Sasun Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 What do you think of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 I think that's an easy question ... there becomes a point where keeping a person alive just ain't worth it no mo ... in other words, keeping them alive costs more than their life is worth. Notice I am not talking about just criminals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamavor Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 I don't believe that this issue worth to be discussed. Only totally dehumanized Paleozoic minds can insist on keeping up with capital punishment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 I demand to speak to an attorney on this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamavor Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Iaba -daba- du who is calling me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Iaba -daba- du who is calling me? Tell that other Gamavor up there, if you would please, why we have capital punishment in our legal system in the US (especially in Texas). Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamavor Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Because Texans' dollars worth more than the rest in circulation all over the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azat Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 I don't believe that this issue worth to be discussed. Only totally dehumanized Paleozoic minds can insist on keeping up with capital punishment. Agree 1000000000000% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 You guys suck. But the pole is 2-2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamavor Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Because you voted twice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 You guys suck Ya, you guys should be shot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted September 1, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Yeah, not really much to talk about. It's interesting to know how the forumers look at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 This question is too black and white. If someone arbitrarily goes out and kills someone then the death penalty is justified. There is always the chance, however, that the WRONG person is convicted. The death penalty has been shown not to be a deterrent to future murders, yet wanton killing must be punished severely. Even though I have a position on almost everything, on this subject I am in a dilemma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 I am firmly against death penality. It is one of the greatest contradiction, that ones sentence will be the same as for what he has been sentenced. And, I believe that it is the greatest crime, the most premedited killing of all. There is nothing more cold blooded than the execution of someone for a soc-alled justice that it is NOT. How can anyone understand, or if there is anything to understand, on the killing of someone that is so premedited, or if there is any worst crime that a state could commit. Anyone that is for death penality, does not realise, that every killing has its reason, that could be understood... but not in this case, because in this case, there is no understanding, the reason why the person has been killed, no one can understand, because the individual like I said, would be killed for a justice that it is not. Another note: Punishment exist to punish someone, in order to change him, in order to make him a better person, in order that he does not do the same mistake. For that reason, death penality can not be a punishment, it is rather a vengence... because there is no real reason to kill the person. Think about that, a serial killer will kill because of his illness, because of his sociopathic psycopathy, again there is reasons. A raper that kill his victim, the killing is done for a reason again, he don't want to leave traces that would lead to him. So again, in every cases, we can TRY to understand. But what is there to TRY to understand, in the killing of a person, because he was sentenced to death? It is simply called "justice" and there is no way to understand why it is justice to kill someone. In those extrem cases, of serial killers, dangerious individuals... still there is no reason to kill him. Those people are like other species that are not part of or evolved civilisation as humans. If after everything we realise that they can never live in society, we isolate them, and they live with their kinds. We know that letting lions live with humans,m it is dangerious for humans... because the lions will eat them. Is that a reason to kill lions? Those serial killers, psycopathics... are just like that, they can not live with us humans, like lions can not... we must just isolate them so that they can live with their kinds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Notice I am not talking about just criminals. You mean kids right, Sip? Sasun, you posted this under "theology", does that mean "death penalty from a theological perspective", or in general? Theologically I have no idea, but generally, I don't know. I think I'm with Hagarag on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Domino - I agree on the most part - but what about the sicko who diddles little kids? He's sick, yes, but that's not really a valid excuse, is it? And if Doctors determine that he's not going to get better, well than he's hopeless. A second or a third time offender who has NO fear/concern for the consequences, who has ruined the lives of many children and their families. Does he deserve to live - and to live without a care? Three square meals a day, access to a library, to books and magazines, to computers? Excercise an hour a day - laundry, cigarettes, free health care...man, some people work HARD just to get the life security that he has 'earned' by raping children! And after 20 years, he gets a day pass once in a while to a half-way house, where he gets the opportunity to diddle another little kid. Geez. I'm on the fence about the Death penality - every instinct in my body tells me it's wrong - but I keep running into examples and instances that scream for it. <_< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted September 1, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 You mean kids right, Sip? Sasun, you posted this under "theology", does that mean "death penalty from a theological perspective", or in general? Theologically I have no idea, but generally, I don't know. I think I'm with Hagarag on this one. Nairi, the reason I posted in theology is because there was a recent discussion on death penalty in this section and I didn't have time to think where else to put. But what I had in mind, in general, was "yes" or "no", without "if"s and "but"s. I didn't put a "don't know" option on purpose. Imagine you are on a death row, for whatever reason, and also that you want justice to be held no matter what. So what is the answer, yes or no? This is the kind of the answer I was hoping could be understood. Somebody whose life depends on this qustion doesn't want to hear "i don't know" type of answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted September 1, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Domino, I agree with you. And add one more thing, we are supposed to not only try to change the killer, but also prevent future killings. So we should also try to understand potential killers. Vava, you are making a valid point. However, no matter what the crime, I think death penalty is wrong. If the child molester is going to go out of jail after some time and do the same thing then it is very unfair and something is wrong with the "correction" he has received. Maybe there simply is no way that we know could change him, but maybe there is or there will be in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Sasun, can I be really cheeky and say that I hope I'll never have to be in a position where someone else needs to answer that question for me? The main reason I would be against death penalty is the possibility of an innocent person being held responsible for something he or she didn't do. There have been plenty of cases where innocent people were killed on death row because the law failed to protect them (or whatever). For a long time I wanted to believe that reforming a person is possible, but I'm beginning to wonder if that really is so. This may be true for many young delinquents, but what about older ones? At the end of the day, I think I would still opt for life-time imprisonment; and I mean LIFE-TIME, not 20 or 30 years. I mean 'til natural death do them part from this earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 (edited) Vava, if those sicks life is made too easy in prison, it is not a reason to kill them, but rather change the system. I believe they should be forced to work. I talked about that in the past. A kind of state owned compagny, all what they cost, would be pied by them, and the rest of the profit, return to the society. Edited September 1, 2003 by Fadix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted September 1, 2003 Report Share Posted September 1, 2003 Vava, if those sicks life is made too easy in prison, it is not a reason to kill them, but rather change the system. I believe they should be forced to work. I talked about that in the past. A kind of state owned compagny, all what they cost, would be pied by them, and the rest of the profit, return to the society. So then what is more humaine? Slave labour, or the death penalty? And still, the question of incarcerating an innocent remains.... Why should WE (the law abiding public) pay to keep someone alive - an incorrigible menace to society, who has admitted his crime? It can cost up to 50K a year to feed, house, guard and maintain the health of a prisoner - not to mention their entertainment. Over 30 to 40 years: THAT'S OVER ONE AND A HALF MILLION $$$ - not including inflation, interest etc. Don't you think some poor families, or injured or unemployeed law-abiding people are more deserving? How about health-care? Federal debt? Education? There are better places to put the money than good-for-nothing, hopelessly sick individuals. I too, have trouble with the thought of taking a life. But what are the alternatives? Domino says we should isolate them - ok. where? An island somewhere? A jail? what's it going to cost? what if there's a jailbreak? What a Breave New World it would be... ...Send them inot space, maybe? As for the system being in dire need of some 'fixin' - I agree wholeheartedly. Here's an example of what burns me up 7 / 17 / 2002 Convicts get special treatment OTTAWA – Frederick Earl Fisk is a convicted killer. In 1997, this known Hells Angels associate was sentenced to life in prison after he shot a man in the head seven times over the non-payment of a drug debt. He is currently serving time in the maximum security Kent Prison in Agassiz, BC. A few months back he began an affair with the separated wife of a Powell River man, after he received conjugal visit privileges. Now, she is pregnant with his child. What happens next? Correctional Services of Canada buys Fisk a plane ticket at taxpayers’ expense, to fly him over 400 kilometres from the prison to a Powell River hospital to see the prenatal ultrasound. When asked if this is a common occurrence, Corrections officials admitted that although it is not common “that’s not to say there couldn’t be a rare or occasional case where someone would be allowed to go.” “Welcome to the Liberal government’s version of prisoner rehabilitation,” said Opposition Solicitor General Critic Randy White. “I was under the impression that when you go to prison that you lose some of your privileges and freedoms, not gain them. So far, Corrections has given this couple time to meet, a place to have sex in the prison since she can come visit him for up to four days at a time, and are now providing a convicted killer a front row seat for the miracle of birth, which is occurring with another man’s wife.” Corrections officials would not discuss the details of the case, nor would they comment if Fisk would be flown to Powell River for the birth of the child. “Where does it end?” asked White. “This is a dangerous precedent that I am sure other inmates will be using in order to get out of prison. If you let a maximum-risk offender out, how can you stop an inmate from a lower level institution from going? I wouldn’t be surprised if he was let out to attend a baby shower….we as taxpayers have already provided them with a gift.”- 30 - WTF??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamavor Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 Vava, you are right from cost efficiency point of view. On the other hand don't you think that by executing a death row inmate you eliminate a valuable customer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 On the other hand don't you think that by executing a death row inmate you eliminate a valuable customer! Oh my god it all makes sense now! Gee I tell ya .... only lawyers!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 Guys, wanna hear something really funny? LOL. A convicted armed robber fell off his bed (bunk) onto his head, took the state government to court and won AUS$100,000 (approx US$65,000). See if I can find the article on the net.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accelerated Posted September 2, 2003 Report Share Posted September 2, 2003 here we go.... Prisoner who fell from bunk could have got more: ministerSeptember 2, 2003 A prisoner believed to have been awarded more than $100,000 in compensation for injuries sustained in a fall from a cell bunk could have received four times as much had the case gone to court, the NSW Government has said. The Justice Minister, John Hatzistergos, said a payout was made after Craig Ballard, a former Grafton Correctional Centre inmate, was injured in 1999. He would not confirm reports the amount was in excess of $100,000, but said the bill could have been much more. Mr Hatzistergos said: "The advice that the department [of corrective services] received from the Crown solicitor and counsel appearing for the department . . . was that in the event this matter was to proceed to court the department was exposed to a potential payout of more than four times the reported figure." However, new Civil Liability Act legislation restricted the liability of public authorities in such cases, he said. "Because of the tighter tests on negligence a person bringing such a claim would be less likely to be successful," he said. "And in any event even if successful, lower thresholds for damage would mean any compensation would be considerably less." The Government was also reviewing court actions taken by inmates against the Department of Corrective Services, he said. The Premier, Bob Carr, said the matter was a hangover from pre-reform days. "I think it's wrong that prisoners and their lawyers have been able to use the laws in this state [to gain compensation], but that's why we fixed it," he said. "If you've assaulted or murdered a law-abiding citizen I think you forgo the right to invoke public liability to get a big cash payout and that's the law that we've now got in place." The Opposition leader, John Brogden, said it was ludicrous the payout to Mr Ballard was double the amount available to a victim of crime. "It's not good enough that criminals get more for falling out of bed in jail than the victims of crime get for an application in NSW after a vicious crime," Mr Brogden said. "If a person fell out of bed at home they would get nothing, so why should a jail inmate who falls out of bed in prison get $100,000?" The NSW Senior Assistant Commissioner for Corrective Services, Ian McLean, confirmed the prisoner's bunk had not been properly bolted. Mr Ballard reportedly suffered serious head injuries, leading to memory loss, impaired speech and dependence on medical treatment and medication. His payout came to light a fortnight after Kevin Presland was awarded $300,000 after he sued a doctor and the Hunter Area Health Service for negligence. Mr Presland's claim was based on his discharge from hospital while suffering alcohol-induced hallucinations, during which he stabbed a woman to death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.