Thoughts. (1 Viewer)

[Spambiter]

So, how many prisoners do you take into your homes every year?
We have lots of them, and they don't really have any place in the world, so if
you don't want them killed, go pick one up!

Remember, it is a problem with their brains.

 

[jamesrage]

Thoughts.

My thoughts is that we need to make executions cheaper.
We need to eliminate mental compitency trials.
Ban the shrinks from the court rooms.
If a individual is convicted with a no doubt/guilty with out a doubt conviction of a certian of murder then deny him or her any appeals and immidiatly execute him or her.
If a person on death row want to hang themselves then let them save the tax payers some money.
If a death row inmate has a terminal desease don't waste money on curing him/her.

 

[Mixed View]

My thoughts is that we need to make executions cheaper.
We need to eliminate mental compitency trials.
Ban the shrinks from the court rooms.
If a individual is convicted with a no doubt/guilty with out a doubt conviction of a certian of murder then deny him or her any appeals and immidiatly execute him or her.
If a person on death row want to hang themselves then let them save the tax payers some money.
If a death row inmate has a terminal desease don't waste money on curing him/her.

You just say this out of revenge. And not so the punishment fits the crime. A life sentence fits the crime. And also, several people who are innocent die from the death penalty. And the jurers thought "without a doubt" they were guilty.

Check this site out. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=111#executed

 

[IValueFreedom]

I would have to say that people have different views on justice. So, that isn't a very sound argument against the death penalty.

If a person did commit a murder in cold blood. What right does that individual have to their own life?

Please keep the system out of the question, as we all know it's flawed.

What fundamental right to life do murderers have if one? If so, why?

 

[jamesrage]

So thus you think that motive has nothing to do with a crime, and should be ignored. I really can't say how ridiculous that idea is. Are you a christian?

I believe motive to a certain extent should be examined.I just think someone should face trial regardless of mental competency and face punishment regardless of mental competency.
Someone killing for self defence.defense of property,defense of others I find to be totally acceptable reasons to kill someone.
A father/mother killing someone who raped his/her daughter deserves some leniancy.
A woman who killed her abusive husband deserves leniancy.

Yes I am a Christian.Jesus spoke alot of what a individual should do and not do. not what a government or justice system should do or not do.

 

[Schweddy]

After being in a Jury recently (completely unrelated subject), I can see how it would be easy to convict the wrong person.

My thoughts on the death penalty are now being re-visited personally.

 

[Parmenion]

There can be no hard and fast rule in this regard. I believe every case must and should be taken on its own merits.

A Time to Kill

Portrays a good picture of a situation where any father (or mother for that matter) would kill the perpetrators of such a crime against their family.

The law must and always should be taken as a guideline to moral behaviour, not (in my humble opinion) a precedent for action or reaction in every given situation.

Sovreign states break international laws or bend them all the time but in the main they abide by them. Individuals, by the same token, should use this premise when dealing with matters in their own lives. In extraordinary circumstances, extraordinary reactions must be taken on their merits in terms of morality and when being judged by their peers - in terms of analyzation of the particular circumstance in question.