies. You failed to understand basic facts about the execution process itself and then expect the people in this thread to take your argument seriously?

 

[Enmos]

Interesting. But all of the mass murderers that have ever existed on the planet have killed far, far less than are killed in car accidents or other similar accidents.

So ....perhaps we should execute all drivers??

Baron Max

No, we should kill everyone. Everyone has the potential to kill someone by accident. You don't need cars for it either.

 

[Baron Max]

My insults are justified; justified insults are merely observations.

Insults are insults, however you wish to "justify" them. And they're not very nice things to do.

You many have included an ellipsis but you still only included the 'DP has no point' quote in your reply. What do you say to the part describing an 'antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge'; the sentence, "The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off." or the fact this comes from a man who has witnessed this process in incredible depth?

What do you have? Your own uninformed opinion where prisons are holiday camps and the Death Penalty is the perfect solution; your lack of knowledge blares out like a foghorn with your selective replies. You failed to understand basic facts about the execution process itself and then expect the people in this thread to take your argument seriously?

Executions are not, nor have they ever been, designed to "solve" anything. They were designed specifically to rid the society of unwanted, unneeded evil elements of that society. Simple as that. Don't read so much into things ...unless you're just trying to use it to further your many and varied arguments against the DP.

And just let me add: The opinion of one man is just that ...one opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

No, we should kill everyone. Everyone has the potential to kill someone by accident. You don't need cars for it either.

Well, if we want to eliminate innocent deaths, then that's the way to do. However, let's just talk about "limiting" innocent deaths. And if we go that route, then we should limit cars to travel at, say, no more than 25mph.

But, see, people here aren't actually trying to lessen innocent deaths. They only want to eliminate innocent deaths by execution. They don't seem to give a fuck about all the other innocent lives!

Baron Max

 

[sniffy]

I can't figure out.

Baron Max

I agree! Sure seems that way.

 

[Baron Max]

I agree! Sure seems that way.

That remark, of course, makes no sense ....and sure doesn't add to the discussion in any way.

Baron Max

 

[Cellar_Door]

Executions are not, nor have they ever been, designed to "solve" anything.

I see - you are unable to reply to rest. That was all I needed to know.

If it doesn't solve anything then it is unneeded; prisons take criminals off of the streets, so why this desire for blood revenge? It is a truly primal instinct: the human sacrifice to purge society of 'evil'. Except, back when hanging was the penalty even for pickpockets, there was a higher crime rate than there is now.
What is the point of punishment if the criminal is untouchable in oblivion. Besides, have you ever been to a prison full of category A prisoners?

 

[Baron Max]

If it doesn't solve anything then it is unneeded; prisons take criminals off of the streets, so why this desire for blood revenge? It is a truly primal instinct: the human sacrifice to purge society of 'evil'.

But why can't you see that in keeping those people in prisons, you're essentially punishing the entire society, all of the taxpayers, for the crimes of those few individuals?

And answer me this: Why should any society want to keep vicious murderers and rapists within their society ...even if in cages? What good are they to anyone? And why should a society pay for keeping them around when they're no good to anyone?

What is the point of punishment if the criminal is untouchable in oblivion. ...

I'm not sure of the question?? The punishment is that he'll no longer be allowed to live in that society or any other society. What's wrong with that? there's no need to be concerned about .."oblivion", whatever that means.

Baron Max

 

[Enmos]

Well, if we want to eliminate innocent deaths, then that's the way to do. However, let's just talk about "limiting" innocent deaths. And if we go that route, then we should limit cars to travel at, say, no more than 25mph.

But, see, people here aren't actually trying to lessen innocent deaths. They only want to eliminate innocent deaths by execution. They don't seem to give a fuck about all the other innocent lives!

Baron Max

That's completely unfounded. People ARE trying to limit innocent deaths by cars, but that's not the topic here.

 

[Baron Max]

That's completely unfounded. People ARE trying to limit innocent deaths by cars, but that's not the topic here.

Dead innocent people are still dead innocent people, regardless of how they die. Or do you have some different ideas about that that you'd like to share with us?

And just so you know, as if you didnt already, people ARE trying limit accidental deaths by execution ...it takes fuckin' years of endless appeals and begging by rights activists etc.

Baron Max

 

[Enmos]

Dead innocent people are still dead innocent people, regardless of how they die. Or do you have some different ideas about that that you'd like to share with us?

And just so you know, as if you didnt already, people ARE trying limit accidental deaths by execution ...it takes fuckin' years of endless appeals and begging by rights activists etc.

Baron Max

We still have the intent issue.. they don't HAVE to execute these prisoners, they choose to. The government does not schedule car accidents..

 

[Cellar_Door]

But why can't you see that in keeping those people in prisons, you're essentially punishing the entire society, all of the taxpayers, for the crimes of those few individuals?

And answer me this: Why should any society want to keep vicious murderers and rapists within their society ...even if in cages? What good are they to anyone? And why should a society pay for keeping them around when they're no good to anyone?

Taking a human being's life, regardless of their crimes, is not something that should be looked at from a financial perspective. Taxes are wasted in many areas of public life, I don't see why the money wasted by not killing lots of people should be at the top of your list. In your mind you turn these individuals into 'vicious' comic book villains to distance yourself from the humanity of the matter.

 

[11parcal]

Interesting. But all of the mass murderers that have ever existed on the planet have killed far, far less than are killed in car accidents or other similar accidents.

So ....perhaps we should execute all drivers??

Baron Max

Did you just point out a flaw in your own logic

 

[Baron Max]

We still have the intent issue.. they don't HAVE to execute these prisoners, they choose to. The government does not schedule car accidents..

But of all of the executions or scheduled executions, only a small percentage are "accidents" ...accidents just like the accidents in car wrecks.

Perhaps that's your problem with all this .....you actually think that the state knows that they're executing an innocent man, but they do it anyway????

Still, dead innocent people are still dead innocent people, regardless of how they died ...car accidents or accidental executions or accidental firearm discharge or accidental skiing mishaps or accidental drowning in swimming pools or..... Well, you get the picture. All dead people are equal ....except to you, some dead people are more important than other dead people.

Baron Max

 

[Baron Max]

In your mind you turn these individuals into 'vicious' comic book villains to distance yourself from the humanity of the matter.

No, no, that's not true. I hate all people equally. But you'll notice that YOU, on the other hand, think some people are more important than other people. Accidental deaths on the highways, you accept without a twinge. But you go ape-shit when the state accidentally executes an innocent person.

Baron Max