Captiol Punishment

[Linx_is_me]

Capitol Punishment
A friend did this for a school project I am very interested on your thoughts about this Serious issue. Either post them on here or on the video , i personally would post them both places .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SQgXIzF50s&feature=sub

[Jokersvirus]

Its not really an issue per say.. It was designed to prevent others from doing horrible crimes, yet murder, treason, terrorism, still high as ever.

Its a needed service. If we didnt kill those who deserve to die the system would be overflowing, it still is right now but it is to a lesser degree.

Personal, you take the life of someone you have lost any right to be alive yourself, that excludes self defense.

[BobTD]

I dont think it does anything to help our prison overcrowding because its such a small number of people due to the lengthy appeal system and all the time and money involved.

However when capitol punishment was repealed for a time in the past we did see a significant raise in violent crimes. Its best at what it is, a deterrent.

We use it to put our foot down and say some things just are not tolerable.

[Linx_is_me]

This is the comment I posted on this Video under my youtube account
49 minutes ago

I think is kinda funny how All these people Are all like THEY should ROT in jail and Kill them and stuff . pfff I think that one to kill a person for killing somebody else does not make any sense like that one girl said . But its NOT ABOUT WHAT THEY DESERVE . It is about how can we help them get better or at least keep them from the people who they want to hurt . To have a attitude like Oh Kill that loser , should make you feel bad for every bad thing you do .

[Jokersvirus]

Putting someone to death has several purposes. First it shows the US will not tolerant killing people without reasonable justiftion, second its to show the families of those who are murdered that the system works, Third, it gives the Victim's Families peace of mind and ease knowing that their loved one got justice in the end, goes back to number 3.

Those who kill need to die, yes there is lesser form of murder, manslaughter, etc etc. Those who commit first degree murder, meaning they planned it out, need to fry.


But its NOT ABOUT WHAT THEY DESERVE . It is about how can we help them get better or at least keep them from the people who they want to hurt

Im not sure if you made this statement or that girl you speak of, whatever the case is... that is the most ignorant statement ever made in the world.

I do bad things in this world, but Ive never taken someones life so I will never feel bad for what "evils" i have committed.

[Linx_is_me]

So you don't think we should help these people . Almost every Child molester or Serial Killer was hurt at a younger age . I complete agree what they have done is wrong . I am not saying that what they did can be excused but to kill one person because they killed someone seems Stupid . Also you can say oh we kill them so they wont kill anyone else . Because you can keep them in solitude . I understand there is special cases for everything, I just think it is wrong to kill someone because they have done something wrong . Every one deserves a chance no matter who they are or what they have done . I am not going to put my self in a room with a murder and I am not going to treat them like everyone else but I am not going to kill them either .

[Jokersvirus]

Other I will ask you this, If your family was brutality murdered in front of you. I mean just the most unspeakable things you would only see in your nightmare happened in front of you, you would stand up in court and ask for them not to kill the man and to give him the help he needs?

Not everyone deserves to die, those who commit first degree murder do, They had their chance to live and they blew it the second they took the life of someone else.

I find it interesting you want to help murderers yet you wont put yourself in a room with them, and your not going to treat them like anyone else. That would make you a hypocrite, cause if you want to give them the help they need you have to treat them like like everyone else. So they can fit into the norm.

[EpsilonX]

Capitol Punishment is just the highest punishment able to be given by a judge. And it's only allowed to be given when a capital crime is committed. If a guy goes around and kills 3 cops and a judge, that's 4 capital crimes and the death sentence is coming.

that's what we learned in law class, i have no opinion on the matter

[Linx_is_me]

So you don't think we should help these people . Almost every Child molester or Serial Killer was hurt at a younger age . I complete agree what they have done is wrong . I am not saying that what they did can be excused but to kill one person because they killed someone seems Stupid . Also you can say oh we kill them so they wont kill anyone else . Because you can keep them in solitude . I understand there is special cases for everything, I just think it is wrong to kill someone because they have done something wrong . Every one deserves a chance no matter who they are or what they have done . I am not going to put my self in a room with a murder and I am not going to treat them like everyone else but I am not going to kill them either .

Well at the first part , I am going to be honest and say I would not know how I would respond to that because it has never happened to me . I have my thoughts on the matter but they are a little personal . As for me being a hypocrite. I am not a hypocrite for being smart enough not to put myself in a situation of personal harm if a person has done something wrong you let them know and treat the according . I just find it wrong to kill someone . We are not God we dont decide who lives and dies . If some one says they have been healed and everything . That does not mean I have to act like what they did never happened but it does mean that person should at least be able to live out the rest of his life . They know what they did , they have to live with it . I honestly would kinda understand if some of them killed themselves . I do not think it is ok to let them live among other people. I think they should live among other people with the same problem or maybe just by themselves . I do not think it is hypocritical to say I think every one deserves a chance and then say I will not put my self in a place of harm or act like what a person has done never happened .

[Jokersvirus]

Sorry to say, but god doesnt play a part in wether a man kills or not, if he did he wouldnt have given us free will in the first place.

If a man kills someone else they need to be put to death. Why should they be allowed to live? Look back at some of America's most screwed up killers, Ted Bundy, jeffrey dahmer, etc etc. There would have been riots out the ass if they were not put to death. Hell, would have been riots here in Indiana since thats where Bundy was put to death.

[Jaykub]

I'll make my views very clear and short..

Its wrong in my opinion to take a persons life so I believe its just as wrong for us to take the murders life... Life in jail is a much more painful punishment. Its not up to us to decide who lives and who doesn't.

[Linx_is_me]

Sorry to say, but god doesnt play a part in wether a man kills or not, if he did he wouldnt have given us free will in the first place.

If a man kills someone else they need to be put to death. Why should they be allowed to live? Look back at some of America's most screwed up killers, Ted Bundy, jeffrey dahmer, etc etc. There would have been riots out the ass if they were not put to death. Hell, would have been riots here in Indiana since thats where Bundy was put to death.

I a course have heard of these people but I had to goolge exactly what they did . I will not forget what I read about Jefferey Dahmar that was repulsive and Distributing but a person is a person none the less . Nobody has the right to say who will live and who dies no matter what they do . LOCK them up but you should not kill them . Honestly I do not think I can get that stuff out of my head . I think I would had been better off not reading up on that . The reason why I googled it was to see if there was a connection to him being molested or something as a child all they had was that his parents divorced . My parents are divorced and I will never do any such thing . I am truly sick to the stomach of what I have read .

[BobTD]

I think the opionion that its an absolute wrong to end a persons life is a little backwards.The majority of religions followers belong to religions with violent histories and plenty of exceptions for when its ok to execute your enemies.

The idea that there is no proper time to kill someone is both unnatural and frightening absurd.

All life competes in a life and death struggle. Its the natural order of things. You cant blame a wolf for eating a rabbit. But at some point either explained by your religion or evolution, mankind learned the ability to develop societies. These societies need laws to function. And saying you cant kill people is a reasonable law. Its still something that will happen, but now from a legal and moral standpoint, you should not kill people.

You take all that away, and examine someone who breaks into a home an commits murder, and we are no longer dealing with philosophy or morals. We are back to basics, our safety is threatened and its now a matter of survival. Do we provide every meal for a murderer until the day they die? Do we take out limited prison space and release other potentially dangerous criminals early to make room for this life long burden on society?

Its not immoral or unatural to remove this parasite from existence. Its a defense mechanism for a society and its the natural order of things.

[Linx_is_me]

I should point out that I think in the sense of self defense as in WAR or a attacker I find it to be a exception to kill someone . The reason why I think it is wrong to kill these people is they have done what they did . They are not in the act of doing it now . They are not hurting anyone at the moment . Put them away from anyone who they can hurt . It is over , it is a sad fact that for the world to go around we have to let the pain come . It is a true one though a lot of people get hurt in the progression of the world. But there is no need to hurt one more person because they hurt someone else .

[Jaykub]

Here is 4 reasons why capital punishment is wrong, and no I did not write this..


1. WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 35 years in the U.S., 130 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. So, as long as the death penalty is in place, you are pretty much GUARANTEED to occasionally execute an innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people to oppose it. If you need more, read on:

2. EXPENSE: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. DETERRENCE: The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

4. EASY WAY OUT: There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.” Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."

[Linx_is_me]

Here is 4 reasons why capital punishment is wrong, and no I did not write this..




2. EXPENSE: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. DETERRENCE: The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’
"
I find it interesting how these people have to have trials and such to decide if the person should get the death penalty . But then other people go ...Nope kill him he killed someone else . I am sure that these trials are to see if the person is psychologically stable , the evidence and such . But then these other people say screw all that if he killed someone kill that guy . I seems kinda evil to think like that if you ask me .

[Jokersvirus]

1. Wrongful Convictions there is no argument for that. But the thing is... if police did their jobs and collected all the evidence they needed to go to trail why was he pointed out? sound likeSaying he or she was set up to take the fall.

2. Expense it only gets expensive due to the fact those worthless pieces of crap can appeal, and appeal and appeal, and it cost about 1,000 bucks per inmate per day to house, in jail and prison, thats too much for a tax payer right there.

3.Deterrence was the name of the game, but since its still occurring its used as a way to give justice to the family of the victim. Which makes sense to me

4.Easy way out not really, To some murderers it might be hell on earth in prison, but to most they dont care they have worked up from small time crime to felonies so prison isnt anything. KSM is different because he wanted to inspire more people to die in his name and religion, he doesnt care about the fact he help killed innocent people he just wants to be the reason more americans die.

Other:

You are right, its about being psychologically stable to go stand trail, if not an expert makes a recommendation on what should happen and the judge makes the final call.
and No the jury doesnt just go in and say "he killed someone lets fry his ass." Once they find a person guilt of murder or what not they have to follow a guideline of circumstances, which pretty much lay out was the crime brutal or not, after they go down this guideline and its brutal they can recommend the death penalty, if not the person gets life in prison.

[Linx_is_me]

Those who kill need to die,


I am not talking about the jury I am talking about you and so many other people on the world . Anybody who kills someone is mentally unstable . Except in the case of self defense . I think that those who have killed for that reason probably still suffer from regret . To take a life takes more then most people have . I have gotten into some serious fights , I really feel no regret fro any time I have hurt someone . But I do believe I would suffer greatly if I ever killed anyone for any reason .
Other then that all you did up there was explain better what jacob was already saying . Telling us why it cost so much does not change that is cost soo much . Honestly thought price of keeping them in jail is probably in the long run the same or maybe a little more .

[Jokersvirus]

Why would people need to feel regret for killing in self defense? If you have to kill someone to save your own life, there is no reason to feel bad. It came down to simple choice of you or me. You value your life so you did what you had to to stay alive.

If violence was none existant executions wouldnt be need but since it is, we, the US, cant back down. If the US stopped killing murderers it would be seen as a weakness so someone kills someone and gets life imprisonment with no parole, 3 meals a day, warm bed, tv, work out daily, everything paid for by us tax payers. It would be a life time vacation.

To be honest anyone who has commited a felon crime against a person, murder, attempted murder, etc etc should be put down. They have shown they dont respect human life so why should anyone respect their life?

[BobTD]

Here is 4 reasons why capital punishment is wrong, and no I did not write this..


1. WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 35 years in the U.S., 130 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. So, as long as the death penalty is in place, you are pretty much GUARANTEED to occasionally execute an innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people to oppose it. If you need more, read on:

2. EXPENSE: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. DETERRENCE: The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

4. EASY WAY OUT: There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.” Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."

1. Why is DNA not available in most cases? This was an issue in the past before DNA was readily available but this is no longer the case. I covered this debate topic in the past and in my class I convinced the opposition heavily in favor of capitol punishment simply by presenting all the facts for both sides and weighing them.

Any time I see something like this "Its wrong because (no sources listed)" I get a little sad that people will read it and incorporate it into their decision making. These statistics are not credible, however you have to admit that some people are falsely tried and found guilty because no legal system is perfect.

People die in prison and jails as well, so the simple act of awaiting trail could be fatal. The loss of life is sad when we cant be sure justice is carried out, but just because there is no perfect solution does not mean its not necessary.

2. Expense? Maybe but no one can guess the cost. Is money really an issiue when it comes to closure for a family? And how can we tell how long someone will live in prison, how old they will become, what medications they will need and the expenses they will incur during their incarceration. Saying you know for sure that the death penalty cost more is pretty shady.

Problems determining costs (http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001000)


"There are several problems involved in trying to determine the cost of a capital case. First, there is a wide variety of costs associated with capital cases. These include costs for prosecuting and defense attorneys, interpreters, expert witnesses, court reporters, psychiatrists, secretaries, and jury consultants.
Another problem is the length and complexity of the process. Cases tend to last several years and can pass through three possible phases. The first phase includes state trial court (two trials - one to determine guilt, the other for sentence), state Supreme Court, and possible appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. The second phase is the state habeas corpus (post-conviction process) and appeals. The final phase is federal habeas corpus, which includes appeals to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and to the U.S. Supreme Court...
A third problem is the way states budget money for entities that are involved with capital cases. For example, Texas and Connecticut allocate specific sums to their judicial departments. It is difficult to separate the costs each department incurs for capital cases from those for other cases. From a data-gathering standpoint, Texas presents yet another problem. Each county (there are 254) must bear the costs of its capital cases. It is extremely difficult to get data from the counties. Dallas is the only county from which we received partial data, and we were unable to determine whether they are representative of other counties."

3. The deterrence factor from capitol punishment seems pretty established to me. I would like to note I live in WI, where gangs drive up to WI to shoot people and dump the bodies because Illinois supported capitol punishment and WI did not. So it seems pretty obvious, but facts are better then guesses so:

Wiki link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States#Suspension _by_Supreme_Court)


Capital punishment was suspended in the United States from 1972 through 1976 primarily as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972). In this case, the court found the imposition of the death penalty in a consolidated group of cases to be unconstitutional, on the grounds of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the eighth amendment to the United States Constitution.

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/6939/simplechart.png

Also the hypocritical comment was not very well thought out. Not every form of execution is murder. Murder is a legal term defined by the country are in and the USA carries out its death penalties in a way the is not legally defined as murder. Same as killing in self defense is not murder. This is self defense on a larger scale.

Would the same milksop that typed that hold such lofty morals if they where put in a life or death self defense situation? Would they pull the trigger on someone coming at them with a weapon to ensure their families safety?

4. Prisons have benefits, cable, and TVs in most of the cells. Other facilities have CD players in each cell. And access to large libraries and even computer and the chance to get an education.

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/7275/prisoncell2.png

Saying its more horrible then death is almost laughable. Prisons are is some ways supposed to be rehabilitation centers. So you are sticking them into a system torn between nurturing positive development and "punishing" them for crimes they committed. Its a broken system.

They have a lot of freedoms stripped but they are still givin certain rights. I prefer stripping capitol offenders of all that with simple death.

[Linx_is_me]

Why would people need to feel regret for killing in self defense? If you have to kill someone to save your own life, there is no reason to feel bad. It came down to simple choice of you or me. You value your life so you did what you had to to stay alive.

If violence was none existant executions wouldnt be need but since it is, we, the US, cant back down. If the US stopped killing murderers it would be seen as a weakness so someone kills someone and gets life imprisonment with no parole, 3 meals a day, warm bed, tv, work out daily, everything paid for by us tax payers. It would be a life time vacation.

To be honest anyone who has commited a felon crime against a person, murder, attempted murder, etc etc should be put down. They have shown they dont respect human life so why should anyone respect their life?
I am not saying they NEED to feel regret I am just saying they most likely would . I thought what I wrote got that across as for a payed vacation . It is not vacation to keep some alive and not be able to doing anything ever again . Thats preservation I know it may cause a whole new set of arguments but I think if they asked to be injected with the Death toxins then they should be able to . I also believe a lot of them may go for it .
I need to get some sleep but I will have this conversation later . I do belive this is a very good thread we have going here . I am starting to better understand some things . Also it is nice for my post to have some content again . Plus it is a honor to know I am the one who started this . Also I would like to thank everyone for keeping this so Civil and mature Thanks guys . I just am getting up at about 10 to get modernwar fair tomorrow so I need some sleep . I will edit this post and continue tomorrow or if someone else post something I will post a reply to the comments made while I was anyways . This is a good forum conversation . best part soo far no facepalms :) night everyone

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/7275/prisoncell2.png
As for this I was sent to juvy for like 3 days as a scare tactic . IT WAS NOT LIKE THIS . It was a cold cell with a bed made of gymnastic stuff . With a pillow that sucked and a toilet in the middle of the room where people could watch you . It sucked and there was writing all over the wall . This is stupid to let people have that stuff . Also the food sucked


Inseted of capital punishment they should ...
.have a tiny cell
.which contains a small toilet
.a bed like a camp bed
.they should have there food brought to them on a tray
.let out once a day to get fresh air/see visitors
Basicaly they should be made to live in squalor!
I bet is prisons were like that you would have less crime as people wouldn't want to go back to that!
:( :(
That is exactly how it was for me

[Th3-devils-princess]

There are huge floors in our justice system! People are sent to jail every day who are inisent! But then there is also the large amount of people who are guilty!
If you get sentenced to say "12" years for some crime... You would be let out in "6" for good behaviour WTF is that all about! You did a crime serve your time!!
If you when into a prison now a days you would find the convicted aloud out of the cells all day, tv sets, laptops/computers, games consoles, pool tables, and grade a classes! To me it sounds better in there than out here having to pay for nothing and getting every thing handed to you on a platter!!
People who commit the same crime over and over is because they liked what thy got when they went inside!!
I'm sorry but the justice system fails so much!
Okay we do put huge criminals behind bars but for what a lap f luxury!!! That dosent sound fair to me!!
Inseted of capital punishment they should ...
.have a tiny cell
.which contains a small toilet
.a bed like a camp bed
.they should have there food brought to them on a tray
.let out once a day to get fresh air/see visitors
Basicaly they should be made to live in squalor!
I bet is prisons were like that you would have less crime as people wouldn't want to go back to that!
And there sentences should be what they are so if someone gets "30" years make them serve "30" years none of this "good behaviour" rubbish!!
Sorry that's just my views!!!
A little statistics for you:::
If you steal electricity you would get more in jail than you would if you murdered a person!!
:( :(

[Linx_is_me]

Please read my updated post Night everyone

[Th3-devils-princess]

Thank you sir other that's how it should be !!!!!!!!!! :)
You were in jail?? Or is princess confused?!? Lol :)

[BobTD]

Other, please note that Juvy, jail and prison are all very different things. Prisons are the most comfortable by far.

I kind of hate to make a post this small. But it had to be said.

[EpsilonX]

Joker, do you really think that if you killed somebody, you'd be 100% okay with it? Most people when they kill somebody, no matter if its intentional, in self defense, or accidental, it weighs on their conscious and stays with them for the rest of their life.

And to whoever mentioned that the death penalty was for keeping the jails from overflowing, no it's not. It's for 1 deterring other people from committing crimes and 2 preventing that person from committing future crimes. I forgot what it's called that keeps jails from overflowing but it's not that o.o

Unless i read that post wrong, i just saw "its to keep jails from overflowing" and didn't read the rest. I was too lazy to go back and re-read it cuz i had already started making this post lol okay im done now.

[Jokersvirus]

Eps, If I had to do in self defense, yes I will be fine with it. As I stated If I had no other choice but to take their life I wont feel bad.

Do remember I come from a law enforcement family and the way I grew up was protect people from the bad guys at all cost. Its my way of thinking you must understand, which is,again, if I had no other choice I will do what I have to, to defend myself or others.

[Linx_is_me]

Eps, If I had to do in self defense, yes I will be fine with it. As I stated If I had no other choice but to take their life I wont feel bad.

Do remember I come from a law enforcement family and the way I grew up was protect people from the bad guys at all cost. Its my way of thinking you must understand, which is,again, if I had no other choice I will do what I have to, to defend myself or others.

I honestly think you are speaking too soon . Even the people who kill someody in war seem to have in most cases regret for the lifes they took . Some people have some real issues after it is over . A lot of people I think bury it in , . At Devils Princess , I never went to jail I went to Juvy . I got in some trouble and as a scare tactic to show me how bad it is in there . I was sent there for 3 days . It sucked sooooo bad , the worst three days of my life . All I did was sit in there and do nothing look at the wall and sit . Try to sleep but I couldnt cuzz I was not tired . Just sit sit sit , and meals were the absolute worst . Plus that toilet was gross and metal . It did scare me into doing better because It would suck sooo bad to have to stay at juvy .

[Jokersvirus]

Im not speaking too soon have I ever taken a life, no, have I been close? once. I wont regret it cause I valuve my life more than that idiot's who tried to kill me.

It comes down to this, plain and simple, If you will regret killing a person in self defense, chances are your going to die in that fight because you wont be in the mind set to pull the trigger to save yours.

[Linx_is_me]

Eps, If I had to do in self defense, yes I will be fine with it. As I stated If I had no other choice but to take their life I wont feel bad.

Do remember I come from a law enforcement family and the way I grew up was protect people from the bad guys at all cost. Its my way of thinking you must understand, which is,again, if I had no other choice I will do what I have to, to defend myself or others.

I honestly think you are speaking too soon . Even the people who kill someody in war seem to have in most cases regret for the lifes they took . Some people have some real issues after it is over . A lot of people I think bury it in , . At Devils Princess , I never went to jail I went to Juvy . I got in some trouble and as a scare tactic to show me how bad it is in there . I was sent there for 3 days . It sucked sooooo bad , the worst three days of my life . All I did was sit in there and do nothing look at the wall and sit . Try to sleep but I couldnt cuzz I was not tired . Just sit sit sit , and meals were the absolute worst . Plus that toilet was gross and metal . It did scare me into doing better because It would suck sooo bad to have to stay at juvy .

Also becuase I am a christian I thought I would sneak in a bit on my belief from that side .
By killing off someone you shorten there opportunity to even get to know who God is . Maybe in that time that they have in jail they know become close to God . Which means that by offing someone who never had this time alone to reflect you sentence them to a life time in hell . Which I would also have a hard time to get over . But I am not shoving religion on anyone just saying for those of you on here who are Christian's . From what I know Sick is .
Also i have to admit I do agree with what joker said about if , God gave us free will so we could kill who ever we want . So I admit I stand corrected there .

[jango]

I'm going to be quite biased here because I'm someone living in a country where the police don't carry guns, and a country that doesn't have capital punishment and hasn't had for some decades.

For me killing, whether based on a lawful or unlawful basis, is the greatest failing in humanity. Specifically to do with this topic I see capital punishment as a slightly stunted solution, and if anything a limp-wristed and archaic option for legal matters. There are some terrible people in the world, for sure, and it's hard to be anything but emotive if anything terrible touches your life or something you care about, but for me personally I don't see any moral mileage in resorting to killing as an answer to it. For me it does nothing to raise us above the consciousness of a wild animal and is full of potential problems.

[BobTD]

I'm going to be quite biased here because I'm someone living in a country where the police don't carry guns, and a country that doesn't have capital punishment and hasn't had for some decades.

For me killing, whether based on a lawful or unlawful basis, is the greatest failing in humanity. Specifically to do with this topic I see capital punishment as a slightly stunted solution, and if anything a limp-wristed and archaic option for legal matters. There are some terrible people in the world, for sure, and it's hard to be anything but emotive if anything terrible touches your life or something you care about, but for me personally I don't see any moral mileage in resorting to killing as an answer to it. For me it does nothing to raise us above the consciousness of a wild animal and is full of potential problems.

I respect your point of view and its true that most of the developed countries in the world no longer support capitol punishment. However most of the developed nations in the world dont have the same rights in regards to weapons and strict drug laws that we do.

We have a lot more violent crime it seems and a lot more people in prison.

Number of inmates by country (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri-crime-prisoners)
(the countries listed with "0" people in prison usually have problems with human trafficking, something they should have the death penalty for)

And these prisons are like schools for criminal thinking. The one good thing about them may be that many prisons expose the inmates to seeing prisoners on death row. Im a little afraid of what might happen in this country if we take away capitol punishment altogether because there would most likely be another spike in violent crimes and murders swiftly following it.

I just wonder if capitol punishment is our biggest concern. There are probably others things as a country that we need to fix first, rather then abolish the death penalty and deal with the results later.

Even if you dont agree with it in general, does it make sense that our country might need it right now?

[jango]

Tbh comparing American crime with somewhere tiny like Britain is like comparing the surface of the moon to a pebble .. ofc you have more people in prison, your country is massively bigger than countries like mine (with a fraction of the population) - hardly a relevant point tbh.

Our cultures are quite different tbh in quite key areas which isn't taken into account .. it's all relative tbh and to me doesn't justify death. So in answer to your question "Even if you dont agree with it in general, does it make sense that our country might need it right now?" .. to me 'no', and quite honestly I find those kind've justifications quite weak, and conveniently blinkered.

Don't get me wrong though no culture is perfect, nor its legal systems .. but this is just my view.

[Linx_is_me]

Tbh comparing American crime with somewhere tiny like Britain is like comparing the surface of the moon to a pebble .. ofc you have more people in prison, your country is massively bigger than countries like mine (with a fraction of the population) - hardly a relevant point tbh.

Our cultures are quite different tbh in quite key areas which isn't taken into account .. it's all relative tbh and to me doesn't justify death. So in answer to your question "Even if you dont agree with it in general, does it make sense that our country might need it right now?" .. to me 'no', and quite honestly I find those kind've justifications quite weak, and conveniently blinkered.

Don't get me wrong though no culture is perfect, nor its legal systems .. but this is just my view.

Thats weird , Because I always got the idea in my head like over in in Britan your guys crime rate was horrid . Thats also what someone had told me who lived over there . I mean yes it is a good thing it is not . I just wanted to point out that I was told it was horrid . But none the less , I support Jangos Views on this one .

[jango]

Thats weird , Because I always got the idea in my head like over in in Britan your guys crime rate was horrid . Thats also what someone had told me who lived over there . I mean yes it is a good thing it is not . I just wanted to point out that I was told it was horrid . But none the less , I support Jangos Views on this one .

You might wanna read what I wrote in context to what Bob was saying rather than assume, incorrectly, what I've said :)

[BobTD]

Tbh comparing American crime with somewhere tiny like Britain is like comparing the surface of the moon to a pebble .. ofc you have more people in prison, your country is massively bigger than countries like mine (with a fraction of the population) - hardly a relevant point tbh.

Our cultures are quite different tbh in quite key areas which isn't taken into account .. it's all relative tbh and to me doesn't justify death. So in answer to your question "Even if you dont agree with it in general, does it make sense that our country might need it right now?" .. to me 'no', and quite honestly I find those kind've justifications quite weak, and conveniently blinkered.

Don't get me wrong though no culture is perfect, nor its legal systems .. but this is just my view.

Tbh honest i was not comparing Americas problems to Britons when I posted this link:

Number of inmates by country (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri-crime-prisoners)

It shows that america has more people in prison then China and india combined. And more then double the number of prisoners then the 3rd country on the list. Our prison system is directly affected by including the death penalty. And its a relevant point because the country has tried abolishing the death penalty in the past and it caused more problems then it solved.

I see that we can agree on no legal system being perfect, but you have managed to call my justifications weak while giving little more then your opinion without any real clarity on why you feel that way. Is your opinion shaped by religious or philosophical principles?

Your own personal set of morals are fine. But its not in itself a very strong argument.

[jango]

I'm not a religious guy at all, so my thoughts on this don't really come from there. I just don't see justification for things like death in a legal framework from a civilised country. It just doesn't sit right with me. If anything my views are purely humanitarian, looking forward and not backwards. As i said at the start, my views WILL be biased because I live in a country without the same culture and social framework, and while there are big similarities there are also big differences. By no means does this mean Britain is 'better' .. in a good number of ways we're far worse .. but regardless most people would prefer solutions to social issues to be more proactive than destructive regardless of their origin.

To me the number of prisoners is a bit of a smoke screen, especially when often the things people compare one thing to another aren't particularly comparable. It's a smoke screen to me because in my view it certainly doesn't equate to a need for capital punishment, and reminds me more of a form of social control from ancient cultures, not a modern sophisticated civilisation. Surely after 2,000 years we could be managing things in a different way? Naturally this doesn't relate purely to capital punishment either if you choose to think on.

My comments about 'weak justifications' weren't directed at you personally Bob, but more in general as there are other countries that have similar practises and in my view try to justify it with 'numbers' of one sort or another. If you need more clarity on my view then I'm not sure what more I can say .. as I already mentioned, I see any killing as humanity's greatest weakness, particularly as part of 'law' - I'm not sure there's much more I can add to that.

One thing I will add is that we're conditioned to believe there is distinctive 'good' and 'evil' in the world which is mostly a very subjective thing .. what there is more of that's harder for people and cultures to adapt to is 'difference'. History and culture gives us reference points for how to conduct our future .. but to me this isn't always a constructive way to make the world, a specific culture, or just your neighbourhood better.

But now I've met my 10% serious post quota for this week .. so must now go back to silliness :)

[RecreationalGamer]

Personal, you take the life of someone you have lost any right to be alive yourself, that excludes self defense.

Indeed. Cardinal rule, in order to take one life, you must be willing to give yours away. This is because taking a life involves demeaning the value of life, therefore demeaning any value your own life holds.

[Linx_is_me]

Indeed. Cardinal rule, in order to take one life, you must be willing to give yours away. This is because taking a life involves demeaning the value of life, therefore demeaning any value your own life holds.

I get a lot of facepalms , But this DESERVES all of mine .The whole sentence is a big oxymoron . IF YOU KILL SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY KILLED SOMEONE .....then we can kill you . Does anyone else see the problem here .

[RecreationalGamer]

I get a lot of facepalms , But this DESERVES all of mine .The whole sentence is a big oxymoron . IF YOU KILL SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY KILLED SOMEONE .....then we can kill you . Does anyone else see the problem here .

Aside from the law, I'm speaking strictly in a humane perspective of the subject. If two people are alone in the world and one of them kills the other, the killer has then given up his value in life as well.

[Linx_is_me]

Aside from the law, I'm speaking strictly in a humane perspective of the subject. If two people are alone in the world and one of them kills the other, the killer has then given up his value in life as well.

So the law is above moral Structure ? hmmmm

[Jokersvirus]

Other, you do realize he did say "Aside from the law, I'm speaking strictly in a humane prespective of the subject"

he removed the law from the equation

his saying that by killing life the killer has no general respect for himself or life in general.

[RecreationalGamer]

Other, you do realize he did say "Aside from the law, I'm speaking strictly in a humane prespective of the subject"

Talk about a face palm.

[Linx_is_me]

Talk about a face palm.
USELESS post ....

[RecreationalGamer]

I know you got about 3300000 in my book , The law consist of people that person who injects those toxins into the person who committed the crime . They are killing a person . Wether thats there job or not They are killing a person.

I would love for you to list the three million, three hundred thousand face palms in your book that pertain to my posts.

You're still missing the point.

However, you are right about one thing: the law still exists.

[Linx_is_me]

Well honestly I am sorry for my Facepalm post . I was trying to keep it mature up in here . So I am going to go back and edit that post , As for the law . My more friendly response is , I still think that killing a person is wrong wether your the law or a psycho .

[Jokersvirus]

Ive been asking my friends about this around campus, law enforcement and other majors, they all agree that its needed, and they all agree saying its for justice and scumbags like that dont need to be on this earth.

The process is long and expensive, if youve been found guilty .357 is alot cheaper than the current process.

[RecreationalGamer]

if youve been found guilty .357 is alot cheaper than the current process.

That calls into question the validity of the process being used by authorities today. When you can get the same process at a local ammo shop for millions of dollars cheaper a year than you can at the current process...

[Linx_is_me]

That calls into question the validity of the process being used by authorities today. When you can get the same process at a local ammo shop for millions of dollars cheaper a year than you can at the current process...

Yeah why is is more humane to inject people with toxins then it is too shoot them in the head . I think that we just need to realize our Laws moral code is really wack .

[BobTD]

I see what your saying Jango. Thank you for elaborating, I always enjoy reading your point of view because its often one I dont think from naturally.


Aside from the law, I'm speaking strictly in a humane perspective of the subject. If two people are alone in the world and one of them kills the other, the killer has then given up his value in life as well.

A great perspective however, not one everyone would agree with. If you value your life you do whatever it takes to survive. This drive to eliminate threats does not mean you don't value life.

So even if its not direct self defense, the enforcement of the death penalty is in defense of society. Holding a murderers life sacred demeans the value of the victims life.

The idea that as a cardinal rule you cant kill someone without devaluing your life is a purely religious perspective where all life must be held sacred. Not everyone shares this point of view.

The flaw is simply that even if you hold life sacred others may not. Its more responsible to take your protection into your own hands then expect others to share the same belief in the sacred value of life.

[Jokersvirus]

Yeah why is is more humane to inject people with toxins then it is too shoot them in the head . I think that we just need to realize our Laws moral code is really wack .


Why is it more humane, because the person feels no pain, compared to riding the lighting, gas chamber, firing squad, etc etc.
Its like putting down a pet you put it to sleep without it causing pain therefore it is humane.



Also Other, I want to say something. You said you are a religious person and to kill someone prevents them from getting closer to god, or something of the sort. If that is true and you believe our laws are screwed up how to answer to the fact since the dawn of time there has been killings in the name of a god? Those killings are illogically compared to those that we do to rid the earth of scum.

[Linx_is_me]

Also Other, I want to say something. You said you are a religious person and to kill someone prevents them from getting closer to god, or something of the sort. If that is true and you believe our laws are screwed up how to answer to the fact since the dawn of time there has been killings in the name of a god? Those killings are illogically compared to those that we do to rid the earth of scum.

People will do what they want my point of view on God is not based on what people did . In biblical sense the only killings that should had taken place for God is with a animal . For all I care kill any animal you want . But since the new testament we no longer do that . So if someone kills a person in the name of God they are still commiting a sin .

[BobTD]

People will do what they want my point of view on God is not based on what people did . In biblical sense the only killings that should had taken place for God is with a animal . For all I care kill any animal you want . But since the new testament we no longer do that . So if someone kills a person in the name of God they are still commiting a sin .

From a religious standpoint I would completely agree with that. New testament wise there is no justification for killing. Technically you would have to be a pacifist and let someone kill you, but that I wouldn't personally agree with.

[Linx_is_me]

From a religious standpoint I would completely agree with that. New testament wise there is no justification for killing. Technically you would have to be a pacifist and let someone kill you, but that I wouldn't personally agree with.

It is not against the bible to kill it is against the bible to murder . So self defense is not a sin .

[Jokersvirus]

To kill is to take away life which is homicide and murder is homicide.

even in self defense your taking away life so you cant say its not murder when you say killing is just bad

[Linx_is_me]

Please do understand I am not putting my religion on you . Just hoping you may better understand this .
Definition of murder
# kill intentionally and with premeditation; "The mafia boss ordered his enemies murdered"
# mangle: alter so as to make unrecognizable; "The tourists murdered the French language"
# unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being

"Most Christians have been led to believe that Scripture forbids the Taking of a life; that is to kill. That it forbids the taking of a life under any circumstance; even in Self Defense. If this is so, why would GOD tell Israel “Thou Shalt Not Kill”, yet then turn around and tell then to kill their enemies? This would seem to be a Glaring Contradiction, would it not? UNLESS, GOD Never said “Thou Shalt Not Kill” to begin with! Even though the Bible may actually say the word “Kill” in several places, is this what the Original Hebrew and Greek Texts actually say? Or, do we once again have some serious translation errors? Let’s investigate. The first place to start is in Exodus 20; the giving of the Ten Commandments."
In Exodus 20:13 we have the Fifth Commandment “Thou Shalt Not Kill”. Take a good look at that word “Kill”. In the Hebrew Manuscript the word is “Ratsach” which means: Murder; ie - to Murder, a Murderer; to dash to pieces. Thus, Exodus 20:13 Actually reads “Thou Shalt Not MURDER”. Next, look to Exodus 21:12 “He that smiteth a man so that he die, shall be surely put to death”. Here, the Hebrew word translated ‘Smiteth’ is “Nakah”, which means: Murder, To Slay, to make slaughter. Thus, Exodus 21:12 Actually reads “He that Murders a man so that he die, shall be surely put to death”.

Next, look to Exodus 21:14 “But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbor to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die”. The Hebrew word translated ‘Slay’ here is “Harag”, which means: To Smite with Deadly Intent; To Murder. The Hebrew word translated ‘Guile’ here is “Ormah”, which means: Trickery, Craftiness; Deceitful Strategy. Thus, Exodus 21:14 Actually “But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbor to Murder him with a Deceitful Strategy; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die”.

Now move over to Deuteronomy 19:11 + 12 “But if any man hate his neighbor, and lie in wait for him, and rise up against him, and Smite him mortally that he die, and flee into one of these cities: Then the elders of his city shall send and fetch him thence, and deliver him into the hand of the Avenger of Blood, that he may die”. Again, the Hebrew word translated ‘Smite’ here is “Nakah”, which means: Murder, To Slay, to make slaughter. But what is this ‘Avenger of Blood’? The Hebrew word translated ‘Avenger’ here is “Ga'al”, which means: To Redeem (According to the Ancient Law of Kinship) The Next of Kin, Kinsfolk; To Redeem Blood for Blood: ie - Revenge - The Kinsman Redeemer. So, the Murderer was to be put to death by the Nearest of Kin! But what if the death was an accident? Deuteronomy 19:2 thru 6 tells what to do with those who kill by mistake; by accident. They were to be moved away to a far off city, thereby giving the relatives of the one accidentally killed time to cool off, and to not seek revenge.

Thus you will see again and again, when the Old Testament speaks of Kill, it many times actually says ‘MURDER”, and that the Murderers were to be put to Death; by the Kinsman Redeemer! But what about the New Testament?


The Word ‘Kill’ in the New Testament

First, let’s look to Matthew 5. In verses 17 and 18, Jesus says “Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till Heaven and Earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled”. In other words, until the Eternity begins, not even the smallest punctuation mark changes in the Law! What Law? The Ten Commandments! Next, in Matthew 5:21 Jesus says “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou Shalt Not Kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the Judgment”. Once again, we have translation problems! The Greek word translated ‘Kill’ here is “Phoneuo”, which means: To be a Murderer, to Murder - 'Phoneuo' a form of 'Phoneus' which means: A Murderer; Always a Criminal or at least Intentional Homicide. The Greek word translated ‘Judgment’ here is “Krisis”, which means: (When referring to the Divine Law) Damnation, Condemnation; Justice – Tribunal. Thus, Matthew 5:21 actually reads “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou Shalt Not Murder; and whosoever shall Murder shall be in danger of Eternal Damnation”. In other words, no Murderer can have eternal life abiding in him; and even Jesus Christ can not change this fact! He states so himself. Why is Murder so serious a crime? You not only Murder that person, but any Children the person might have had, thus destroying a whole lineage; not just that person.

Lastly look to 1John 3:15 “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no Murderer hath eternal life abiding in him”. This word ‘Hateth’ actually means: To Persecute to the Death. Thus, 1John 3:15 actually reads “Whosoever Persecutes another to their death (as Stephen was) is a murderer: and ye know that no Murderer hath eternal life abiding in him”.

So, Murder, not Killing, is forbidden by Scripture! And those who do commit Criminal Homicide (verified by at least 2 witnesses) are to be Executed, and sent to GOD. And NO MURDERER can have Eternal Life abiding in him while in the FLESH!!! The Murderer’s salvation is up to GOD the Father alone, at the final Judgment!!

[Jokersvirus]

Please do understand I am not putting my religion on you . Just hoping you may better understand this .
Definition of murder
# kill intentionally and with premeditation; "The mafia boss ordered his enemies murdered"
# mangle: alter so as to make unrecognizable; "The tourists murdered the French language"
# unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being



that in bold is the defintion of murder yes?

That is also homicide.

I do understand what murder is and what not, my major was law enforcement.


So when a human kills another human it is homicide which translate can translate into murder.
the premeditated part defines murder, but the killing of a human being by another human being is definition homicide.

[Linx_is_me]

that in bold is the defintion of murder yes?

That is also homicide.

the premeditated part defines murder, but the killing of a human being by another human being is definition homicide.

From the laws point of view , This is murder .. it says unlawful Murder . Religious view is not human law but gods law . So I can agree by American law yes Unlawful human on human killing is Murder . Also it is homicide .So yes , But My opinion is shaped from a christian stand point . Which may be the safest spot to end this particular part of the discussion at least on the thread . If you wish to skype PM me feel free . I am open for that .
But Homocide is not necessarily murder . It is still killing yes . But no it is not Murder in all cases

[Jokersvirus]

Well in this world on this earth, religion's law "god's law" has no meaning. You can live by that code, you can honor the code, you can do many things, but on this planet Man's Law is law.

And it says what I state. You say killing is wrong yet self defense isnt. Your saying its ok for a man to die in one aspect but its totally wrong for them to die for being guilty of killing 100 people. Which in itself is self defense because the system is protecting everyone humanly possible from this crazy person.

[Jaykub]

Well in this world on this earth, religion's law "god's law" has no meaning. You can live by that code, you can honor the code, you can do many things, but on this planet Man's Law is law.

And it says what I state. You say killing is wrong yet self defense isnt. Your saying its ok for a man to die in one aspect but its totally wrong for them to die for being guilty of killing 100 people. Which in itself is self defense because the system is protecting everyone humanly possible from this crazy person.

The world has no laws. Its only what one man decided to say it is.

[Linx_is_me]

Well in this world on this earth, religion's law "god's law" has no meaning. You can live by that code, you can honor the code, you can do many things, but on this planet Man's Law is law.

And it says what I state. You say killing is wrong yet self defense isnt. Your saying its ok for a man to die in one aspect but its totally wrong for them to die for being guilty of killing 100 people. Which in itself is self defense because the system is protecting everyone humanly possible from this crazy person.

The use of the right of self-defense as a legal justification for the use of force in times of danger is available in many jurisdictions,

In times of danger , if a man is in jail or solitude that is not a time of danger . You can not call it self defense to end a mans life who is just sitting in a room .

[Jokersvirus]

The world has no laws. Its only what one man decided to say it is.
Not one man, hundreds there isnt just one law maker :P


The use of the right of self-defense as a legal justification for the use of force in times of danger is available in many jurisdictions,

In times of danger , if a man is in jail or solitude that is not a time of danger . You can not call it self defense to end a mans life who is just sitting in a room .

Self defense is a legal justification of use of force.

But according to you the taking of one mans life is wrong, homicide is homicide

[Linx_is_me]

Not one man, hundreds there isnt just one law maker :P



Self defense is a legal justification of use of force.

But according to you the taking of one mans life is wrong, homicide is
homicide

The statement that self defense is legal justification is complete wrong . We has self defense before we had law . and Homocide does not mean MURDER it means a person who kills another person . Get your latin right . Homo - same type . Cide . Kill .... It has nothing to do with murder Directly .

[LiNuX]

Get your latin right . Homo - same type . Cide . Kill .... It has nothing to do with murder Directly .

I tried staying away from this thread. But homicide = killing a human being. Murder is just one aspect of it. Manslaughter is another. Criminal Negligence is another. Reckless is another.

/leaves thread

[Jaykub]

I tried staying away from this thread. But homicide = killing a human being. Murder is just one aspect of it. Manslaughter is another. Criminal Negligence is another. Reckless is another.

/leaves thread

Some people just can't understand that it seems.

[Linx_is_me]

Some people just can't understand that it seems.
I was trying to get that point across with my post .

[Jokersvirus]

The statement that self defense is legal justification is complete wrong . We has self defense before we had law . and Homocide does not mean MURDER it means a person who kills another person . Get your latin right . Homo - same type . Cide . Kill .... It has nothing to do with murder Directly .


Please do understand I am not putting my religion on you . Just hoping you may better understand this .
Definition of murder
# kill intentionally and with premeditation; "The mafia boss ordered his enemies murdered"
# mangle: alter so as to make unrecognizable; "The tourists murdered the French language"
# unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being



Ya it does. Your definition of murder is right there in bold take out the premeditated and what is that, homicide. Google the definition be my guest you will get "one human being killing another human being."

murder by your definition, YOUR DEFINITION YOU GAVE, states the killing of a human being by another human being, not person by another person.

So your also saying self defense is wrong? So if someone is trying to kill me they should be allowed to??
So my brother who is a police officer shouldnt be allowed to defend himself or others, or the US armed forces shouldnt be allowed to defend themselves with deadly force because why mr other?

[Linx_is_me]

Ya it does. Your definition of murder is right there in bold take out the premeditated and what is that, homicide. Google the definition be my guest you will get "one human being killing another human being."

murder by your definition, YOUR DEFINITION YOU GAVE, states the killing of a human being by another human being, not person by another person.

So your also saying self defense is wrong? So if someone is trying to kill me they should be allowed to??
So my brother who is a police officer shouldnt be allowed to defend himself or others, or the US armed forces shouldnt be allowed to defend themselves with deadly force because why mr other?
ad I never said self defense is wrong I AGREE COMPLETELY WITH KILLInG UNDER SELF defense it is not murder .

.... What I am saying is MURDER means you did it in cold blood , Killing does not mean necessarily you killed someone in cold blood it can be out of self defense . So no homocide does not mean Murder did you not see the part that says UNLAWFULL killing , that is the dictionary way of saying killing in a way that is not out of self defense .

[Jokersvirus]

Homicide is unlawful killing, but you did say that self defense is completely wrong

Other, I would suggest to do some research on this subject, I did for 2 years so I know this stuff.

Murder = homicide, self defense is a needed, and we still need to kill people for committing very sick murders

/thread

[jango]

Please try and adapt your tones a little bit here. Attempts to demean only really make you look like a drama queen, and provoke counter-reactions.

Let's not get to the point where we have to close another thread because people can't conduct themselves in mature discourse.

[Linx_is_me]

Murder = homicide, self defense is a needed, and we still need to kill people for committing very sick murders

/thread

I think that we can all agree this is just a opinion . So it is fair to say you would like to end you input here . I can respectfully accept that . My personal opinion is that we do not need to "kill" (Murder ) People for committing a crime that is already over and done with it . So if any other things come up on this subject please do put them in here . But we can also all agree there is no point arguing about the same thing over and over .

[RecreationalGamer]

I think that we can all agree this is just a opinion...

Indeed, as if the quoted statement of this reply.

[Linx_is_me]

Indeed, as if the quoted statement of this reply.

What ? , What does that mean ?

[BobTD]

Im pretty sure from a strictly new testament view point it tells you its better be be murdered then to kill someone is self defense... not 100% on that but your rewards in heaven and so forth are all the greater blah blah something like that.

I should really read the bible just to be clear by it would take decades of study to find out what that book really says and even then it would be debatable.

[RecreationalGamer]

Err...

Guys, that book was written CENTURIES ago.

Please for the sake of humanity's growth can we stop relaying our problems to a book that not only was written centuries ago but within those centuries has been translated, re-written to appeal to certain denominations and generations, and when people say "That verse really spoke to me" is like saying "Wow the psychic who took down all my information and then read it back to me was spot on."

There are SO many things in that book (or those books) that SURELY you'll find something that you will relate to, and if you open it enough times then of course the odds become in your favor for such an occassion.

Now...

if you don't agree with the death penalty (or revenge) that's fine. But realistically, you must not be thinking what you would do if the killer took the life of your brother, sister, mother, father, or close friends, girlfriend, wife, son, daughter...

It's like in the movie "A Time To Kill"...

Just imagine the person killed is someone who means something to you...someone really dear to your life....and THEN tell me you'll turn the other cheek and forgive that person when they're sitting in court about to be freed from the death they so arrogantly gave to your loved one(s).