Phoenix Network Forums

by **Rommaster** on Wed Feb 08, 2006 9:28 am

antirem wrote:
Samppa wrote:The cost is actually pretty big as you still have to keep the prisoners alive for a few decades before the actual execution. Something to do with bureaucracy I think..

Check your facts before you post. Its much more expensive to put someone to death. You have to pay tons in the court. Its common sence that it would be cheaper to kill em.. but common sence one told us the world was flat..

Samppa also mentioned "is death that bad" you may look at it and say no... but if death wasnt really that bad why would the criminals fight against it.

Rommaster has a great question.

Many innocent people goto jail. We need to change how the whole court system works. You can take a ghetto looking black man and a white buissness men and you will judge them differently. You wiould assume one is more probable of commiting rape than the other. That should not be in the court room. You need to have evidence. Also you will hear "strike that from the record" that should never be said. You cant tell someone to forget something and they will like that. Questions should be submitted before hand. Lawyers can be actors. The better he is at acting of portraying someone as a vile human being the more cases he will win. Thats not facts though only opinions.

I dont think that goverments should have the power to take a life... but that raises questions as to if they should be able to suspend your life in jail.

Yeah, the lawyers should be checked on their reliability if they are trustable before actually pointing the lawyer to a suspect. But it's a shame that it will never happen. It's their job( Rolling Eyes

), so there really isn't much we can do about the laws to change. There is one thing that they can do, which is making more room for people in jail. So when an innocent guy gets in and years later they found out that he's innocent after all, he will get released. He can come back with this system, not with the death penalty..

[edit] Many of you people say, death penalty shouldn't be abolished, but isn't saving a life of an innocent making you feel good, better than using the death penalty on a worthless murderer, raper, etc. This also saves lots of money. Said this before in the previous post.

by **Samppa** on Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm

antirem wrote:Check your facts before you post. Its much more expensive to put someone to death.

I never said if either was cheaper or more expensive. I avoided saying anything about that. I stated it's expensive to put someone to death, but I didn't compare the cost of keeping them alive and killing them Confused

On the subject of the lawyers and such, if you ask me the whole judiciary system should be completely re-done.. It's getting out of date.

by **Will** on Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:56 am

fishpoo222 wrote:however i can see the logic when it comes to money, it cots loads to keep someone in prison for long periods of time but it is quick and cheep just to kill them

Actually it can cost upwards of 20 Million per execution because of all the legal fees for appeals and such, whereas life imprisonment is only around 2 Million dollars total.

EDIT: Oh, people have said this already.

But I'm still for the Death Penalty. I'd rather an innocent die then a serial killer go free. Shit happens. -_-

by **tenguage12** on Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:13 pm

I Vote i guess so, I'm a MP i have seen like almost every situation idk how many time's a inasent has went to jail, and me not able to say or do anything about it, the only time a rapest or mulaster or w/e should be killed is when they have ever proof in the d*m book that he/she was the one that did it, but other than that its bunotly, i hate lawyers all they care about is winning a d*m case, it's immature, and stuipaty, they have no care for the persons life, only the case to be won, and thats commen sence, i mean you have two peole you d*m sure know ones the killer/raper/mulaster. but there both defending the two, all they want is the money and the case to win, Rolling Eyes

freakkin stuipd, sorry, i would type a hole of a lot more, but don't want to turn this in a argument, but my vote is yea =\. Exclamation

by **Starmax** on Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:57 am

Well i can't say im 100% for or against but since the poll did'nt have a grey area I say I'm for it,only because if we dont have it at all Criminal's wont care.

But i dont believe it fit's every crime,I know it's been asked already,"what if innocent people are convicted", well if the law actually went with all the FACT'S as it were we wouldnt have innocent people convicted.

I do believe that any countries law should provide for punishment's that fit the crime,However i dont believe that's the way it end's up working all the time,Thus the reason i cant go 100% either way.

But i believe child killer's and Rapist's and such should at least rot in jail if not get the chair.

I think the idea of the death penalty was to put devilish Criminal's through the pain they had caused other's,,Not just get a needle in the arm and fall to sleep.

Anyway this is my opinion on the subject,I hope nobody was offended in any way,it was not my intent........ Smile

by **bwolf** on Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:31 am

death penalty, should of never been allowed period.

It's beyond a imoral act and the people who allow it, are
no better then murders themself.

Quote: Thou Shall Not Kill!

by **rgos** on Sun Mar 19, 2006 7:25 pm

death penalty... you kill a murderer then what you get is another corpse I find it illogical at all... sentencing to life time is better imho

by **radky** on Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:22 pm

100% - death penalty.

by **najum** on Sat Apr 15, 2006 11:00 am

I am against death penalty. Death means u might be saving world from the repeat offenders but its no punishment to them. They get free of all troubls once they are dead. State might be out of trouble too because then government doesn't have to pay expense for keeping a guy in jail until he dies.

Also what if a person kills someone in self defence but unable to prove it? Wrongly accused? Being at bad place at a bad time?

But again, in some cases death panelty becomes essential, so its kinda controvertial topic.

by **knedl** on Sat Apr 15, 2006 7:10 pm

I'm partly against and partyl for death penalty, and that's simply becouse I couldn't give a rats ass about those people who have difficulties in the family and decide to kill one of them, those things happen you just pop. The kind of people I would send to death penatly is child molestors and rapists I simply can stand people like that I mean how can you harm or rape a 6 year old if your let's say around 40?
That's just not normal, I'm not saying that killing is normal but just think about how much it really takes that you kill a pearson? I'm positive that about half of you have thought about it but just never had the guts to do it, I admit I did but couldn't do it, but you never know, either is it selfdefence or a planned murder you never know when you will be the one who will face death penalty.

Greetings.

by **roogog** on Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:07 pm

basically i'm against the death penalty but life imprisonment has to mean life. Not a few years then out for good behaviour.

by **slave** on Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:38 am

i think criminal should be hang till death because they cant change them self after releasing from jail they will repeat their crime so before an other damage done by them we should eliminte these kind of peoples from earth

by **Samppa** on Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:08 am

Who's to say they will do it again?

by **krovax** on Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:22 pm

I think it should be abolished, for two reasons:

1st - NO ONE has the right to take a life, no matter what wrong that person has done

2nd - I think being locked up in a solitary cell, for the rest of your life is way worst punishment than death

by **acidflower** on Sat May 06, 2006 3:20 pm

Although in Canada, there is no death penalty, I wish there was. The province I'm in is very lenient towards drug offenders. A judge might go "oh well, this is only his second offence, he'll probably change" and put him back on the streets. I just find that unbelieveable. I wish that after a certain amount of offences for whatever crime, people would be charged with the death penalty.

Edit:

"I dont think that goverments should have the power to take a life... but that raises questions as to if they should be able to suspend your life in jail."

What you're saying is that another person shouldn't be able to decide another's fate. But, then this brings up another question of "Euthanasia" or the whole medicine field. Why should another person have the power to save someone else's life? By killing a person, you would disobey nature's law of "survival of the fittest". But, by using medicine to save a person, or to treat someone for example, such as a mentally retarded person, that would also break nature's law of "survival of the fittest".

Because society accepts the fact that we can use technology to save people, society should also accept the fact that people can take other's lives.

Phoenix Network Forums

The Death Penalty!

Should the death penalty be abolished?

i think yes

hi there

Who is online