Eve Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Do you believe in Capital Punishment? Are there any Biblical justifications for Capital Punishment?
Lizzie60 Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Do you believe in Capital Punishment? Are there any Biblical justifications for Capital Punishment? Yes I wish Capital Punishment was back in Canada.. because I don't think serial murderers and crapulous criminal can be 'cured'.. and they are very costly for society. The money saved could be used for education and health IMO...
shadowplay Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 No, on principal I don't in almost all cases (there may be a few exceptions like leaders of a genocide where killing them serves an important political purpose and actually saves lives). I think it's barbaric. It serves no purpose other than to satisfy people's revenge urges. It's stooping to the level of the killer. I'd probably feel differently if I was a relative of a victim, but in that case I'd be biased. That's not to say a murderer doesn't deserve to die, but society should not be the executioner.
george35 Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 I’d like to know what purpose it serves in today’s society. I don’t believe capital punishment was ever meant to do anything but detour someone else. “There are far worse things in life than death” I don’t know where I heard that but if it’s truly revenge your after that is something to consider.
shadowplay Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 I’d like to know what purpose it serves in today’s society. I don’t believe capital punishment was ever meant to do anything but detour someone else. “There are far worse things in life than death” I don’t know where I heard that but if it’s truly revenge your after that is something to consider. They've actually found that capital punishment is no deterrent, so it's really only about satisfying our baser urges.
The Collector Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 In theory, in some cases, if it made the victims families feel an ounce better I'd support it. In practice the authorities will too often roundup some likely suspect/local crazy/black person, frame them or force a confession. You can free an innocent man, but you can't bring one back to life. And I'd rather have 99 murderers live in prison at the tax-payers expense than kill one innocent man.
george35 Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 I would agree; fear of incarceration for the rest of ones life I would think would be a greater deterrent than “being put to sleep And maybe if we didn’t spend so much on each prisoners creature comforts it would be even more of a deterrent. Although I use to have to do some work in a federal prison and it didn’t seem to be pleasant AT ALL. The first time I had to go to one for work I drove 5 miles under the speed limit for the rest of the day, lol.
Lizzie60 Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 In theory, in some cases, if it made the victims families feel an ounce better I'd support it. In practice the authorities will too often roundup some likely suspect/local crazy/black person, frame them or force a confession. You can free an innocent man, but you can't bring one back to life. And I'd rather have 99 murderers live in prison at the tax-payers expense than kill one innocent man. Chances to kill an innocent man are pretty slim.. but I would rather take that chance than to let a serial killer kill any more innocent people.
a4a Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Well what makes me laugh about this is that it is not legal to kill yourself. I have yet to figure out why it is not legal..... It seems to me you should at least have that right. As for killing others. I don't think that stops crime. It hasn't worked yet. But, on the other hand I think perhaps some maiming might be in order....... cut the hand off a thief...... Does it again...... no hands. Kinda hard to hold a gun in your mouth and commit armed robbery.
oldguy Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Well what makes me laugh about this is that it is not legal to kill yourself. I have yet to figure out why it is not legal..... It seems to me you should at least have that right. As for killing others. I don't think that stops crime. It hasn't worked yet. But, on the other hand I think perhaps some maiming might be in order....... cut the hand off a thief...... Does it again...... no hands. Kinda hard to hold a gun in your mouth and commit armed robbery. So what is the punishment if you do kill yourself?
a4a Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 So what is the punishment if you do kill yourself? None....... why would there be? Where is the crime or victim? But you could kill yourself heroically..... like jump on a grenade to save your buddies..... and that is ok. You would get a parade in your honor. But that is not the topic.... and money still rules the justice system. Have enough and you will be set free.
Trialbyfire Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Do you believe in Capital Punishment? Are there any Biblical justifications for Capital Punishment? Yes, I believe in Capital Punishment. Yes, old testament says...an eye for an eye. Historically, Capital Punishment is reserved for murders. Get rid of the murderers and that's the best deterrent out there, at least for someone who's serial. In this day and age with DNA testing, security cameras and other surveillance equipment etc., the shadow of a doubt grows slimmer and slimmer. If someone is convicted on circumstantial evidence, then imprison them for life.
Quinch Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 If you had asked me my views on the death penalty a few years ago I would have been completely in favour of it for some extreme cases. I guess I've softened in my old age though, becuase now I'm not so sure. I agree that, while it is wrong to kill another human being, some people, by their actions, no longer deserve to qualify as human beings. Killing them would be like killing a dangerous animal and might ultimately save more innocent lives. However, even if someone deserves death, I would be loathe to pull the trigger or flick the switch myself. You can kill them if you want and I won't lose any sleep over it but personally I would rather dump them on a remote island somewhere with no hope of escape and let them rot. I guess I just couldn't bring myself to take another life.
quankanne Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 I go back and forth on this one – my religion is against it, so therefore I'm against it. But I also live in a state that is more than happy to mete out capital punishment for heinous crimes. What is it that Ron White says? "We're trying to speed things up … we're creating a drive-through … my state is the only state that says, if you go out and kill someone, we'll kill you back." which satisfies the eye-for-an-eye vengeance, but really doesn't leave you with anything but another dead body to bury. my thought is to let them live as a guest of the government. Let them live long enough to realize just what they did was so heinous they're filled with shame, and they have a moral and spiritual conversion. Because what good is killing someone if they don't think what they did was "wrong" – wouldn't the greater punishment be an awareness of the sin that landed them in the clink in the first place?
EnigmaXOXO Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 As for killing others. I don't think that stops crime. It hasn't worked yet. It hasn’t stopped the degenerates from committing crimes. But it sure deters the criminal ... one at a time! I think in cases where someone has been proven guilty of first degree murder beyond a shadow of a doubt, then the surviving family of the victim/s should decide the punishment. Not a jury of strangers who are too far removed from the situation to fully comprehend the life-long impact of losing a loved one to one of these abominations of nature. Let the family decide whether their own religious beliefs dictate “turn the other cheek” or “an eye for an eye”. Don’t know about Biblical justifications, but I think ten unsupervised minutes alone in a room with the monster who raped and murdered your child would sure help to define an individual’s good conscience and/or how strong their religious convictions are. Me ... I’d be more inclined to send him on the fast train to wherever it is he thinks he’s going and letting his “God” sort it all out. And I’m hardly ashamed to admit it. In situations where the victim’s family sees fit to spare the murderer his life; let them (not the tax payer) flip the bill for his bed, the roof over his head, his food, his clothing, his legal council, his psychiatric treatment, his continued education, his medical care, his phone calls to home, all the fancy gym equipment in the yard, as well as all the other free luxuries the prison provides --- that law abiding citizens who are sick, unemployed, homeless and working two jobs just to make ends meet can’t afford. I prefer the way Texas handles it’s criminal element: “Kill us ... and we’ll kill ya back!”
Quinch Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 then the surviving family of the victim/s should decide the punishment. I disagree. The victim's family are too personaly involved and the law must always remain impartial and impersonal. Emotion has no place in justice. Also the killer's family or associates might try to take revenge on the victim's family.
The Collector Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Chances to kill an innocent man are pretty slim.. but I would rather take that chance than to let a serial killer kill any more innocent people. I think you're being naive. Here in the UK since the death penalty was abolished there have been about two dozen 'IRA terrorists' that were freed after being found innocent, and at least two high-profile 'murderers' that turned out to have been innocent and largely set-up (Colin Stagg and Barry George.) If we had the death penalty, all of these people would probably be dead for a crime they didn't commit, like Tim Robbins in The Shawshank Redemption or the A-Team (although they didn't die). Maybe the UK police are more corrupt than the US, but I doubt it. Look how they framed my brothers in the Black Panthers.
lovelorcet Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Chances to kill an innocent man are pretty slim.. but I would rather take that chance than to let a serial killer kill any more innocent people. This is completely and utterly WRONG! The state or New Jersey was even force to call a commission to study this issue because they started looking into old cases of people they had killed. With modern DNA testing they were finding that over 20% of the people were innocent.... that is a pretty big number in my book... They also came to the following conclusions: There is no compelling evidence that the New Jersey death penalty rationally serves a legitimate penological intent. There is increasing evidence that the death penalty is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency. Abolition of the death penalty will eliminate the risk of disproportionality in capital sentencing. The penological interest in executing a small number of persons guilty of murder is not sufficiently compelling to justify the risk of making an irreversible mistake. The alternative of life imprisonment in a maximum security institution without the possibility of parole would sufficiently ensure public safety and address other legitimate social and penological interests, including the interests of the families of murder victims. http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/committees/njdeath_penalty.asp
jerbear Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 There is no compelling evidence that the New Jersey death penalty rationally serves a legitimate penological intent. There is increasing evidence that the death penalty is inconsistent with evolving standards of decency. Abolition of the death penalty will eliminate the risk of disproportionality in capital sentencing. The penological interest in executing a small number of persons guilty of murder is not sufficiently compelling to justify the risk of making an irreversible mistake. The alternative of life imprisonment in a maximum security institution without the possibility of parole would sufficiently ensure public safety and address other legitimate social and penological interests, including the interests of the families of murder victims. With New Jersey in debt, since what I feel as time started, why should tax payers continue to fund unlimited health care, food, housing, support costs, etc... for someone serving a life sentence w/o parole, or those with multiple life sentences. Also I feel 20% (from your numbers) out of 360 or so in the grand scheme of things is ok. Going forward that 20% may go down. The 20% you've referenced is based on historical data.
Trojan John Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Capital punishment is archaic and barbaric. There have already been too many innocent people executed. It really reflects poorly on a society. There have been many biblical justifications for executions, but once again, they're archaic and barbaric.
lovelorcet Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 20% of 360 is 72... That is 72 dead innocent people that we are responsible for as a society... I am not very comfortable with numbers like that... If you factor in all that is needed to legally execute someone it is not really much of a cost-savings compared to life in prison.
shadowplay Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Yes, I believe in Capital Punishment. Yes, old testament says...an eye for an eye. Historically, Capital Punishment is reserved for murders. Get rid of the murderers and that's the best deterrent out there, at least for someone who's serial. In this day and age with DNA testing, security cameras and other surveillance equipment etc., the shadow of a doubt grows slimmer and slimmer. If someone is convicted on circumstantial evidence, then imprison them for life. Capital punishment is actually not a deterrent. Do some research. http://www.truthinjustice.org/922death.htm You would be surprised at the corruption in our legal system. If there's room for even one mistake, as The Collector said, capital punishment is unjustified. So even if you believe that CP is justified in a flawless system, the argument falls apart. Human minds haven't caught up with science. Despite advances in technology we are still capable of wrongly convicting people of heinous crimes because of our own flaws and prejudices. All forms of punishment in our society before you reach the extreme of capital punishment are theoretically about practical/utilitarian concerns: keeping criminals off the streets, discouraging people from committing crimes, etc. But then CP is this leap "on principal" because it serves no real purpose other than vengeance (it doesn't deter crimes). So if you're doing something like that on principal, you have to look at it in terms of absolutes, and you better be damn sure there isn't a chink in the system. There are many. "An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind." -Mahatma Gandhi If we routinely turned to the old testament as a justification for the way we ran society, our world would be a mess. It's no surprise that this statement comes from the most barbaric part of the bible.
shadowplay Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 There have been many biblical justifications for executions, but once again, they're archaic and barbaric. Exactly. The old testament is some scary sh!iot.
Moose Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Exactly. The old testament is some scary sh!iot. "Was some scary sh!ot" is more precise. The New Testament, and therefore the entire Bible clearly is against capital punishment. Take, for instant, the account of the harlot caught red handed about to be killed by the community.....Jesus told them, "He who has no sin may cast the first stone"...... We need to remember that the New Testament is the fullfillment of the Old.... Yes, we need law and order, so lock murderers away for life and chain them to treadmills that generates electricity 16 hours a day....
Trialbyfire Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Capital punishment is actually not a deterrent. Do some research. http://www.truthinjustice.org/922death.htm You would be surprised at the corruption in our legal system. If there's room for even one mistake, as The Collector said, capital punishment is unjustified. So even if you believe that CP is justified in a flawless system, the argument falls apart. Human minds haven't caught up with science. Despite advances in technology we are still capable of wrongly convicting people of heinous crimes because of our own flaws and prejudices. All forms of punishment in our society before you reach the extreme of capital punishment are theoretically about practical/utilitarian concerns: keeping criminals off the streets, discouraging people from committing crimes, etc. But then CP is this leap "on principal" because it serves no real purpose other than vengeance (it doesn't deter crimes). So if you're doing something like that on principal, you have to look at it in terms of absolutes, and you better be damn sure there isn't a chink in the system. There are many. "An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind." -Mahatma Gandhi If we routinely turned to the old testament as a justification for the way we ran society, our world would be a mess. It's no surprise that this statement comes from the most barbaric part of the bible. Reread what I wrote. You're failing to understand my point. Dead is dead. Unless you believe in spirits coming back to haunt you, a dead serial killer can't come back to kill, no matter how much the entertainment industry wants you to believe it.
Recommended Posts