im with you on that

an eye for an eye until the world is bilnd?


you have to remember that someone has to kill the killer. and what of the killers' killer?
should he not also be killed?

nope. executing a murderer isn't murder. it's the punishment. since you're against it, i tell you what. i'll kill a friend of yours, spend the rest of my life in prison, watching tv, reading books, get a degree, get better food than half of this country, and you can pay for it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_r e_us/death_penalty_deterr ence;_ylt=AqlxJX4PX7UM2FB.MyveIBFvzwcF

Statistics are not proof. There could be, and likely is, countless other reasons that no one even thought to look into, that played a much larger roll in the increase of murder rates.

There is also the fact that we humans... are still animals, something we will never not be. Animals kill animals, for many different reasons, and that's just the way it is.

The fear of being put to death (or any form of punishment) certainly deters many, but those that commit heinous crimes, are gonna commit heinous crimes, regardless of the possible consequences.

which is why we have decided that the only punishment for them is to be put to death. if you're against the death penalty, then you should have no problems with them moving in next to you right? 100% of the people put to death don't murder or rape anybody again - prison doesn't 'fix' anybody.

Governor George Ryan did his best to empty death row...and not a single one of the released murderers are living next to him....not fair.

that's why i like texas......we aren't afraid to use it. in fact, someone is getting fried this weekend.

I don't have a particular problem with the sentence of Life with no parole.

except life without parole isn't life.......he'll be out in 25. and you can pay for him to live there.....

Okay, in some states life isn't life (to my understanding my state is one), but that's a problem that should be fixed and not by execution. Execution is nothing more than state sanctioned vigilante justice. Murder is murder no matter who does it or gives the order to. Murdering murderers makes you nor I nor anybody else any better than them. A dead murderer will murder no more, but a living executioner will go on murdering until they get too old to pull that switch.

"I'd rather see 100 murderers go free, than see one innocent man executed" (paraphrased)- Ben Franklin? I can't remember specifically who said that, but it seems like something he would have said. If for no other reason, that alone should be why the death penalty should end.

Oh, and forensics aren't 100% accurate, and people still do fall through the cracks. So, if a mistake is made by a forensics technician, and an innocent man is put to death, who should pay the price? What if that same technician is biased, and flubs the results intentionally, and they don't find out until after the execution has taken place, should that technician be sentenced to death as well?

Again, if you want to have them spend the rest of their life in prison, feel free to send money to the prisons. I don’t want my money going to support some low life that raped and murdered an 11 year old girl. I will personally pull the switch.

No, forensics isn’t 100% accurate, but so far not one person that has been put to death has actually been innocent. And your argument doesn’t add to your position at all either, because whether somebody is executed or not, he’s still going to die in prison because somebody was ‘biased’.

Aside from the fact that that has probably never happened in the last 30 years, it’s an argument against all incarceration, not just the death penalty. After all, the tech might do it at any time. And, that is why we have appeals, and it takes many, many years for somebody to be executed.

And why would we be better than the murderer anyway? Isn’t all human life equal? So what does ‘We’d be no better than the murderer’ mean?

And you say murder is murder? Would you put somebody away for life for killing somebody who entered his house and tried to kill him or his family? After all, he killed somebody, and murder is murder.

(This comment was modified on Jun 12, 2007 07:19 PM)

That's self preservation, not murder. Murder is "The killing of a human being with premeditated motive". Killing someone who is trying to seriously injure or kill you, is not murder, for it is not premeditated.

As far as money is concerned, I've read that, due to the extensive appeals process, it is acutally more expensive to sentence someone to execution than to imprison them for life.

I'll keep arguing about this if you want, but I don't see you changing your mind, and I'm not going to either.

(This comment was modified on Jun 12, 2007 07:55 PM)

again, every conviction can be appealed. some cases are still being appealed from the 80's, and they were giving actual life without parole. it's actually cheaper to execute, because we will no longer be financing his stay in prison, unlike the person doing 50 or so years constantly appealing.


And it's only murder if it was premeditated? Ok, i'll break into one of your family member's house and accidently shoot and kill them. and according to you, i haven't committed murder.

I give you a "good point... but". However, I'm done arguing about this.

(This comment was modified on Jun 14, 2007 01:54 AM)

I think everyone has the same problem, personally i am for the death penalty for certain crimes like pedophillia and rape, but murder makes you just as bad as them.

The death penalty is NOT murder.

Murder: innocent victim; murderer acts as arbitrary judge, jury, and executioner; Frequently a VERY horrible death.

Death penalty: Guilt must be proven through the legal system; Several people must be convinced of said guild AND believe it's strong enough to warrant death penalty; Reasonable attempts made to make it quick and relatively painless.

Funny you should mention that, because I also have a problem with war. Certainly one should be aloud to defend themselves when attacked, but killing in self defence is not murder, it's survival. Pre-emptive wars *cough* are essentially murder (nay, genocide really) put forth with the facade of self defence. These wars seem to me to be the upper crust, manipulating the lower crust into committing the mass murders for them... for profit.

welcome to America........

Nay... Genocide and War ARE 2 different things.

Genocide can be committed outside of a war as it is basically slaughter of a people,race,ideology .

War is armed conflict between 2 groups...Genocide is a criminal act whenever it happens...

Slaughter is not War...

Please dont confuse them.

very good point

best comment posted!