Death Penalty

Originally posted by Schecter
If money is all you consider then I think you are more hopeless than those who want to kill for revenge. In fact, I would seriously question whether or not you have a soul.

I do not follow your logic. They are condemned to death regardless...one is just much faster and cheaper than another and IMO, more humane. (maybe)

I would rather be executed than spend 50 years in prison where the only release is my death. That is much more inhumane. I would question whether or not you cannot think objectively about this situation. Again, reference "The Bet".

And, yes, you should know by now that money makes the world go round. Instead of thinking about how horrible my perspective is, think realistically. A major deciding factor/argument in this discussion IS money.

Please provide evidence that it costs more to execute than it does to keep someone in the system until their death. If no evidence exists, than I will remain on the fence until someone provides evidence otherwise.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Apparently, because I'm against killing and any kind of punishment, I'm a nutcase. Anyway, the death penalty is wrong.

If you are against any kind of punishment, then yes, you are a nutcase. How do you propose to deter crime? Or are you happy with people walking around stealing, raping and murdering, without facing any consequences? In your world, is it every man and woman for themselves, and only the strongest survive?

Nutcase might be too mild a term...

And if you believe the death penalty is wrong, then what do you think murder is?

Murder is also wrong.

Doesn't make the death penalty right, it makes it hypocritical.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I do not follow your logic. They are condemned to death regardless...one is just much faster and cheaper than another and IMO, more humane. (maybe)

I would rather be executed than spend 50 years in prison where the only release is my death. That is much more inhumane. I would question whether or not you cannot think objectively about this situation. Again, reference "The Bet".

And, yes, you should know by now that money makes the world go round. Instead of thinking about how horrible my perspective is, think realistically. A major deciding factor/argument in this discussion IS money.

Please provide evidence that it costs more to execute than it does to keep someone in the system until their death. If no evidence exists, than I will remain on the fence until someone provides evidence otherwise.

you are declaring that money alone dictates whether or not you believe human beings should be put to death.

therefore i question whether you have a soul.

its really simple, when you stop and think about it. all the cliches about the money keepin the world a-goin-round doesnt change how ****ed up or even nonexistant your sense of morality and principles are. no offense.

:edit: and even if you're FOR the death penalty, ffs have a better reason than money. fukin hell

Originally posted by BackFire
Murder is also wrong.

Doesn't make the death penalty right, it makes it hypocritical.

So what d you propose? To sit there with your hands folded and pray for the best?

Originally posted by Schecter
you are declaring that money alone dictates whether or not you believe human beings should be put to death.

therefore i question whether you have a soul.

its really simple, when you stop and think about it. all the cliches about the money keepin the world a-goin-round doesnt change how ****ed up or even nonexistant your sense of morality and principles are. no offense.

:edit: and even if you're FOR the death penalty, ffs have a better reason than money. fukin hell

You question the fact that he has a soul, merely because he looks at the practicalities of the issue.

So, if you doubt whether someone has a soul just because he can take into consideration the fact that we, as a society, pay for the clothing, feeding and housing of these murderers and rapists, I would be fascinated to your what your position is on the souls of these aforementioned convicted criminals?

Originally posted by Schecter
you are declaring that money alone dictates whether or not you believe human beings should be put to death.

O rly?

Originally posted by dadudemon
A major deciding factor/argument in this discussion IS money.

Originally posted by Schecter
therefore i question whether you have a soul.

Because your original point fails, this next point also fails.

Originally posted by Schecter
its really simple, when you stop and think about it. all the cliches about the money keepin the world a-goin-round doesnt change how ****ed up or even nonexistant your sense of morality and principles are. no offense.

O really? So you mean to tell me that money is not a major deciding factor/argument for or against the death penalty? That really shows how f***ed up your perspective on reality is.

Originally posted by Schecter
:edit: and even if you're FOR the death penalty, ffs have a better reason than money. fukin hell

Whatever the f*** an FF is.

Do you remember this post?

Originally posted by dadudemon
The other part of me realizes how barbaric it is to still be executing each other. In a Christian dominated society like America, how can we kill another when our very religion COMMANDS us not to do it?

Wow...double fail. This is not like you, Schecter. You are usually fairly thorough and your arguments are very well constructed.

And as for your soul argument....

Please see this thread:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f80/t479017.html

Atheists have morals too. Triple fail FTW? 😄

Originally posted by Dreampanther
So what d you propose? To sit there with your hands folded and pray for the best?

Prison.

You know, lock them up. The obvious alternative to murdering them; committing the same exact act you are condemning them to die for.

And for the record, yes, it is fact. It costs more to put someone to death than to keep them in prison for life.

Originally posted by Dreampanther
If you are against any kind of punishment, then yes, you are a nutcase. How do you propose to deter crime? Or are you happy with people walking around stealing, raping and murdering, without facing any consequences? In your world, is it every man and woman for themselves, and only the strongest survive?

Nutcase might be too mild a term...

And if you believe the death penalty is wrong, then what do you think murder is?

Originally posted by BackFire
Prison.

You know, lock them up. The obvious alternative to murdering them; committing the same exact act you are condemning them to die for.

And for the record, yes, it is fact. It costs more to put someone to death than to keep them in prison for life.

Your argument is the same argument anti-death penalty peeps argue. They say it is a much better punishment to have them be in prison the rest of their life rather than being given the wonderful escape of execution.

Do you see the flaw in this argument?

derher fail double fail triple fail fail dur hur

anyway:

Originally posted by dadudemon
A major deciding factor/argument in this discussion IS money.

as YOU even quoted to somehow prove that you never said it...i guess?

so how the **** did you somehow prove me wrong? by validating my view or by whoring the word "fail"?

:edit: you know what? dont answer that. it will not make sense and ill be annoyed. just have your typical 'o rly' 'quintiple fail' last word with no substance and all posturing and we'll just say you win, k tinktink?

Originally posted by Schecter
if money is all you consider than i think you are more hopeless than those who want to kill for revenge. in fact i would seriously question whether or not you have a soul

As for the money factor, how much is a gun and bullets?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Your argument is the same argument anti-death penalty peeps argue. They say it is a much better punishment to have them be in prison the rest of their life rather than being given the wonderful escape of execution.

Do you see the flaw in this argument?

No, because there is no flaw.

And that's not even what I said.

I said it's hypocritical. He asked what else is there (as if murdering people is the only punishment available), I pointed out that prison is the other alternative. I'm not taking into account what the criminal may want, simply saying that condemning someone for murder, and then murdering them, is hypocritical.

Besides, putting them in prison is cheaper, and it does allow for the possibility of redemption and rehabilitation. Not to mention that it allows for someone to be released should it later be discovered that they were in fact innocent of the crime they're being held for. If they're dead...you know, can't release them.

That's the biggest problem with the death penalty. The fact that our justice system isn't nearly accurate or good enough to rely on to ensure that everyone who is arrested and found guilty actually committed the crime. There have been a number of innocent people put to death by our government through capital punishment. That alone should be a deterrent for it, at least until there is a way to guarantee that there is a zero percent chance that an innocent person will ever be put to death again. There is no such possible guarantee, since humans error.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Money should be considered though. I wouldn't want people to spend lots of money on my death, that's just selfish and they could do so much more with the money.

As for the money factor, how much is a gun and bullets?

if a standard american principle is that money should influence whether or not its ok to put a human being to death, im off to join frikin al quada.

Originally posted by Schecter
derher fail double fail triple fail fail dur hur

anyway:

as YOU even quoted to somehow prove that you never said it...i guess?

so how the **** did you somehow prove me wrong? by validating my view or by whoring the word "fail"?

Wow. This post is made of fail.

You, the one her loves to purvey the word fail, have no room to go to town on my use of the word fail.

I quoted myself to show how you were wrong. You said:

Originally posted by Schecter
you are declaring that money alone dictates whether or not you believe human beings should be put to death.

To which I replied with my quote. Why are you out of wack today with your arguments? This is not like you.

Seriously, are you drunk?

Originally posted by BackFire
Prison.

You know, lock them up. The obvious alternative to murdering them; committing the same exact act you are condemning them to die for.

And for the record, yes, it is fact. It costs more to put someone to death than to keep them in prison for life.

No, actually, it doesn't. The cost of the LEGAL CASE is more, since you include all the appeals, all the postponements, all the legal costs, etc.

Which I don't.

In SA last year we had more than 55 000 reported rape case (statistics indicate that the true figure is more than double that. We also had almost 20 000 murders.

Now take into account the cost of building new prisons, with new facilities, training and employing new warders - the costs involved to make sure that all these prisoners' rights are protected...

See, I read the same articles as you do, but I also know a little bit about research and statistics.

Very conveniently all the articles you refer to include all the legal costs of the death penalty trials and all their appeals - which only makes sense because the current law ALLOWS murderers and rapists to appeal, and appeal again, and again, and again...

But these same articles conveniently forget to add the costs that are involved with housing, feeding and clothing an increasing population of violent criminals, who prey on each other as ruthlessly inside the prisons as they do on innocents outside.

So, where does your morality stand on the fact that rape and assault is common inside prisons?

Are you soothing your conscience by arguing that well, they might be victims of violent assault, over and over and over again, but at least they aren't dead?

oh i get it. so because i mistakenly added 'alone', you get to dance around the point and win.

ok tink tink. i stand corrected. now read the same ****ing sentence and omit 'alone'.

Originally posted by Schecter
if a standard american principle is that money should influence whether or not its ok to put a human being to death, im off to join frikin al quada.

Originally posted by Schecter
oh i get it. so because i mistakenly added 'alone', you get to dance around the point and win.

ok tink tink. i stand corrected. now read the same ****ing sentence and omit 'alone'.

let me try...

duurrrr dur narf narf...dur...liek dat really changes the point I made.

I can use the same type of perspective that you used above and I tell you that it still doesn't change my point in anyway shape or form.

Wanna see it again?

Originally posted by dadudemon
A major deciding factor/argument in this discussion IS money.

Your above approach is very fundamentally flawed. What gives, bro? Don't debate with me if you are drunk...I find that insulting.

Do you mind addressing my other points?

Has anyone thought about throwing meat on the floor?