Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Instructor
#26 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:08 AM Last edited by piggypeach : 15th Jun 2012 at 2:18 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by BlakeS5678
I mean, being dead, or staring at a jail cell wall for a good 30-60 years WISHING you were dead. Weigh the options, people.


Exactly the point. Which is why it doesn't make sense for death to be saved for worse crimes than a lifetime in jail. If the supposed "worst" method of justice is not really the worst, why not just eliminate it entirely? Say someone committed a... mass murder. Yes, they might be sentenced to death, but that might as well be giving them what they want. Some of these people are psychotic, you will never know what goes through their brain. It would make more sense to give this criminal a lifetime in jail. If he wants to kill himself, let him do it. But don't do the job for him. I'm not saying all criminals want to die, I'm just saying that being in jail forever is worse than dying, so it makes no sense to have it as an option. Why not just substitute it for years in jail? Being contained might not "fix up" a person, but it is a pretty damn good way to make sure they don't do any more damage.

Edit: ach, I didn't explain this well, it just looks like a bunch of gobbly goop. I think I just meant that we should avoid death penalty in all possible cases and substitute it for lifetime in jail, because it is more of a punishment in some cases, and killing them is literally taking everything away from the guilty party. Which is not cool. Also, it's soo much better if you make a mistake, because you can just free them from jail, but it's not like you can resurrect someone.

♫ She's got sunset on her breath, I inhaled just a little bit now I got no fear of death ♫
Advertisement
Field Researcher
#27 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:11 AM
Quote: Originally posted by piggypeach
Well, I don't really think that death penalty follows the eye for an eye rule. It's more of...


Let's suppose I kill a particular person I hate. Am I really a threat for everyone? I don't think so. I think that every crime is different and trying to apply death penalty to ALL murders, ALL rapes or ALL anything is just plain stupid, not considering anything else.
Instructor
#28 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:18 AM
Quote: Originally posted by pinketamine
Let's suppose I kill a particular person I hate. Am I really a threat for everyone? I don't think so. I think that every crime is different and trying to apply death penalty to ALL murders, ALL rapes or ALL anything is just plain stupid, not considering anything else.


I don't think they would really perform death penalty for a single murder. I had thought it would be reserved for events like 911, mass murders, etc.

Definitely not saying I agree with Death penalty. I totally agree with you about how it is easy to make a mistake, which is irreversible in this case.

Also, even if they did do death penalty to single murders, I never said it would be the same for each murder, and it wouldn't be. They would carefully examine the specific case and choose the most appropriate mode of justice.

♫ She's got sunset on her breath, I inhaled just a little bit now I got no fear of death ♫
Test Subject
#29 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:23 AM
Quote: Originally posted by pinketamine
Let's suppose I kill a particular person I hate. Am I really a threat for everyone?


...yes.
Undead Molten Llama
#30 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:32 AM
Quote: Originally posted by pinketamine
Let's suppose I kill a particular person I hate. Am I really a threat for everyone? I don't think so. I think that every crime is different and trying to apply death penalty to ALL murders, ALL rapes or ALL anything is just plain stupid, not considering anything else.


Which is exactly why it ISN'T applied that way. If you killed a person you hated and were tried and convicted for the murder, you'd go through all sorts of evaluations to determine where your head is. If you proved yourself to be a completely deranged and unrepentant person who'd likely go on killing because you believe that it's your God-given mission to do so, that might put you up for the death penalty. If you killed someone because you hated them, specifically -- or because they were abusing you, maybe -- then that's a different thing altogether. Possibly, it would be considered a crime of passion and therefore the death penalty wouldn't even apply.

And in reality, I don't think the death penalty would EVER be applied across the board for all instances of a certain kind of crime. I support it, as I said, because it's generally reserved only for a certain KIND of one type of crime. At least, as I said, here in the US. (As I recall, you aren't American. )

So, really, this isn't much of a "debate." It's talking about something that would likely never, ever happen, except maybe in some horribly oppressive dictatorial place ruled over by a particularly sadistic dictator.

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
Scholar
#31 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:33 AM
Quote: Originally posted by iCad
I deliberately didn't say anything about that, you know. Trust you to take up the slack.


aw, gurl u is so swett <3

"You're born naked, and everything else is drag."
dA
Last.fm
tumblr
Undead Molten Llama
#32 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 12:45 AM
Quote: Originally posted by paksetti
aw, gurl u is so swett <3


Aw, I love you, too, man. <3

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
Scholar
#33 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 1:38 AM
bffs 4 lyf.

"You're born naked, and everything else is drag."
dA
Last.fm
tumblr
Undead Molten Llama
#34 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 1:42 AM
Quote: Originally posted by paksetti
bffs 4 lyf.


Totally BFFs. Now bring on the bug pictures.

I'm mostly found on (and mostly upload to) Tumblr these days because, alas, there are only 24 hours in a day.
Muh Simblr! | An index of my downloads on Tumblr.
Alchemist
#35 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 7:02 AM Last edited by SuicidiaParasidia : 15th Jun 2012 at 7:34 AM.
Quote: Originally posted by paksetti
(I know you weren't referring to me, but) I'm not saying that supporting the death penalty makes you a violent person, but I feel that if you support it, you have to admit that it's okay to kill another human being. I can't bring myself to say "What this person has done is so unforgivable that I have the right to end their life".

(if things like assisted suicide are out of the equation, but that's a whole other can of worms)


and with that, you have missed my entire point.

killing to eliminate a threat is not the same as murder. not the same. they are not interchangeable ideas.

when it comes down to it, there are 3 types of people in this world. the first type is the type that wouldnt harm a fly, even when threatened. the second is the type who would harm a fly, but ONLY if threatened. the third...makes a hobby out of harming flies, and does so with impunity.
now, imagine if the world had no second type of person, and it was just the lambs in with the lions.
how exactly do you expect life to continue if there are only those who refuse to defend themselves in any way, at risk of "becoming one of THEM", and the others, who feel there is absolutely no reason to respect that a person might want to carry out their existence peacefully and with minimal blood loss?

i might clarify: it is UTTERLY okay to kill a "human being" who has ZERO regard for another's desire to live their life. i thought it was common knowledge that we're alive to live our lives the way we plan to, and if we're all going to coexist, certain major rules need to be followed and cannot be negotiable. such as...dont drug/kidnap someone, then stab them to death and dismember their corpse, and then defile their dead body.
which, by the way, id LOVE to hear the cure for. personally, i dont care if they had a hard life; everyone does, and most come out of it functional or at least realize theres a problem and seek help BEFORE they get to that point.
anyone who does so (who commits that kind of crime...not seeks help before they get to that point, lol), is not a "human being" in my book, not even if they looked exactly like me. the minute you violate the right for someone to coexist peacefully with others, you have forfeited your humanity and are obviously in need of an escort off the field.

NOTE: this does NOT include people who genuinely accidentally kill others, kill out of self-defense, or other situations along that vein. i am thinking primarily of the dalhmers and the magnottas of the world, with the occasional drug cartel.

Quote: Originally posted by BlakeS5678
How do I put this in an ethical way?

In my opinion, Jail for life with NO parole is worse in my opinion. I mean, being dead, or staring at a jail cell wall for a good 30-60 years WISHING you were dead. Weigh the options, people.

And, if you were found guilty when you WEREN'T, then, you have the option to be set free. Because, the Ressurect-O-Nomitron hasn't been perfected in the outside world.

Yet.



Being in jail for life, BASICALLY, achieves that as well.


incorrect!
you have only to go so far as google to retrieve a list of people who have been killed in prison by other inmates before they could have a chance at being cleared.
life in prison isnt the same as being safely guarded and nourished properly for the rest of your existence.

"The more you know, the sadder you get."~ Stephen Colbert
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." ~ Jon Stewart
Versigtig, ek's nog steeds fokken giftig
And all the maladies of the world burst forth from Pandora's cooch
#36 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 7:42 AM
"In my opinion, Jail for life with NO parole is worse in my opinion. I mean, being dead, or staring at a jail cell wall for a good 30-60 years WISHING you were dead. Weigh the options, people. "

You'd be surprised at how many people would prefer to live for 30-60 years in a cell, instead of dying. Life can be sweet, even for the lowest dregs of humanity. Unless you were completely fatalistic (a very rare thing) most people would fight tooth and nail to avoid death, or else crumple like a baby bawling, while pissing themselves. And as others have said, sure they are locked up, but everything else is handed to them, at the taxpayers expense. Many people on Death Row, who are guilty of their crimes, are probably laughing it up. Until the day someone shanks them. The thing is, people adapt to almost anything, even captivity, until it becomes normal for them.
Retired
retired moderator
#37 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 8:24 AM
Okay. Step back a minute. In the simplest possible terms: Why are we even debating killing people?

I've never lived in the country with the death penalty, and I can't imagine how anyone can consider it an option. It's killing people, people!

CAW Wiki - A wiki for CAW users. Feel free to edit.

GON OUT, BACKSON, BISY BACKSON
Mad Poster
#38 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 10:28 AM
I used to hold the position that the death penalty removed a threat and a miscreant from society. I've changed my mind after considering many things, such as these:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

* Killing the killer does not bring back the victim nor undo any of the damage done. It worsens it.

* You never know what good someone may yet do in his lifetime, even from a jail cell. Killing a murderer erases the possibility of reform. This is not a judgement I am comfortable making.

* Everyone is capable of good and bad actions. Bad actions do not suddenly appear in someone from out of nowhere although it may appear that way at times.

* The death penalty costs taxpayers more in the US than keeping criminals in jail for life.

* How can a killer make restitution if he's dead? I like the idea of having some sort of restitution to the families of the victims.

* Even killers have parents, friends, and teachers (yes, teachers) who cry for them and cry for the horror of the crime they've committed. The community where these killers were raised mourns for the loss of promise, hope, and innocence. Putting them to death is punishment to these people and complicates their lives further. It is too much to bear.

* Executing the killer requires that innocent people become killers themselves.

* What kind of a society commits murder as a form of "punishment"? The rest of us are showing ourselves as unevolved and without compassion for allowing this.

* Ending another's life is violent even if it is accomplished quietly and calmly.

* This last piece gives me intense hope that some day we may have a way of changing the behavior of even the most violent in our society: The Brain on Trial. Warning - this is not a quick read, although it does explain for laymen some of what we know and don't know about human behavior and brain function.

Addicted to The Sims since 2000.
Retired
retired moderator
#39 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 2:29 PM
I think it's also important, VerDeTerre, to include the fact that people are wrongly convicted from time time on your list. Countries with the death penalty seem quite good at killing people only to years later find they got the wrong one.

CAW Wiki - A wiki for CAW users. Feel free to edit.

GON OUT, BACKSON, BISY BACKSON
Scholar
#40 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 2:42 PM Last edited by BlakeS5678 : 15th Jun 2012 at 2:52 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by SuicidiaParasidia
Incorrect! you have only to go so far as google to retrieve a list of people who have been killed in prison by other inmates before they could have a chance at being cleared. life in prison isnt the same as being safely guarded and nourished properly for the rest of your existence.


An inmate killing another inmate is another crime in itself, happens fairly rarely, and to me, is irrelevant to the issue at hand. Sure people DO die in prison, but, people also die by choking on their beard and biting their tongue. Does that mean we should say all beards are forbidden and tongues are evil? No, probably not.

http://www.neatorama.com/2007/03/12...ths-in-history/

Here's a list actually.

As for the whole bit, of how we have to pay tax payer money, to keep these people alive in Jail. Well, you'd be shocked on how much the death penalty costs.

(Here's a hint: It's a five digit number)

Quote: Originally posted by SuicidiaParasidia
and with that, you have missed my entire point.

killing to eliminate a threat is not the same as murder. not the same. they are not interchangeable ideas.


Oh, but, sweetie, that's exactly where YOU are wrong. Call it whatever you like, it's still murder. Call, it civilized murder. Ethical murder. Getting rid of a threat. It's still murder.

Quote: Originally posted by SuicidiaParasidia
when it comes down to it, there are 3 types of people in this world..


Say, no more. You've already made a VERY broad generalization. And, anything you say after that comment, will be just that, stereotyping or generalizing.

Just call me Blake! :)
Hola, hablo español también - Hi, I speak Spanish too.
Scholar
#41 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 3:27 PM
Quote: Originally posted by SuicidiaParasidia
and with that, you have missed my entire point.

killing to eliminate a threat is not the same as murder. not the same. they are not interchangeable ideas.

how exactly do you expect life to continue if there are only those who refuse to defend themselves in any way, at risk of "becoming one of THEM", and the others, who feel there is absolutely no reason to respect that a person might want to carry out their existence peacefully and with minimal blood loss?



I respect your opinion more than you've respected mine. I never said that it was the same, I just said that is is still ending a human life whether or not you think that a person deserves to die, that decision does not belong to you. period.

As for that last bolded part, is murder the only defense for you? Someone steals your purse, so instead of calling the cops to chase him down, and use force if necessary, you'd rather he just be killed for it?

I'm not saying that I don't approve of the use of force if necessary, if someone were holding a person hostage, It's completely reasonable to use a gun, taser, baton, or whatever means necessary to save an innocent person, short of choosing to just choosing to end their life because they're "bad, evil, not human, scum, and it'll make me feel better if this person's dead."




(seriously Blake, stfu if you're going to act like a dick. two wrongs don't make a right.)

"You're born naked, and everything else is drag."
dA
Last.fm
tumblr
world renowned whogivesafuckologist
retired moderator
#42 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 3:47 PM


Oi! Knock it off!

Cut it out with the bickering, name-calling, and snarking. Be respectful, both in attitude and in tone. If you cannot do this, then do not post in this thread again.

my simblr (sometimes nsfw)

“Dude, suckin’ at something is the first step to being sorta good at something.”
Panquecas, panquecas e mais panquecas.
Field Researcher
#43 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 3:55 PM
Quote: Originally posted by iCad
Which is exactly why it ISN'T applied that way. If you killed a person you hated and were tried and convicted for the murder, you'd go through all sorts of evaluations to determine where your head is. If you proved yourself to be a completely deranged and unrepentant person who'd likely go on killing because you believe that it's your God-given mission to do so, that might put you up for the death penalty. If you killed someone because you hated them, specifically -- or because they were abusing you, maybe -- then that's a different thing altogether. Possibly, it would be considered a crime of passion and therefore the death penalty wouldn't even apply.

And in reality, I don't think the death penalty would EVER be applied across the board for all instances of a certain kind of crime. I support it, as I said, because it's generally reserved only for a certain KIND of one type of crime. At least, as I said, here in the US. (As I recall, you aren't American. )

So, really, this isn't much of a "debate." It's talking about something that would likely never, ever happen, except maybe in some horribly oppressive dictatorial place ruled over by a particularly sadistic dictator.


I know, iCad, I was just saying why applying death penalty in ALL abuse casess as the OP says is simply wrong and stupid.

Quote: Originally posted by kiwi_tea
Okay. Step back a minute. In the simplest possible terms: Why are we even debating killing people?

I've never lived in the country with the death penalty, and I can't imagine how anyone can consider it an option. It's killing people, people!


I agree with you so much. I can't even understand why someone would want death penalty, in any case.
Mad Poster
#44 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 6:21 PM
Quote: Originally posted by kiwi_tea
I think it's also important, VerDeTerre, to include the fact that people are wrongly convicted from time time on your list. Countries with the death penalty seem quite good at killing people only to years later find they got the wrong one.
True. Thanks for pointing that out. I've also heard it hinted at that many who are accused of such crimes are not in a position to defend themselves due to some sort of mental disorder. In fact, they may be the type who could be convinced they were guilty even when they weren't, didn't understand the charge to which they confessed, or were worn down by the legal process.

Addicted to The Sims since 2000.
Scholar
#45 Old 15th Jun 2012 at 7:26 PM
Quote: Originally posted by HystericalParoxysm
Cut it out with the bickering, name-calling, and snarking. Be respectful, both in attitude and in tone. If you cannot do this, then do not post in this thread again.


Thank you. I think we all needed to take a chill pill.

Quote: Originally posted by paksetti
(Seriously Blake, stfu if you're going to act like a dick. Two wrongs don't make a right.)


I'm going to ignore that, because it seems you made it when you were angry about something.

Just call me Blake! :)
Hola, hablo español también - Hi, I speak Spanish too.
Instructor
#46 Old 16th Jun 2012 at 3:50 AM
What if a convicted killer gets a life sentence ( what really isn't a life sentence nowadays) and gets out and kills again?
What will you say to the family of that victim? "We are sorry we thought we reformed him, we thought he had lost the urge too kill, we are so sorry." Well, that won't cut it for me.

All the victims had lives to lead, making plans for tomorrow, getting married or on holidays ... and than someone who kills for the sake of killing takes that life away.
I'm sorry but I can't have compassion for a person like that, I feel sorry for the killers family that they had a person like that in their midst and have to cope with his actions.

A lot of people seem to be more concerned with what will happen to the killer, than getting proper justice for the victims.
If you are prepared to kill someone in a country/state what has the death penalty, you should be prepared for the consequences.
I do NOT agree that executing someone will make as murderers ... it's the law. If we kill that person on his way to jail, that would be murder.

I agree that some convicted killers could be innocent, but that is very rare and that's why killers sit on death row for years. If it can't be proven in say a decade that they are innocent, than their are most likely guilty.
Everyone in jail says that they are innocent, nobody admits of having committed a crime. Everyone wants to get out before their sentence is up.

In case you haven't noticed, I'm for the death penalty for serial killer who kill for the sake of killing.
I'm against it if like the OP asked, if you abuse people.

You can find more of my stuff here: http://www.blackpearlsims.com/downloads.php
Instructor
#47 Old 16th Jun 2012 at 6:23 AM
Quote: Originally posted by ~Dee~
What if a convicted killer gets a life sentence ( what really isn't a life sentence nowadays) and gets out and kills again?
What will you say to the family of that victim? "We are sorry we thought we reformed him, we thought he had lost the urge too kill, we are so sorry."


Well, it's better than "Sorry, but he is psycho, and... well, he's going to be killed. Okay, bye!"

Quote: Originally posted by ~Dee~
Everyone in jail says that they are innocent, nobody admits of having committed a crime.


...I have to disagree to that. It is more likely that they will admit in court, because they are after all, under oath. Yes, some people choose to refuse the blame. But when so much evidence gets stacked up against you, it gets completely pointless to argue against it. Lots of criminals sense the hopelessness and understand that denying it will do no good.

Quote: Originally posted by ~Dee~
A lot of people seem to be more concerned with what will happen to the killer, than getting proper justice for the victims.


Well, in many cases, what happens to the killer can indirectly or directly affect the public. As Blake has said somewhere above, a death sentence is expensive, and I assume that the public will have to pay for it... somehow.

As for the question "is death penalty murder?" I would have to say no, only because it's not a single person doing it, it's a large board of people carefully picking what to do that will be most beneficial. Yes, it's killing. But not... murder. I wouldn't slap that nasty word onto it. Don't they give them a last meal of whatever they want, and let them have a last wish or something? They can say goodbye, while an innocent homicide victim has none of those luxuries, they are just put under the power of one person who feels the need to kill. I guess when it all comes down to it, a criminal sentenced to death is not innocent, while a murder victim is. Usually. And I guess they kind of brought it upon themselves, for their behavior. If it was just one freak accident, then they wouldn't be killed in the first place. So they'd have to have done something really terrible.

♫ She's got sunset on her breath, I inhaled just a little bit now I got no fear of death ♫
Scholar
#48 Old 16th Jun 2012 at 2:26 PM Last edited by BlakeS5678 : 16th Jun 2012 at 2:39 PM.
Quote: Originally posted by piggypeach
I have to disagree to that. It is more likely that they will admit in court, because they are after all, under oath. Yes, some people choose to refuse the blame. But when so much evidence gets stacked up against you, it gets completely pointless to argue against it. Lots of criminals sense the hopelessness and understand that denying it will do no good.


Also, many criminals do plead guilty in negotiation of a much less harsh jail time.

"Is death penalty murder?"

A lot of people admit that's killing (for obvious reasons) but, not murder. I guess either you define murder as something other than killing someone or don't believe the death penalty is making people die. But, it is called the DEATH penalty.

This isn't even to do with whether I agree with the death penalty or not, but saying the death penalty isn't murder is like saying gay marriage isn't marriage.

(I know the word murder stings and you can't help but, envision a sociopath stabbing a little girl in her sleep. But, let's push that image out of our head. Thank you)

You see, gay marriage is marriage because it's STILL two consenting adults who love each other and promise that they'll spend the rest of their loves with each other. However, if you define marriage as something that is specifically between a man and a woman than I lose my case.

The same way the death penalty is the action of a human being taking the life of another. Ie; murder. However if you define murder differently than me I lose my case again.

We must agree to disagree, or this will become a debate nobody can win.

I propose the OP should define murder for this specific debate, to move forward with intelligent conversation.

Just call me Blake! :)
Hola, hablo español también - Hi, I speak Spanish too.
Lab Assistant
#49 Old 16th Jun 2012 at 3:01 PM
I'm half on this, but all I wish is that the UK put more effort into jail than just lock them in a cell with a board game for 20 years.....
Theorist
#50 Old 16th Jun 2012 at 4:12 PM
The OP doesn't have to define murder. Murder already has a definition - unlawful killing. For an execution to be unlawful it has to be extralegal. Ergo, the death penalty is not murder. It's a killing committed by the state, no more murder than a soldier shooting the enemy or someone properly exercising their right to defend their person or a doctor failing to save a patient.
 
Page 2 of 5
Back to top