"You have forfeited your right to live"

[Richelieu]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Yes it is

phew

Now that was a healthy debate! I hope you all learn something from this kids.

[Richelieu]

Originally posted by laurentius
What the hell is this judge trying to do? Play God? If so then Carlie is as guilty to murder as the defendant.

What?

[Last Conformist]

So issuing a death sentence is playing God now?

That's a new one, I think.

[Dinner]

No, it is a very old red herring of an argument.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Richelieu
phew

Now that was a healthy debate! I hope you all learn something from this kids.

Death penalty, in this case (and in all cases where it passes off as warranted, I won't even mention gross injustices) is the easy way out. Can't figure out an appropriate punishment? Just kill the man! Primitives have been doing it for thousands, if not millions, of years.

Civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond such blatant and unadapted simplism. Heck, the man is the kind who fears for his life, begged for mercy, and yet it didn't prevent him from killing the girl. If anything, his fear strengthened his willingness to kill the girl.

Death penalty might create some feelgood at gut-level, but it is has no use in judiciary matters.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Flubber
Lets save some time


No its not


YES it is

NO its Not


YES IT IS

NO ITS NOT

Now that that portions of the debate has been fully explored . .. . please do proceed

You did forget the rolleyes

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Oerdin
No, it is a very old red herring of an argument.

I don't think I've heard it before ...

Anyway, as an observational fact, people kill people, while god does diddly squat. If the judge was playing god, he'd do nothing at all.

[VetLegion]

What if they got the wrong guy? You people trust the system too much. Death penalty

[Last Conformist]

Considering he abducted here on camera, I'd think that's not much of a concern in this case.

[Datajack Franit]

@ Spiffor

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Death penalty might create some feelgood at gut-level, but it is has no use in judiciary matters.

On the contraire, it acts as a deterent to future crimes. And before you ask for cites please realize that we've all been through this a million times and it always boils down to one side posting obviously biased anti-DP studies, the other other side posting obviously biased pro-DP studies, and then there is a small middle ground of actual well done scientific studies which say there is some deterent effect but it is small especially since it can take decades between the crime and when the sentence is served.

I've gone though that debate at least a dozen times and I won't do it again. That is how it always ends up.

[Richelieu]

[Sava]

Originally posted by Spiffor


Civilization is supposed to have evolved beyond such blatant and unadapted simplism.

On the contrary. If technological development has taught us anything, it is that a better design is a simple one.


I've still yet to hear an explanation of how keeping murderers alive is of any benefit to society. Maybe you can explain this to me now Spiffor. Please. I'd like to know.

Our planet has too many people already. There are innocent children starving... why don't we use our resources to feed them instead of providing for people who don't deserve to live?

Our resources our limited. It seems to me, we shouldn't be using them on people that seek to hurt and kill other people.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

If it was simple enough for those damned "primitives" to figure out, why are we having trouble with this issue now?

[Richelieu]

Again, I think the judge said it well: "You have forfeited your right to live."

[Sava]