ANSWERS: 8
  • I'm not saying that I'm "for" the death penalty (I'm quite undecided on the issue), but there are several issues that you fail to broach. [1] Does the death penalty - that is: the mere existence of the death penalty - act as a deterrent to crime? (Proponents say that it does.) [2] Is the death penalty - on average - more or less expensive to the average taxpayer than is life imprisonment? (Proponents say that the death penalty makes things considerably cheaper for the taxpayer.) [3] How secure and how final is "life imprisonment" really? That is to say: how well does it GUARANTEE that the criminal will not escape and/or will not again commit a crime, in comparison to the death penalty? [4] Is life imprisonment sufficient punishment for the worst of crimes? Some would contend that life imprisonment is equivalent to WELFARE, that the convicted criminal receives plenty of nutritious food, television, a clean, secure room, and several other amenities - free of charge - for the rest of the criminal's life as "punishment" for the crime. In other words: the criminal receives - free of charge - a living that is much healthier and safer and well-maintained than many people who have never committed any crime. *** Morally speaking, IN AN IDEAL WORLD (economically speaking) we should not have to resort to the death penalty. We can simply "put up" the person for life (in a penitentiary). But in reality "putting up" a person for life - that is: nutritious food and well-maintained shelter, not to mention the several additional amenities - is something that we cannot afford to provide even to our non-criminals. Given that we do NOT live in an economically-perfect world, what really IS the best solution, morally? That is: what is best FOR THE SOCIETY as a whole? The answer is NOT simple.
    • Shadow
      The death penalty goes against the killers rights to live. It may not be seen as a crime in the eyes of the law in some countries because the law in those countries are messed up in the head. It has nothing to do with taxpayers. It’s to do with the right to live. If you do the crime you do the time. Killers should be kept in their cells for life and not allowed out. Prison time is punishment enough for them. Life in prison is sufficient for killers. Innocent people put in prison after being framed or mistaken identity are the ones who deserve their dignity. It’s best for society that they are protected by the police who do their job properly. Unfortunately in the real world there are corrupt police and that governments in certain countries who allow the death penalty are equally as criminal. Think of a person’s rights to live and what the moral thing to do is for killers. True justice does not allow for the demise of a person whether they are innocent or not. It’s to do with the government and how they handle situations with crimes committed
    • Army Veteran
      You're right but for the wrong reasons. When a killer has been convicted, he has no more rights. The death sentence, when imposed by law, is legal and follows due process if the option is on the table. The reason that the death penalty should not be imposed has nothing to do with "rights" or "morals". It has to do with punishment - as you said. People favor the death penalty because they themselves fear death - it's the worst thing they can imagine. Death is a state of blissful peace - it's no different than an extended sleep. When you're dead you have no worries of any kind. This is the experience people send convicted killers to when they impose the death penalty. And given a choice between serving time for his crimes and death, death is the easy way out. The killer avoids any kind of suffering while the families suffer for the rest of their lives.
    • Shadow
      It takes a lot of anger and hatred in a person to want someone else’s life to end
    • Army Veteran
      It isn't up to the person (victim's family). The law prescribes punishment without emotion. To impose the death penalty, certain criteria have to be met including the opportunity for numerous appeals.
    • Shadow
      I understand it’s the law that allows for the death penalty but the law in America and other parts of the world such as the Middle East are messed up in the head.
    • www.bible-reviews.com
      Shadow: "The death penalty goes against the killers rights to live.". Certainly it does...as does abortion, for example, which is another sort of legal killing. BUT...there are a few considerations relative to that statement of yours For example: after murdering another member of society, does the murderer STILL have the right to live? After all: the murderer has violated someone else's right to life. Arguably, in doing so they have surrendered their own right to life (at least: legally speaking.) Of course, one can also contend that the punishment (death penalty) is commensurate with the crime...assuming the death penalty is only used in cases of intentional murder. *** Remember also: rights are things that the law itself provides to us. The law determines what rights people do and do not have, and also determines which people have any particular right. In the U.S. I have the right of freedom of speech. In Germany I don't. (Go ahead - call a German police officer a "schweinhund", a pig-dog' in Germany. See what happens. In the U.S., that's not illegal in any way BECAUSE freedom of speech is a legally-granted right.) In Canada homosexuals have the right of freedom of public displays of affection. In Russia they don't. Etc.
    • Shadow
      Bible-reviews, any type of killing is morally wrong even if it’s part of the law in your country. The law in some parts of the world is messed up caused by the actions of a corrupt government. A murderer has the right to live but to spend their life in prison without parole. Certain governments don’t allow for the right for freedom of speech because that is a problem they have created for citizens of their country.
    • Linda Joy
      Have you ever killed a bug? Do you eat meat? Have you killed a plant? YOU, SIR ARE A MURDERER! Not really and killing is not morally wrong or GOD HIMSELF would be a murderer. He was the first to kill on earth to clothe Adam and Eve. You might actually want to read the bible if you want to know what it says! And you DEFINITELY should read it if you plan to quote it. And next time grab a scripture address. Know what, never mind, you don't have what it takes to pull this off.
    • Shadow
      I’m not interested and not affected by religious delusions Linda Joy. You speak bull$hit. The bible is a fairytale book written by people with an imagination and you believe in such bull$hit and lies
    • Linda Joy
      You are the one messed up in the head, not everyone else. And if you are going to call everyone who disagrees with YOU messed up in the head you deserve to be called the same for calling names to begin with. You're obsessed with illegally diagnosing others with a mental illness instead of learning how to express your dissatisfaction with the system. And on a side note, just because you don't believe in it doesn't mean its not true.
  • We'll take all of your money first to feed them, o.k.? And we'll put that prison right next door to you. And we'll be sure to put the gang that raped you, your sister and mother in there, too. Sorry your sis was only two when that happened, man. But maybe you can invite them to dinner since you're feeling so accommodating! As has already been said, once someone breaks the law and are convicted they no longer have the rights of a law abiding citizen. Execution should happen to everyone who willingly murders another human. And if they are innocent then they go to heaven, so what's the big deal?
    • Shadow
      You sound silly by saying you will take all of my money to feed them and for the prison to be next door to me. That’s ridiculous talk. You have anger and hatred to want a criminals life to end. As I said in my question there is a reason for prisons. Here in Ireland there are no executions because this country is not as messed up in the head as your country. There is no such thing as heaven because that’s a made up place in your subconscious mind for religious weirdos to believe in. The big deal is a person’s life which you have no regard for because you have anger and hatred.
    • Linda Joy
      Funny how you call me what you are. I have no anger or hatred. YOU are the one bringing that. I'm just saying if you want them, and are so concerned about their welfare you take them! I'm doing the loving thing by sending them to their reward! You are the one being ridiculous. And this page I found comparing crime in U.S. and Ireland are almost identical so SUCK IT LIAR! And I'm not angry, I'm laughing all the way... at your ignorance for even throwing this out there before checking it first!! https://www.numbeo.com/crime/compare_countries_result.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=Ireland HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
    • Shadow
      It’s usually religious weirdos that have a problem with atheists because we are different which you are intolerant of. Religious weirdos like yourself are the ones who sound ridiculous. The government in America and Ireland are different with the rules they set. I don’t lie at all. I say things as they really are which you don’t listen to and that’s your loss.
    • Linda Joy
      You don't listen to me and that's YOUR loss. And YOU are the one who has an intolerance of religious groups and individuals that believe. I've never been intolerant with atheists. I simply disagree with them. YOU NEED TO LEARN THE DIFFERENCE.
  • As I live in a country too weak to hang murders rapists peadophiles or drug trafficers. Crimainals have no respect for our laws they live better in jail than at home. . Lock them up for 5 years wip them everyday then hang them.
    • Linda Joy
      YOU wipe them! I ain't touchin' that!
    • Army Veteran
      There's your problem - they live better in jail. They have no incentive for staying out. Bring back hard labor on the rock pile for the rest of a person's life, and I guarantee you they won't be so quick to commit a crime that would put them there.
    • 11stevo73
      they do I know of plenty of drug addicts that like to go to jail to dry out.
  • There's a number of views. 1) The person took a life and so clearly does not value the life of others, so why value their life, eye for an eye. 2) Practically, it costs a lot of money (taxes) to keep a prisoner and less to dispose of them. 3) Morally, a person may see this as becoming the murderer, by inflicting the same on the person, as they did others. In a world where morals are relative or subjective and not objective, then in practical terms to dispose of the person is to not only rid the world of a person that commits such acts, so making it a safer place, but also it costs less. A serial killer doesn't kill out of hate or anger. A serial killer moves from victim to victim, purely out of a desire to kill. For them, it's a joy, or at least a compulsion. It is — as Edmund Kemper, one of the worst serial killers of all time, put it — a thrill: "There was actually a sexual thrill. You hear that little 'pop' and pull their heads off and hold their heads up by the hair. Whipping their heads off, their body sitting there. That'd get me off." That's where the terror of serial killer stories truly lies. It's not just the gore and the violence of the act – it's the joy. It's the disturbing glee that a man like Edmund Kemper gets when he drives a blade through another person's neck. For the worst serial killers, there's no horror or fear in the act of killing. When the Son of Sam, David Berkowitz, killed his first victim, he was so filled with euphoria that he sang on his way home. He felt nothing but release. Leonarda Cianciulli murdered three women by drugging and murdering them. Once dead, she cut their bodies into small pieces, used the fat to make soap, and their blood to make tea cakes to serve to her neighbours. The Moors murders were carried out by Ian Brady and Myra Hindley between July 1963 and October 1965, in and around Manchester, England. The victims were five children—Pauline Reade, John Kilbride, Keith Bennett, Lesley Ann Downey, and Edward Evans—aged between 10 and 17, at least four of whom were sexually assaulted. "We do whatever we enjoy doing. Whether it happens to be judged good or evil, is a matter for others to decide." Ted Bundy confessed to 30 homicides before his execution in the electric chair in 1989. "You learn what you need to kill and take care of the details. It's like changing a tire-the first time you're careful, by the 30th time, you can't remember where you left the lug wrench." Westley Allan Dodd abused as many as 175 children over a fifteen-year period. During that time he exposed himself to his victims, fondled them, and sexually assaulted them. Over time, he became more sadistic, eventually kidnapping and killing three young boys. Amelia Dyer was a "baby farmer." She housed pregnant women, then farmed their babies off to adoptive parents who would be able to give them a better life. At least, that's what she said. In reality, Dyer neglected the babies until they died of malnutrition. Later in life, she strangled the them using white edging tape. These are the haunting words from BTK killer Dennis Rader: "When this monster entered my brain, I will never know. But, it here to stay ... Society can be thankful that there are ways for people like me to relieve myself at time by day dreams of some victim being tortured and being mine. It's a big complicated game my friend of the monster play, putting victims number down, follow them, checking up on them waiting in the dark, waiting, waiting ... Maybe you can stop him. I can't. He has already chosen his next victim." Arthur Shawcross, AKA The Genesee River Killer, murdered at least 14 people. "I took the right leg of that woman's body, from the knee to the hip, took the fat off, and ate it while she looked at the other girl. When I bit into it, she urinated right there." Henry Lee Lucas was convicted of murdering 11 people and is serving a life sentence in prison. " Sex is one of my downfalls. I get sex any way I can get it. If I have to force someone to do it, I do... I rape them; I've done that. I've killed animals to have sex with them, and I've had sex while they are alive."
  • Killers remain killers, whether in prison or out. There was a gang leader in a San Joaquin valley prison awhile back, who ordered the killing of his enemies on the outside. He only stopped after his execution. Same with killers who continue to kill in prison. They kill because they can and because they like it. Eliminate them from the gene pool is the proper solution, IMHO. 10/11/22
    • Shadow
      Eliminating them is not the solution. With all the violence and corruption in the world there is no need to get involved with that because some people want to live their life in peace while the worst of criminals should be locked up for life to protect the innocent. As I said in my question there is a reason for prison which some people don’t understand. If you value human life you would not have said eliminate them. That’s said out of anger and hatred towards them which such feelings are understandable but not the actions of a corrupt government in certain countries
    • 11stevo73
      shadow easy to tell you have never lost a close friend or family member to an unproved attack . If a member of your family was walking down the street minding thier own business then hit of the back over the head with a water pipe and killed would you want the offender hung?
    • dalcocono
      As I stated in my answer, I know for a fact that prison doesn't protect anybody from killers who decide to eliminate somebody. Execution is the solution to stop the killers from doing what they love. I can't speak to countries other than the US, mostly CA where I'm from. My answer is not about valuing human life at all, it is about justice for the victims and their families.
    • Shadow
      I would not want the prisoner hung because I respect human life but what they did was completely wrong and illegal. They should be in prison for life without parole. Executions are not the solution because that’s the government being equally as criminal. It is not justice for a killer to be killer to be executed. Some people who think that killers should be executed have a violent mind and seem to forget the reason for prisons. Prison time is justice enough.
    • dalcocono
      No, it is society making rules to live together in peace. There are penalties for breaking those rules from fines thru incarceration up to execution for the worst offenders. As I have stated twice now, prison does not stop killers from killing. They kill in prison because they can, and they will kill by arrangement outside of prison often for revenge. If they are dead and gone, that threat is gone with them. They chose the crime that gave them the consequences, and the poor victims of their killing had no choice in the matter at all.
    • Shadow
      What does society know about peace? They are corrupt which some citizens seem to forget. I understand there is a penalty for breaking rules and that is what prison is for. Life in prison without parole with the key thrown away is the moral solution. I can sympathise with the poor victims but it sounds like you go along with the decision of a corrupt government
    • dalcocono
      "What does society know about peace"? Society makes the rules and the laws, we are required to live with in our societies. Peace is the goal. Those among us who choose to break that peace by killing other members of society destroy many more lives than the original victim of their crime. Murder is a cruel and heartless act that can have generational effects on the survivors. Execution is the appropriate punishment for murder. The killer should not get to live a life incarcerated while the victim is lying in their grave.. Your sympathies seem to be with the murderer instead of the victims.
    • Shadow
      Not true. I would never sympathise with a killer. You have the wrong idea there. I value and respect human life because I am a pacifist. Killers should get hard labour in prison for the remainder of their remainder of their life. It takes a lot of anger and hatred to follow the actions of a corrupt government with their executions. You don’t think about the reason for prisons. A prison is for people who have done wrong by committing a crime. It’s people like yourself that don’t understand that. Society’s sense of peace is corrupt in your part of the world.
    • dalcocono
      You keep saying you "value human life" yet you ignore the murdered victims. Their blood cries out for justice for their violent death and for their grieving families. "Corrupt govt" has nothing to do with meting out deserved death to wanton killers, IMHO. Their own actions have caused their doom. They deserve it. They should not get to stay above ground in the light while their victims rot in the grave.
    • Shadow
      I do not ignore the victims. They got unfortunate from being killed. If a relative of mine was killed I would remember them in memory. I think about the victims very much. The killers actions should land themselves in prison. I understand you would be feeling anger and hatred towards the killer but executions are not justice. Executions are the government ending a life in some parts of the world. In other countries that don’t have executions that means their government are more moral and it is their rule for the killer to serve prison time as punishment. My value of human life is morally correct and that some people like you don’t understand the reason for prisons. Your country and mine have different government rules. You seem to follow your government’s rules. With all the corruption and violence in the world you would not be helpful to make things better. All criminals should be separated from society by being in prison where they belong
    • dalcocono
      Your take on life and death is strange "unfortunate they got killed"? You have no clue do you. Gangs and cartel function in and out of prison here in CA, elsewhere too I imagine. Killers can reach out and touch you from inside or outside if you are incarcerated. It happens often too. It isn't "immoral" for govt and society to demand a murderer be executed for their crimes. Society has demanded this punishment for murder for generations. It os a good solution, because once that killer is dead, they will never kill again. I don't believe any killer should live to feel the sun on their back for very long after their victim has been placed in the ground. These rules predate my govt by thousands of years. You are following some soft hearted and soft headed approach to capital punishment that allows a killer to live long after his victims have died. There is no longer any "hard labor" sentences in the world either.
    • Linda Joy
      Seems to me what you don't respect, shadow are the feelings of the victims and their families. But you won't change your opinion no matter how many clearer heads are telling you YOU'RE WRONG society cannot tolerate murderers!
    • Shadow
      Dalcocono, I mean to say it’s terrible about the murdered victims. I do have a clue. It is immoral for a corrupt government to end the life of a killer because they have a right to live their life in prison without parole.
    • Shadow
      Linda Joy, you are wrong because I do respect the feelings of the victims and their family. According to your answer you see me as insensitive. Of course society does not tolerate murder. That’s why there are prisons which you are forgetting
    • dalcocono
      I disagree that it is "immoral" for govt to execute killers. These are the penalties for murder. They took the life of an innocent and their life should be forfeit in the name of justice. Human society has created these laws to try and control the predators among us. Your idealism over human life is not shared by the killers who wantonly destroy other peoples lives. Once those people are caught tried and convicted they don't have "right" to live their lives in prison. Their victims rights are the ones which were sadly violated. You and I will never agree on this subject I'm afraid.
    • Shadow
      Dalcocono, you think that executions are moral because you tend to follow a corrupt government. The government in your country and mine are different. To execute a killer is taking away their right to live their life in prison. They deserve prison time. I understand very well the victims rights were violated so because the killer did the crime they do their time in prison. The reason why we will never come to an agreement is because we have opposite views. I know very well this conversation will get nowhere. Everyone has the right to live their life while wrongdoers of all kinds should be spending time in prison. There is a reason for prisons which some people don’t take on board.
    • dalcocono
      You keep saying the same nonsense about "immoral corrupt govts". You have never said what is your country. The killers have forfeited their right to live by murdering another person. What about their right to live? I do agree that there is a good reason for prisons. They are there to house those who have transgressed our laws and are serving out a sentence passed on them after a trial. Crimes that do not call for death are atoned for with some rehabilitation involved too hopefully. They are also there to house death row inmates awaiting their doom.
    • Shadow
      It’s not nonsense when I mention about corrupt governments. That is the truth which you seem to ignore. I live in Ireland. Nobody has the right to decide someone’s fate like the government do with their executions. A killers doom is in prison.
    • dalcocono
      It is nonsense. Because the death penalty is and has been imposed for the ugliest of crimes by ALL societies around the globe for generations. Claiming that it is the product of a "corrupt govt" is way out in left field. Before there was any govt control over executions, it was tribes and families and clans that worked out the death of an offender. Your notion of "corrupt govt" may or may not be correct some of the time, but the death penalty for killers predates any govt we have on earth today. Prisons are for those who haven't murdered.
    • Shadow
      It’s not nonsense because not every country has a government that allows for the death penalty. The death penalty is the actions of a corrupt government which you don’t realise because you tend to follow what the government does in your country. Prisons are for any offender including killers and it depends on the country’s government as to what their rules are
    • dalcocono
      Once again, you just repeat the same error to me. Just because a nation allows for the death penalty does not make them corrupt. That point begins from an error. That is why I call it nonsense. The death penalty is the result of the perpetrators actions against society and individuals. Just because "not every country" uses the death penalty today, doesn't mean they didn't a few years back, or that they won't again, if society demands it. Your arguments are not changing my mind on this issue.
    • Shadow
      It’s not an error. You think it’s an error but you’re wrong. The reason why I’m repeating is to try and get my message across but you don’t listen and that’s your problem. When a nation allows for the death penalty that makes them corrupt because they are responsible for the death of a killer who should be in prison. Everything you say does not change my mind on the issue.
    • dalcocono
      Once again, I have to call nonsense. You are simply giving me your opinion and expecting me to accept it as true and right. However, I completely disagree with your opinion and reject the notion that a govt is corrupt because of the use or not of the death penalty. The laws of the land and the people of the land don't have to be corrupt simply because they don't agree with some stuff and nonsense about keeping killers alive because they have some nonexistent "right to live in prison". We return to the right to life their victims enjoyed until the killer destroyed them. From there, the only right the killer has is the right to a fair trial under the laws of his state. If they are exonerated, then go in peace. If they are convicted though, their punishment in many cases should be execution. The people of any society don't have to be corrupt to require that from a killer.
    • Shadow
      When you say it's nonsense, that's just what you think. The government are definitely corrupt. Some governments in other countries who do not allow the death penalty are more moral. You go by a corrupt government in your country that are immoral who do not allow the killer to spend their life in prison without parole. Your government are corrupt whether you choose to listen to me or not. Obviously there is no understanding between us and that's why this conversation is not getting anywhere. The laws of your land are corrupt and that where I'm coming from is not nonsense. That's just what you think. In some countries like here in Ireland that some killers spend their life in prison so it's not nonexistent. I don't know where you heard that crap saying that it's nonexistent. That's just in your country out of a few other countries throughout the world that punishment in some cases is execution and not "should be execution" like you say. It's people like you that would not do any favours for the problems of the world because death for anybody at all including killers is morally wrong and it DOES take a corrupt government to allow executions. You're wrong. Punishment for killers is prison time without parole which you don't seem to understand but that's your loss.
    • dalcocono
      Your nation used the death penalty up until 1990. Just because they are conducting a social experiment now doesn't mean they are more moral than other nations.. Thanks for sharing your opinion, and thanks for the civil debate. Often a debate this long becomes rude and offensive. You haven't convinced me that my nation is corrupt nor immoral and you haven't convinced me that killers should be allowed to lounge around prison for the rest of their natural lives either. I still think it's all nonsense.
    • Shadow
      It’s not nonsense. That’s what you think. The government in your country contribute to the horror of the world by taking a life which you seem to think is ok. Obviously there is something wrong with you morally speaking. The actions of the government in your country is evident that they are immoral and corrupt and don’t think about the reason for prisons.
    • dalcocono
      "The govt of my country contribute to the horror of the world by taking a life"? More nonsense. Please don't wax maudlin on me over a killer getting his just desserts! If you want to discuss the contributions to the horror of the world just look back at your own nation during the time your people called "the troubles". Ireland is not holding any moral high ground just because they stopped executing their killers around 30 years ago. Prisons are for criminals who may be rehabilitated. Eliminate killers from the gene pool then they will never kill again.
    • Shadow
      It’s not nonsense like you think. There is no need to quote what I said. I’m saying exactly how things are. Of course the American government are taking a life. You don’t see it that way because you’re wrong in the head. Your thoughts on eliminating killers is wrong because executions are the government making a murder which you are blinded by. You obviously don’t have a sense of morality. Whoever brought you up into the world since you were young did not teach you about morality and to value human life. You don’t know anything about that because if you did you would not be talking about eliminating killers. You were not taught about the reason for prisons for all criminals. Unfortunately the government in your country are not moral because if they were they would not be ending the life of a killer. I do not sympathise with killers because that would go against my pacifist views. It’s people like you who are part of the corruption in America
    • dalcocono
      Unfortunately, it is up to each of the 50 states whether they use the death penalty or not. Some do, some don't. Those that don't leave killers alive to kill in prison or to hire killings outside of prison for revenge. I have a good sense of mortality. I knew the murderous conflict in your nation that killed thousands was wrong. You guys didn't know it though. I value human life as much as anybody. I just know that the penalty for murder is death. I don't live in lala land. Corruption in govt anywhere is certainly not due to the death penalty. nor does pacifist crying and wringing their hands over it make for some moral high ground in govt.
    • Shadow
      I never said mortality. I said morality. If you have a sense of morality you would not be saying in your previous response to eliminate killers. If you value human life, you would be opposing the death penalty but you seem to think the death penalty is ok according to what you say. That’s a contradictory thing to say that you value human life yet you are for the death penalty. The penalty for murder is prison time without parole. I don’t live in lala land either. I live in Ireland. The Irish government value human life more than the American government and that’s why we don’t allow the death penalty.
    • dalcocono
      mortality" was a typo I missed. Morality was what I intended to write. I have a well developed sense of right and wrong. I do not believe a murderer should live much past his/her victims though. That is not immoral. It does not devalue human life (murder does that) and I don't care how things work in Ireland. You folks can coddle and save your murderers if you like. I think the best answer to murder is trial by jury and execution if found guilty. Problem solved; they won't do that again. As I've stated before, none of your arguments have swayed me an inch from my position on death penalty. I still believe they deserve and they have earned it by murdering other people. You can cry for them if you like. I shall not.
    • Shadow
      You say you have a sense of right and wrong but then you say the best answer to murder is execution. That is an immoral judgment because the killer deserves prison time. It takes an immoral judgment from the American government to allow for the death penalty. None of your arguments can change my mind on the subject. I do not cry for people who murder. I still believe that killers deserve prison time. That’s a moral judgment.
    • dalcocono
      Uh-huh, you've said that already a few times. Repeating nonsense does not make it any less nonsense. It just makes the nonsense redundant.
    • Shadow
      I don’t know what you are talking about when it’s nonsense. You should explain what you think is nonsense. You and I are not gaining anything out of this conversation because you are sticking with your views and I am sticking with mine. What I say is not nonsense. That’s just what you think. It’s not nonsense when I say that killers should be in prison without parole. There is nothing nonsense when I talk about the government in your country being corrupt. It is not nonsense to say that executions are the government murdering killers. Everyone has the right to live including those who have committed the worst of crimes. It is not nonsense to say that there is a reason for prisons. According to you, anything I say is nonsense because you don’t listen and understand where someone else is coming from. As I said we will not gain anything from this conversation. You can not change my mind about the issue. It’s not in your position to change someone’s views just to suit you.
    • dalcocono
      Uh-huh. I've explained myself thoroughly in my former comments. Just reread them. I'm not explaining anything more to you. Just keep clinging to your nonsense.
    • Shadow
      It’s not nonsense and that’s what you think. You are dismissive of the point I am making because you are ignorant. I explained myself as well which you don’t understand. Your ignorance makes this type of communication an argument and there’s no need to argue.
    • dalcocono
      Sorry mr. pacifist, but disagreeing with your lame opinion is not ignorance. Your opinion however, is nonsense. Perhaps it's time for you to bugger off.
    • Shadow
      My opinion is not lame. That’s just what you think. It takes ignorance to be dismissive of someone’s opinion. There is nothing nonsense about it. You keep saying nonsense in response to what I say when I make a point. You’re just ignorant without realising it and that’s why you deny it. We both stick to our own views which makes this communication not get anywhere. It’s time for all of this to be over
    • dalcocono
      Lol! Listen to the pot call the kettle black! This communication wasn't getting anywhere quite a few responses back. At last you made a point we can both agree on though! "It's time for all this to be over." I concur. See ya, wouldn't want to be ya!
    • Shadow
      Likewise.
    • Linda Joy
      Murderers have no right to live. They took another life! They have no right to live after that. Prisons are not supposed to be for life. Only to protect society from them until they learn to do better, but they don't. And you have has several people tell you you are wrong and you don't listen. Dalcono is right and he stated his point well. You are wrong and keep insisting EVERYONE ELSE is wrong. You have stated repeatedly that people say things out of anger when you are not all knowing. Even when they tell you they are not angry you think you know how they feel better than they do? Now THAT is a mental disorder! You need to talk to your psychiatrist about these irrational ideas. And I seriously doubt anyone will want to even try and explain anything to you because you are judgmental, insulting, closed minded and wrong!!
    • Shadow
      Linda Joy, they have a right to live and be in prison for their wrongdoings. Everyone is going to pass away at some stage so nobody has the right to take away life. Prison time for murderers is for life without parole. You don’t understand that Linda Joy. Just because you agree with what the government in America does with some killers does not mean it’s right. You have been raised in a country that allows death for some killers. There is enough death in the world and you expect the corrupt government to add to it? That’s morally wrong. Linda Joy, you are agreeing with another Answerbag user who thinks the same as you but in the real world we all think differently. I don’t know how someone feels online unless they say it. I don’t need a psychiatrist. You like to label others who don’t think the same as you so bugger off and quit with the labelling for psychiatric help. That’s exactly what you are doing and you don’t realise it. I am not close minded unlike a religious weirdo like you. It’s you who is wrong Linda Joy saying things about me and you don’t know me in person.
  • A lot of people think they should be put to death, others don't. Are people who murder for money or fun evil, or the victim of a handicapped mind? Nobody can really answer that but the answer to whether they live or die may turn on that.😏
    • Hulk70166
      I used to be anti-death penalty and then I started watching documentaries about serial killers. The things they do are so outrageous that their crimes scream out for death. Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, Otis Toole, and Joel Rifkin for example knew what they were doing was wrong but did it anyway because they enjoyed killing. Are they evil and should be put to death or demented and be locked up for the rest of their lives? How difficult was it to resist the urge to kill? Was it impossible or was it difficult but not impossible. Was it an addiction? I can't get inside their minds so I can't say.
    • Linda Joy
      IMHO it doesn't matter. An eye for an eye.
  • I don't think it's the case that people who are pro-death-penalty are just not thinking about the morality of the government taking a life. I think it's a sort of vestigial leftover of traditional thinking. The penal system, prior to the late 19th century, was never intended to reform convicts- it was intended to keep the dangerous people away from the innocent people that they might harm. As such, a person capable of killing another person was seen as too dangerous to have around at all, so it was necessary to end their life, if and only if they were convicted beyond any reasonable level of doubt in court. As that philosophy has shifted, some people still lean into the death penalty out of that tradition, but there are others who justify it for other reasons, either budgetary or as being more humane than a lifetime spent locked rotting in a cell. Any talk about the prisoners' rights is kind of misguided, since convicts don't really have rights anyway- or else they wouldn't be forced to stay in prison. But, I think, most people in the modern western society see the death penalty as barbarically outdated. The truth is that, at the end of the day, for every criminal who was executed, there exists some person out there who had to push the plunger, flick the switch, flip the lever, or open the valve that resulted in the death of another human. And our justice system in the USA is piss poor, with a shocking proportion of people sentenced to die being exonerated. Could you imagine being the guy who flicked the switch to electrocute another human, only to find out years later that that person was innocent?
  • Too expensive to keep a killer in prison for life.
    • 11stevo73
      Let them all out John Fetterman a few could stay at your house thats what you voted for?

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy