Death Penalty - Page 4

slaveboy321 · 04-23-2011, 10:47 AM

i'd say the death penalty should be used in only some very extreme situations, like treason or mass murder

Manbearpig · 04-25-2011, 09:22 AM

I used to be deadset against it. However, in cases of terrorism or any kind of mass murder, then the possibility has to remain open. However, I think the possibility of someone remaining behind bars for their entire lifes seems far worse than ending their life early, especially in cases where those executed would be celebrated for being killed.

Yossarian · 04-25-2011, 12:59 PM

You hear stories of some real scumbags. The sort of people who randomly abduct, torture, rape, maim and eventually kill for the sheer fun of it. They have denied someone their human rights for their own pleasure. So what entitles them to human rights?
Thats a controversial view, but there are some bad people out there.

Manbearpig · 05-01-2011, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yossarian

You hear stories of some real scumbags. The sort of people who randomly abduct, torture, rape, maim and eventually kill for the sheer fun of it. They have denied someone their human rights for their own pleasure. So what entitles them to human rights?
Thats a controversial view, but there are some bad people out there.

Thanks for this. I was trying to think of something for my last post on an example of where it would be acceptable in my views and this particular scenario would fall into such circumstances. A scumbag who has no regret or remorse or will have no one to celebrate their death (as a terrorist organization would)

SilverScar · 05-01-2011, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yossarian

So what entitles them to human rights?

The chance to still be innocent.

Look, murder is a terrible thing, but you can’t help the victim, it won’t help them if you kill the murderer. But you can help some innocently convicted people by not killing them!

Bethany · 05-01-2011, 06:09 AM

I am in favor of the death penalty. just kill em all

fred&ted · 05-01-2011, 08:04 AM

I'm against it, besides I think it would be worse spending the rest of your life in prison, have them in solitude all day by themselves. I see the death penalty as just an easy way out.

florida87x · 05-01-2011, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yossarian

You hear stories of some real scumbags. The sort of people who randomly abduct, torture, rape, maim and eventually kill for the sheer fun of it. They have denied someone their human rights for their own pleasure. So what entitles them to human rights?
Thats a controversial view, but there are some bad people out there.

I'm confused. What is controversial about this view? Isn't this pretty much the view of people who are for the death penalty?

My question about the death penalty is, what is the point? Who is helped by killing someone who is already behind bars?

PineForest · 05-01-2011, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by florida87x

My question about the death penalty is, what is the point? Who is helped by killing someone who is already behind bars?

What is cheaper? feeding, sheltering a man for life in prison or just killing him?
Also what happens if he'd escape and killed again?

I don't agree with the death penalty, but in the right circumstances, i think it should be used.

SilverScar · 05-01-2011, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PineForest

What is cheaper? feeding, sheltering a man for life in prison or just killing him?

What's more important, money or innocent lifes?
And the government spend a lot more money for stupid purposes, I don't think feeding some prisoner would cost so much.

florida87x · 05-01-2011, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PineForest

What is cheaper? feeding, sheltering a man for life in prison or just killing him?
Also what happens if he'd escape and killed again?

I don't agree with the death penalty, but in the right circumstances, i think it should be used.

If you worry about cost, why not just have him manufacturing license plates or something to help bring the cost down? Is cost really the reason that we think we should kill someone? The US jails millions of people, and the portion on death row being kept alive indefinitely would not cause much of an increase in costs.

As for the chances that he would escape and kill again, does this happen a lot? It seems sort of disingenuous to say that we should execute someone purely because we don't think the jail is secure enough to hold him. In that case, why didn't we just build a better jail? It isn't like we want the other people in it escaping and committing crimes again either.

And honestly, if you think that "under the right circumstances," the death penalty should be used, you are for the death penalty. Not many reasonable people are for it in the wrong circumstances.

One argument I heard against the death penalty was this:
Let's say it takes unanimous agreement between a judge and jury (like it did where I am from) to find someone guilty and sentence him to death. That's thirteen people, in some states.

Why is thirteen people the right number? Why not fourteen? Why not eleven? Or a hundred?

What is the number of people that need to believe a person should be killed before we kill them? If a thousand believed someone should be killed, would we do it without the trial? What's the magic number?

PineForest · 05-02-2011, 05:33 AM

This is one of these arguments that everyone has very different views, much like embryonic stem cell research. I think the death penalty should be only be applied to psychopathic serial killers. According to studies, psychopathy could be a genetic condition, but it can also be caused by environmental factors or a combination or both. These people get a buzz or aroused by killing.
Imagine them spending the rest of their life in prison getting of with the memories of killing people. Wouldn't it be easier to just eliminate them and not worry at all. Plus we also remove them from our gene pool, which is another plus.

SilverScar · 05-02-2011, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PineForest

Wouldn't it be easier to just eliminate them and not worry at all. Plus we also remove them from our gene pool, which is another plus.

Killing people because they have bad inherited attributes (genetic condition), cleaning the human gene pool from "filth", and selective breeding of human race, creating the „Übermensch” was one of the base ideas of Adolf Hitler. Since him, we know that these ideas are stupid, and dangerous.

And genetic diversity is good, the more diverse a race the more chance it has to survive. Sometimes, because of the changing environment, a formerly „bad” attribute can be the strongest one.

I don’t say psychopaths are good people, and will save us all, just I hate the idea to kill someone because he has bad genes. Treat them, as we treat other ill people – but at the moment, we don’t have any perfect psychiatric treatment for them, so the best thing to do is to lock them up.

PineForest · 05-02-2011, 06:01 AM

But locking them up is so cruel, rotting away for life. I would rather die, than to be locked up for the rest of my life.

redtiger · 05-02-2011, 09:41 PM

I support the concept but vehemently oppose its current application. The death penalty should only be applied to those few people who are such extreme sociopaths they have become predators of other humans (i.e. Ted Bundy, Alberto Salazar, Charles Manson, etc.). Unfortunately, the penalty is usually applied based on heinousness of the crime. One fit of rage resulting in an extremely violent act by an otherwise calm, rational person should not justify the death penalty. Likewise, that a serial killer smothers each of his victims for a painless death should not excuse him from being removed from the population as a predator.

View Poll Results: Are you in favor for the Death Penalty?
Yes	44	27.16%
No	42	25.93%
Depends on the circumstances	76	46.91%
Voters: 162. You may not vote on this poll

04-23-2011, 10:47 AM	#46
slaveboy321 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 12	i'd say the death penalty should be used in only some very extreme situations, like treason or mass murder __________________ likes a lot: anal isertions, humiliation, wearing girls clothes, likes: anything which are not on dislikes dilsikes: extreme pain, full public, familly, permanent

05-01-2011, 06:09 AM	#51
Bethany Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Santa clara California Posts: 27	I am in favor of the death penalty. just kill em all __________________ Likes: masturbation,Wedgies , Public(Semi). Small pain. Crossdressing. Dislikes: Alot of pain,blood,scat.permanant and family involvment.

05-01-2011, 08:04 AM	#52
fred&ted Distinguished Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 506 Blog Entries: 1	I'm against it, besides I think it would be worse spending the rest of your life in prison, have them in solitude all day by themselves. I see the death penalty as just an easy way out. __________________ Likes:Wedgies, Orgasm Denial, Cum Control, Bondage, Puppy Play and Cross Dressing Dislike:Spankings, Nipple torture, Pain, Cum Eating and Semi Public Limits:Family, Friends, Public, Messy and Photo's/Videos. I want to push my limits. GetDare Survivor! REBOOT!

04-25-2011, 09:22 AM	#47
Manbearpig getDare Expert Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The internet Posts: 3,085 Blog Entries: 211	I used to be deadset against it. However, in cases of terrorism or any kind of mass murder, then the possibility has to remain open. However, I think the possibility of someone remaining behind bars for their entire lifes seems far worse than ending their life early, especially in cases where those executed would be celebrated for being killed.

04-25-2011, 12:59 PM	#48
Yossarian Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 55	You hear stories of some real scumbags. The sort of people who randomly abduct, torture, rape, maim and eventually kill for the sheer fun of it. They have denied someone their human rights for their own pleasure. So what entitles them to human rights? Thats a controversial view, but there are some bad people out there.

05-02-2011, 05:33 AM	#57
PineForest Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: WA Posts: 60	This is one of these arguments that everyone has very different views, much like embryonic stem cell research. I think the death penalty should be only be applied to psychopathic serial killers. According to studies, psychopathy could be a genetic condition, but it can also be caused by environmental factors or a combination or both. These people get a buzz or aroused by killing. Imagine them spending the rest of their life in prison getting of with the memories of killing people. Wouldn't it be easier to just eliminate them and not worry at all. Plus we also remove them from our gene pool, which is another plus.

05-02-2011, 06:01 AM	#59
PineForest Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: WA Posts: 60	But locking them up is so cruel, rotting away for life. I would rather die, than to be locked up for the rest of my life.

05-02-2011, 09:41 PM	#60
redtiger Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Earth Posts: 57	I support the concept but vehemently oppose its current application. The death penalty should only be applied to those few people who are such extreme sociopaths they have become predators of other humans (i.e. Ted Bundy, Alberto Salazar, Charles Manson, etc.). Unfortunately, the penalty is usually applied based on heinousness of the crime. One fit of rage resulting in an extremely violent act by an otherwise calm, rational person should not justify the death penalty. Likewise, that a serial killer smothers each of his victims for a painless death should not excuse him from being removed from the population as a predator.