What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Death Penalty (2 Viewers)

Last edited by a moderator:
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
An individual ending the lives of multiple individuals in horrific ways?
To me, it seems like a much more intrusive action than requiring someone buy healthcare.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I don't understand why the death penalty is Big Government while life without parole is Small Government. They're both extremely severe penalties meted out by a criminal justice system that everybody except anarchists agrees is part of the legitimate scope of government.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I don't understand why the death penalty is Big Government while life without parole is Small Government. They're both extremely severe penalties meted out by a criminal justice system that everybody except anarchists agrees is part of the legitimate scope of government.
I see a pretty major difference in the role of government putting people to death vs locking them up. The right to life is a pretty basic and important concept for me.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
Fair enough. I can understand that.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused: I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
It's not a role I want of fellow citizens either, but it happens all the time.
 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I don't understand why the death penalty is Big Government while life without parole is Small Government. They're both extremely severe penalties meted out by a criminal justice system that everybody except anarchists agrees is part of the legitimate scope of government.
I see a pretty major difference in the role of government putting people to death vs locking them up. The right to life is a pretty basic and important concept for me.
It is to me as well. I also believe in accountability. And I believe that if you take another life with intent (Murder 1), you forfeit your right to life yourself. You may disagree but I think that's a reasonable stance to have on this issue.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I don't understand why the death penalty is Big Government while life without parole is Small Government. They're both extremely severe penalties meted out by a criminal justice system that everybody except anarchists agrees is part of the legitimate scope of government.
I see a pretty major difference in the role of government putting people to death vs locking them up. The right to life is a pretty basic and important concept for me.
It is to me as well. I also believe in accountability. And I believe that if you take another life with intent (Murder 1), you forfeit your right to life yourself. You may disagree but I think that's a reasonable stance to have on this issue.
I don't believe in the death penalty, but I do believe it is a reasonable stance for those that do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused: I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
It's not a role I want of fellow citizens either, but it happens all the time.
We are in agreement, I don't want my fellow citizens putting people to death either. Let's get them to stop.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused: I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
It's not a role I want of fellow citizens either, but it happens all the time.
We are in agreement, I don't want my fellow citizens putting people to death either. Let's get them to stop.
thats the beauty of it. Once the murders stop, so does the death penalty.
 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
Are you ok with them sending our young people to war?

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
Are you ok with them sending our young people to war?
I am OK with a volunteer army. I am strongly opposed to any kind of draft.

The older I have gotten the less I have supported the military actions the US has taken, but that's a different question.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
Are you ok with them sending our young people to war?
Who is "them"? All the people that go to war now signed up for it.

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused:

I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm just saying I don't see the connection.

How is locking them up for the rest of their lives any different? You are still taking their life away. You're just doing it in a different fashion. Life in prison seems like more of a punishment than just killing them. Life in prison would seem like torture almost.

This is why, for me, there are times, especially with terrorists, that I'd rather see them get life in prison. But for people who murder people in a crime, they have no place in our world. Just get rid of them. Save them the torture of jail and remove them from life.
Putting people to death just doesn't seem like the right role I want of my government.
Are you ok with them sending our young people to war?
Who is "them"? All the people that go to war now signed up for it.
Yeah...maybe they just wanted to learn computer skills like you see in the recruitment advertisement. They certainly don't send themselves to war. A guy on death row at least gets numerous appeals. I would like to see at least as much consideration for our soldiers before sending them off for some ridiculous reason.

 
Back to the DEATH PENALTY.......some humans don't deserve to live. If the government isn't the one to decide who is? Also the government put in a system....the people ultimately decide.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
Says you. Maybe you should ask a family whose child has been murdered what their definition of deserved punishment is.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
Says you. Maybe you should ask a family whose child has been murdered what their definition of deserved punishment is.
Not a good argument. If it were one of my children killed, I would certainly want to see the death penalty enforced as a punishment. Probably torture as well. But that is, justifiably, an emotional response. There is a reason we do not allow the grieving parents of murder victims to decide this. The law is supposed to be based on well thought out reason, and not immediate emotion.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
Says you. Maybe you should ask a family whose child has been murdered what their definition of deserved punishment is.
Not a good argument. If it were one of my children killed, I would certainly want to see the death penalty enforced as a punishment. Probably torture as well. But that is, justifiably, an emotional response. There is a reason we do not allow the grieving parents of murder victims to decide this. The law is supposed to be based on well thought out reason, and not immediate emotion.
Isn't that what the 12 jurors and the judge do?

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
Tim,

People who should have been executed but have been given life in prison have killed again. I'm not ok with that. It's a shame you can't respect other people's opinions as valid. I understand why people opposed to the death penalty are opposed to it, and I'm in favor of reforms. But, like on most topics, you have zero respect for other valid opinions if they differ from yours.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Why should taxpayers be responsible for the continued feeding and housing of these animals.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
Tim,

People who should have been executed but have been given life in prison have killed again. I'm not ok with that. It's a shame you can't respect other people's opinions as valid. I understand why people opposed to the death penalty are opposed to it, and I'm in favor of reforms. But, like on most topics, you have zero respect for other valid opinions if they differ from yours.
That's not true, Strike.

I do respect your opinion on this issue. In fact, at times in my life I've gone back and forth on this subject. But I actually believe that being in favor of the death penalty is a legitimate opinion. I just think that there is an emotional element to a lot of it. My above comments were obviously a little tongue in cheek.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Why should taxpayers be responsible for the continued feeding and housing of these animals.
You realize that executions usually end up costing more than life in prison?

 
Would the public be in favor of executions if they were all televised in prime time? What does that say about us a society, assuming the people tune in every friday night to see the weekly culling?

 
Would the public be in favor of executions if they were all televised in prime time? What does that say about us a society, assuming the people tune in every friday night to see the weekly culling?
Are we talking about during like July when all the major sports except baseball are on hiatus?

 
Would the public be in favor of executions if they were all televised in prime time? What does that say about us a society, assuming the people tune in every friday night to see the weekly culling?
Are we talking about during like July when all the major sports except baseball are on hiatus?
Nope every Friday night from 9-11. Or maybe two separate shows, an east cost show and a west coast show.

 
Would the public be in favor of executions if they were all televised in prime time? What does that say about us a society, assuming the people tune in every friday night to see the weekly culling?
Are we talking about during like July when all the major sports except baseball are on hiatus?
Nope every Friday night from 9-11. Or maybe two separate shows, an east cost show and a west coast show.
I'd watch. Even though I'm against the death penalty. Like most people, I'm a sucker for barbarism.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Amazing. Tim chose to just ignore a post that shows what happens when you take someone who should be executed and give them life in prison instead. They kill more people. What a shock!!!

:lmao:

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.

The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Why should taxpayers be responsible for the continued feeding and housing of these animals.
You realize that executions usually end up costing more than life in prison?
This argument is so ####### lame. A PROPERLY run death sentence would cost far less than housing an inmate for the rest of their lives. Preemptive strike: Before someone also uses the lame 'innocent people have been executed', I am talking about the obviously guilty. There are boatloads of them sitting in prison.

We should send the bill for incarceration to those who oppose a murderers execution. A simple, 'does anyone object to this murderer's execution?' Anyone saying 'yes', gets sent the bill and we send the loser back to prison. The minute you can't pony up the $, we kill the loser. Then its totally on you. That would be so awesome.

 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."

 
yet another example of republicans once again choosing big government over individuals.
:confused: I don't get this statement.

I'm not a Rep. And the only thing I'm choosing is a just penalty to a waste of space.
I cant think of anything more intrusive than Big Government ending the life of an individual.
I don't understand why the death penalty is Big Government while life without parole is Small Government. They're both extremely severe penalties meted out by a criminal justice system that everybody except anarchists agrees is part of the legitimate scope of government.
IMO, it's because of a natural distrust of govt in general. Let's assume that the want for small govt is the expectation that the govt generally ####s #### up. Why do you want them getting involved in taking the lives of its citizens - legally.

I just don't trust govt in general enough to allow for execution. Too easy to abuse or to implement unjustly - which is exactly what's happening, in regard to the latter.

When / if the govt turns, just grabs too much power and limits our ability to do anything about it, having the govt already be allowed to kill citizens is just a bad idea overall all. No real good can come from it and lots of potentially bad. And irreversible in numerous levels.

 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
Sad.

 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
Yeah.

Except it's been shown time and time again that it's not actually a deterrent.

( so those four innocents now die... Why?)

 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
This is just about as good as any other argument for the death penalty.
 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
Yeah.

Except it's been shown time and time again that it's not actually a deterrent.

( so those four innocents now die... Why?)
I laugh when I hear the deterrent argument. If it's a deterrent great. I don't really care whether it is or not though. To me, It's about accountability for one's actions and ensuring that a person who could commit such an act doesn't do so again.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Why should taxpayers be responsible for the continued feeding and housing of these animals.
You realize that executions usually end up costing more than life in prison?
This argument is so ####### lame. A PROPERLY run death sentence would cost far less than housing an inmate for the rest of their lives. Preemptive strike: Before someone also uses the lame 'innocent people have been executed', I am talking about the obviously guilty. There are boatloads of them sitting in prison.We should send the bill for incarceration to those who oppose a murderers execution. A simple, 'does anyone object to this murderer's execution?' Anyone saying 'yes', gets sent the bill and we send the loser back to prison. The minute you can't pony up the $, we kill the loser. Then its totally on you. That would be so awesome.
He brought up the taxpayer argument, I did not. Also, your "solution" is unconstitutional among other things.
 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Why should taxpayers be responsible for the continued feeding and housing of these animals.
You realize that executions usually end up costing more than life in prison?
This argument is so ####### lame. A PROPERLY run death sentence would cost far less than housing an inmate for the rest of their lives. Preemptive strike: Before someone also uses the lame 'innocent people have been executed', I am talking about the obviously guilty. There are boatloads of them sitting in prison.We should send the bill for incarceration to those who oppose a murderers execution. A simple, 'does anyone object to this murderer's execution?' Anyone saying 'yes', gets sent the bill and we send the loser back to prison. The minute you can't pony up the $, we kill the loser. Then its totally on you. That would be so awesome.
He brought up the taxpayer argument, I did not. Also, your "solution" is unconstitutional among other things.
Since when do you care about the constitution?

 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
Yeah.

Except it's been shown time and time again that it's not actually a deterrent.

( so those four innocents now die... Why?)
Make it a deterrent - if thats what you want. Make the executions public. Make the executions quick - 60 days from conviction. Introduce caning or whipping as part of the death sentence. Maybe 2 per day until the sentence is carried out.

 
So long as we're admitting that it's all about entertainment value, I thought The Running Man was a good concept.
It's not. Entertainment value is a just a byproduct. Administering a deserved punishment is what it is "about."
Bull####. It's pure entertainment. Even now. It's gratification for the public, which enjoys putting people to death. Don't tell me it's deserved punishment- life in prison without parole would be deserved punishment for any crime no matter how savage.The state putting people to death is barbaric, a throwback to savage times- and that's why we do it. Because we love barbarism, and this gives us a chance to be barbaric while keeping up the pretense that it's all about "justice". What a load of crap. So why have the pretense of humane lethal injection, appeals, etc.? Let's string em all up on the courthouse lawn, or at the county fair. Let's have a spectacle. Televise it for the masses. Might as well get maximum entertainment value.
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25816116/supermax-inmate-held-solitary-confinement-30-years-loses

According to the ruling, Silverstein "eats alone and has no face-to-face interaction with others unfettered by glass, bars, chains, or other restraints, and his contact with others is minimal, lasting only a minute or so.
This is what we would have to do with all convicts who we currently consider the death penalty for, in order to ensure the safety of others from them. If that isn't barbaric I don't know what is.
Amazing. Tim chose to just ignore a post that shows what happens when you take someone who should be executed and give them life in prison instead. They kill more people. What a shock!!!

:lmao:
I ignored it because it's probably the weakest argument for the death penalty I have ever heard. There are, surely, other ways to prevent prison murders a little less drastic than state executions.
 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
Yeah.Except it's been shown time and time again that it's not actually a deterrent.

( so those four innocents now die... Why?)
Make it a deterrent - if thats what you want. Make the executions public. Make the executions quick - 60 days from conviction. Introduce caning or whipping as part of the death sentence. Maybe 2 per day until the sentence is carried out.
I suppose fascism and barbaric behavior do have their benefits.

 
Well, if we are being honest in here, and want to use the death penalty as a deterrent. Killing a few "innocent" people will still accomplish the task. The whole concept of it being better to set 100 guilty men free than send 1 innocent to prison, is vastly overrated. And as my momma always told me as she brought down the belt: "You might not have done this, but you did something."
Yeah.Except it's been shown time and time again that it's not actually a deterrent.

( so those four innocents now die... Why?)
I laugh when I hear the deterrent argument. If it's a deterrent great. I don't really care whether it is or not though. To me, It's about accountability for one's actions and ensuring that a person who could commit such an act doesn't do so again.
That's fine in theory.

You actually trust govt to carry this out properly, efficiently and most important of all, equitably? I sure as hell don't.

 
Koya, who cares if it's done properly, efficiently, or equitably? We get to watch people die and feel righteous and good doing it! What's not to like?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top