New Jersey repeals the Death penalty

[Irksome]

It's a great shame that the US still has the death penalty. Those sort of punishments belonged in the middle ages, but in our, so called, civilized world.

It's barbaric and inhumane, and the sooner it's banned worldwide, the better.

Is this a step towards the USA becoming properly civilized? I hope so.

Seriously though, it's good to see that some are making progress. Even though they're some two centuries late.

Pfft - it's not about being civilized here in the US, it's about being hardcore bro. Ain't nothin' more hardcore and macho than saying "LET EM' BURN!".

 

[Vigilante]

have you SEEN the south?

^^ What he said.

 

[Darkside55]

As you're one of the few people on these boards that makes sense on a post-by-post basis, I'm interested - why are you in favour of capital punishment?

I've mentioned it a few times on the boards, there are a couple reasons. They all boil down to: "I don't like criminals." Actually, I could more properly describe it: "I have odium for criminals."

They're scum, capable of things any rational, moral human being would find contemptable. In a species full of the self-serving, there are none moreso than criminals, a lot who would knowingly break the law and cause harm--physical, emotional, and monetary--to anyone they could to achieve their ends. They do this with intent and malice. Then we lock them up and allow them to become a drain on our resources, in the interest of "being humane."

Yet, as someone who has known multiple people who have each spent several years in jail, I can tell you this has little effect on their outlook. Jailtime never seems to put the fear into them.

I also saw my father murdered for someone else's gain, so I know what criminals are capable of. They don't share our values of life...it's like they're broken inside. Like their minds aren't put together properly. I have absolutely no sympathy for a criminal, no forgiveness for criminals. If you willingly commit an act that is detrimental to another person, with intent, knowing full well the consequences, you have demonstrated that you are a person not fit to live in our society. You blatantly go against rules set forth for the betterment of society so that you might gain something out of it (and gain does not have to be monetary, please note); this is a person not deserving of life.

With regard to, "it costs less to keep them in prison for life rather than on death row," in regard to the costs associated with death row itself and not the method of execution, it is simply because of all the appeals and inquiries and this-and-that to make sure that a criminal should truly be put to death. That's all foolishness. If someone gets a sentence of death, there is no need for a "row." There is no need to wait. Execute them immediately. There is no need to give someone a "life sentence." If their sentence would be life, execute them immediately.

Also, in before, "what about innocents in prison?"

 

[Eejit]

Also, in before, "what about innocents in prison?"

That doesn't exactly negate the argument though -.-

Just watch The Fugitive. Harrison Ford was imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit. Also the A-Team were wrongfully convicted, and look how many people they helped after escaping into the Los Angeles underground! If you'd executed those people straight off where would we be?

 

[Raziaar]

Even innocents are guilty. Guilty of the crime of bogging down the justice system more than it already is, by doing something foolish enough to have cast the suspicion on them and not winning their case.



/

 

[Darkside55]

You know what I loved about The Fugitive?

"I didn't kill my wife!"
"I DON'T CARE!"

And fuhgeddabout the A-Team. They only help you if you can find them, and then they end up helping stupid causes like not letting a traveling rodeo close down, or stopping a cult preacher from taking over a town.

Cold as it might sound, you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs. The number of innocents in prison don't even make a dent in the number of actual inmates who are guilty and should be executed.

 

[TheDude]

I voted no. They should repeal it in all cases that haven't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt; but if some wacko child rapist or something severe like that is proven guilty beyond any doubt, he should swing.

 

[Tagaziel]

Cold as it might sound, you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs. The number of innocents in prison don't even make a dent in the number of actual inmates who are guilty and should be executed.

Thankfully, there was a lot of people in history that had a bit more intellect and analytical skills. For instance, Cesare Beccaria.

The death penalty is useless, barbaric and ineffective.

Darkside, your rhetoric is borderline fascist, though. The "society" as a highest value?

 

[Raziaar]

There's nothing barbaric about it. We execute people in a civilized way. It becomes more and more civilized over the centuries, moving away from torture and trying to do it with the least amount of pain and suffering to the inmate.

I could hardly see why people call that barbaric. The fact that we execute people in of itself I don't think is worthy of that title.

 

[2real]

funny how people that are for abortion which is in alot of cases killing an unborn baby because the mother/and or father don't want to take responsibility,but when it comes to putting down a rapist or murdere,its barbaric......

 

[CptStern]

funny how people that are for abortion which is in alot of cases killing an unborn baby because the mother/and or father don't want to take responsibility,but when it comes to putting down a rapist or murdere,its barbaric......

or the flip side; the pro abortionists screaming how a life is precious but when asked they're almost always for captial punishment. Jesus says that shall not kill ..well unless they have it coming then it's off with their ****ing heads

and THAT is 2real and 4real

 

[Raziaar]

My biggest problem is that they're so quick to support war which results in the death of people who have lives. Enlisted, terrorist, insurgent, and innocent alike.

I used to be one of those people.

I still support the death penalty, but I'm no longer supporting war. Abortion is a non issue for me now.

 

[2real]

or the flip side; the pro abortionists screaming how a life is precious but when asked they're almost always for captial punishment. Jesus says that shall not kill ..well unless they have it coming then it's off with their ****ing heads

and THAT is 2real and 4real

I dont care much for Jesus,the point that killing a baby that didn't do anything seems to be alright BUT putting down a murder is not alright?

 

[CptStern]

define "baby", define when "life starts" ..you are in no position to judge either way so comparing it to the death penalty is nothing more than an overgeneralised and unsustainable opinion

 

[Vegeta897]

Is anyone in a position to judge that? I really don't think this abortion debate could ever end unless the problem was somehow erradicated, because even if somebody defined with complete truth when life starts, there will still be people who have their opinions.

 

[CptStern]

who cares? some people are of the opinion that gays should be shot, should we accomodate them?

 

[Raziaar]

If they pay enough money, we accommodate anybody!

 

[CptStern]

I was wondering when you'd show ..I'm sure if lobbyists threw enough cash at government they'd make homosexuality a captial offense ...right

 

[Tagaziel]

There's nothing barbaric about it. We execute people in a civilized way. It becomes more and more civilized over the centuries, moving away from torture and trying to do it with the least amount of pain and suffering to the inmate.

I could hardly see why people call that barbaric. The fact that we execute people in of itself I don't think is worthy of that title.

It's institutionalized, state-approved cold blooded murder.

 

[Solaris]

For starters I don't think the relevant costs is that big a deal at all.

The USA has **** loads of money, I doubt those on death row take up any noticeable amount of it.

So I'm not going to support the death penalty which will endanger the lives of innocents to save a token amount of money.

Darkside, you think we should just forget about the appeals business and shit becuase it is cheaper?
You really need to think about the consequences of this. Why have an appeal system at all then? Why let anybody appeal for any crime? Do you realize how many people would have been wrongly sent to jail if we did what you said?

And what do we gain by removing the rights of out fellow citizens and ourselves? A few bucks?

Is it really worth it?

 

[Raziaar]

I was wondering when you'd show ..I'm sure if lobbyists threw enough cash at government they'd make homosexuality a captial offense ...right

Sarcasm does not equate to an argument that deserves logical response.

I wasn't being serious.

 

[Eejit]

I dont care much for Jesus,the point that killing a baby that didn't do anything seems to be alright BUT putting down a murder is not alright?

In most countries abortion is only legal before the time of pregnancy when a large proportion of embryos/fetuses are naturally aborted by the mother's body due to chromosomal abnormalities or presence lethal genes.

If we were designed by God then he clearly doesn't give these potential babies souls before this point since so many are naturally aborted.
But some Christians just don't like logic.

 

[Darkside55]

Thankfully, there was a lot of people in history that had a bit more intellect and analytical skills. For instance, Cesare Beccaria.

The death penalty is useless, barbaric and ineffective.

Darkside, your rhetoric is borderline fascist, though. The "society" as a highest value?

Cesare was wrong, though. Execution is a necessary form of punishment, and the state does have the right to take lives. A retributive system is more effective than a preventive system; severe punishment will serve as a deterrent. If a criminal knew he were going to die for committing a crime, he might think twice about it. Two things Cesare and I will agree on is that a punishment must be swiftly carried out, and that punishment should be certain. We simply disagree on the severity of punishment.

Even to criticize the death penalty as "ineffective," simply taking a look at crime statistics, overcrowding of prisons, and the number of prisons springing up to house said criminals, you can easily see that our current system is ineffective. It is because a repeat offender does not fear the loss of time or the relative danger of prison life when weighed against the perceived benefit of committing crime. Our system is currently a revolving door: we let criminals in, let them out again, and those who have not learned their lesson will continue to be cycled through the system. Were we to put a bullet in their heads, the door would not swing back the other way.

I have never considered my values fascist; perhaps they are. I will say that I esteem the human race above all other things, and all my opinions and judgements of morality are based on what I think we, as a collective race, should strive for, in order to persevere and survive. Humans long ago found the benefits of society; that is why we have held to it. To go against society is basically going against humanity. If you do not want to live in society, go up in the mountains. If you try to disrupt society by committing detrimental acts in a willfull and malicious manner, you should be expunged.

Like white blood cells fighting a virus.

 

[Tagaziel]

Cesare was wrong, though. Execution is a necessary form of punishment, and the state does have the right to take lives. A retributive system is more effective than a preventive system; severe punishment will serve as a deterrent. If a criminal knew he were going to die for committing a crime, he might think twice about it. Two things Cesare and I will agree on is that a punishment must be swiftly carried out, and that punishment should be certain. We simply disagree on the severity of punishment.

Sorry, but I'm not going to discard the achievement that is the abolition of the death penalty based on someone's opinion. Insitutionalized murder is unnecessary and unneeded. Not to mention ineffective, you conveniently omit Beccaria's example, where public executions gathered large audiences, resulting in criminals having a field day robbing their houses.

Deterrent indeed.

Even to criticize the death penalty as "ineffective," simply taking a look at crime statistics, overcrowding of prisons, and the number of prisons springing up to house said criminals, you can easily see that our current system is ineffective. It is because a repeat offender does not fear the loss of time or the relative danger of prison life when weighed against the perceived benefit of committing crime. Our system is currently a revolving door: we let criminals in, let them out again, and those who have not learned their lesson will continue to be cycled through the system. Were we to put a bullet in their heads, the door would not swing back the other way.

I don't get your reasoning, which apparently is "the current system is ineffective so let's kill people". How about, instead of returning to barbaric methods, introduce labour camps or special prison islands? That way, the prisoner remains useful to society all the while the latter is shielded from it.

I'm not proposing forced labour camps Soviets or Nazis estabilished, M'Atra forbid. Devising a labour camp that both trains the inmates in useful skills and resocializes them is not something a law student can cook up in five minutes.

A prison island would be the absolute last resort, for those absolutely hopeless you would shoot personally.

I have never considered my values fascist; perhaps they are. I will say that I esteem the human race above all other things, and all my opinions and judgements of morality are based on what I think we, as a collective race, should strive for, in order to persevere and survive. Humans long ago found the benefits of society; that is why we have held to it. To go against society is basically going against humanity. If you do not want to live in society, go up in the mountains. If you try to disrupt society by committing detrimental acts in a willfull and malicious manner, you should be expunged.

Like white blood cells fighting a virus.

I'm sure you are aware that political systems that pu the collective above the individual have resulted in millions of innocent victims, right?

 

[CptStern]

Cesare was wrong, though. Execution is a necessary form of punishment, and the state does have the right to take lives. A retributive system is more effective than a preventive system; severe punishment will serve as a deterrent. If a criminal knew he were going to die for committing a crime, he might think twice about it. Two things Cesare and I will agree on is that a punishment must be swiftly carried out, and that punishment should be certain. We simply disagree on the severity of punishment.

Even to criticize the death penalty as "ineffective," simply taking a look at crime statistics, overcrowding of prisons, and the number of prisons springing up to house said criminals, you can easily see that our current system is ineffective. It is because a repeat offender does not fear the loss of time or the relative danger of prison life when weighed against the perceived benefit of committing crime. Our system is currently a revolving door: we let criminals in, let them out again, and those who have not learned their lesson will continue to be cycled through the system. Were we to put a bullet in their heads, the door would not swing back the other way.

I have never considered my values fascist; perhaps they are. I will say that I esteem the human race above all other things, and all my opinions and judgements of morality are based on what I think we, as a collective race, should strive for, in order to persevere and survive. Humans long ago found the benefits of society; that is why we have held to it. To go against society is basically going against humanity. If you do not want to live in society, go up in the mountains. If you try to disrupt society by committing detrimental acts in a willfull and malicious manner, you should be expunged.

Like white blood cells fighting a virus.

capital punishment is not a deterent

http://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/summer06/capitalpunish

 

[Takekaze]

I still think that there are crimes that deserve only one punishment: death.

Let's take two cases from Japan: in 2005 a 31-year old guy kidnaps, rapes and kills a 7-year old girl. In November 2007 a 5-year and a 3-year old girl are butchered with a knife. Now... what to do with monsters who commit such crimes? Lock them up? For how long? Sooner or later there will be a psychologist or a psychiatrist who will pull all kind of crap out of his ass and those monsters will get free. They'll be back on the streets... and they will kill again. Yes, then those psychologists come with "therapy" and what not. BS. That crap doesn't work and such people deserve only one thing: swing them.

Well, in those two cases: The 31-year old guy already has the death penalty on his head and I doubt that the other guy from November will get away easily either. And rightfully so. They both deserve to swing. Period.

It's not civilized? Tell that to the parents of those children.

Though, once those guys swing amnesty international will scream murder again and whine about "violation of human rights". Idiots.

Or a case from Europe: parents let children starve to death. Punishment in Germany's liberal and civilized system? A few months in jail. Nothing big. A slap on the wrists, nothing else.

Or a case from a few years back, also from Europe: a murderer is set free again, after all those dumbass psychologists pushed for his release. Guess what happened... He killed again, 9 or 10 times. Arrested, convicted for life. Well, he continued to claim he was innocent, and then committed suicide. Surprisingly the series ended with his arrest. Innocent my ass. Good thing he killed himself in jail.

That said, I think that Europe should bring back the death penalty. What makes anyone think that someone who rapes and kills a child has ANY right to live?

But I guess that's how it is these days. Protect the killer, but don't give a crap about the victim or its relatives. Yeah, right. The killer's human rights must not be violated? Bull... You rape a child and kill it, you pay. If it's a relative of mine, and the state doesn't have the balls to give you the deserved punishment, well, then I will do it.

 

[Eejit]

Now... what to do with monsters who commit such crimes? Lock them up?

They're still humans whether you like it or not.

You rape a child and kill it, you pay. If it's a relative of mine, and the state doesn't have the balls to give you the deserved punishment, well, then I will do it.

They do pay, with prison time. If their sentence isn't long enough that's down to the judge...

If you take 'punishment', i.e. revenge, into your own hands then you're just as much a murderer as they are. And by your logic you should be hanged too.

 

[HunterSeeker]

Capital Punishment does not work, if it does why do nations with capital punishment have a higher crime rate then those that dont, on average?

The vast majority of criminals do not believe they will be caught, so any punishment no matter how great will deter them.

 

[Que-Ever]

I don't really care, unless I get caught doing something in New Jersey that was worth the death penalty.