Today (8/10) is World Day Against the Death Penalty

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

only for people who have a life sentence,the rest,no.

I was against death penalty,until I read the so try of John gayze(sp).

dansik wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Death penalty is too easy, imo.

Rest of life in prison >>> Death

Moreover, if you're a murderer you probably realize there's a chance you might end up dead yourself. So these people - not all of them but likely the majority - are aware that their crimes could lead to their own death, whether that is a death penalty by authorities, killed by police or while committing your crimes. If they still, realizing this, do commit those crimes, they must have acted so knowing the risks. There must be some acceptance, that "what I'm about to do might be the death of me". In those cases, I don't see how a death penalty is much of a punishment at all. I sort of see death as something, that has no negative sides to the dying, because nothing really matters at that point, it's just going to be the End. It's the people who care for you that suffer the most if you die.

Therefore I consider a life in prison to be a greater punishment than death.

I don't think you quite comprehend just how final death is. You're dead. It's not an out because you can't enjoy it, you just cease to be alive. While in prison, you're still fed 3 times a day, given rec time, able to hang out with your craphhead friends, get visitors, see family...the list goes on. Maybe prison is actually a worse punishment in 3rd world countries, but again....death is death. There's no worse punishment than that.

I think there are worse things than death. For instance, spending the rest of your life without your freedom (i.e. in prison). Or put it this way: If I were to lose both my arms or both my legs, I'd probably commit suicide. I enjoy life, but I wouldn't enjoy it without my freedom.

BeautifulGame wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Death penalty is too easy, imo.

Rest of life in prison >>> Death

Moreover, if you're a murderer you probably realize there's a chance you might end up dead yourself. So these people - not all of them but likely the majority - are aware that their crimes could lead to their own death, whether that is a death penalty by authorities, killed by police or while committing your crimes. If they still, realizing this, do commit those crimes, they must have acted so knowing the risks. There must be some acceptance, that "what I'm about to do might be the death of me". In those cases, I don't see how a death penalty is much of a punishment at all. I sort of see death as something, that has no negative sides to the dying, because nothing really matters at that point, it's just going to be the End. It's the people who care for you that suffer the most if you die.

Therefore I consider a life in prison to be a greater punishment than death.

U are completely underestimating the physiological punishment .The knowledge that u are going to die in few days is highly excruciating and more painful than any long term imprisonment.

There is nothing worse than knowing the day u are going to die.

A few days' psychological punishment isn't nearly as bad, imo, as spending year after year in prison, knowing you're never going to be free again.

And well, in the end everyone have their opinion, but if I had to choose today between spending the rest of my life in prison or being executed, I dare to say I'd choose death.

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

When someone kills a person and we as a society decide to kill the murderer in retaliation, that's certainly "an eye for an eye". A life for a life. It's barbaric and lazy imo. It's based on pure emotion and we humans are not very rational creatures when we allow our emotions to run unchecked.

We should be pushing the limits of just how we can punish the murderer. I happen to agree completely with Art Morte. Death is far too kind for some of these truly depraved people. I find it highly disappointing that we'd rather put them down like dogs in the name of "efficiency" then actually force them to atone for their crimes.

Death Penalty should only be used under extreme circumstances.... for those who are known killer aka Saddam, Osama, Hitler, KKK leaders, Khmer Rouge and those who have committed genocide ..


btw death penalty does cost more then having the person spend all his life in prison....i did a whole report on this last year

i will post some stats as soon as i find them again...

This death penalty debate really only applies to 1st world countries, because anywhere else there are just too many factors to consider which can't be properly controlled.

I mean you have family paying prison inmates to kill serial rapists and the like over here. No one bats an eye because he's inherently "evil". Of course, most of the population is not properly educated or have a very twisted or non existant ethical code. IMO, the death penalty is a joke unless the population properly backs it and the people in power enforce it.

And we're the first country in history to abolish it

McLewis wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

When someone kills a person and we as a society decide to kill the murderer in retaliation, that's certainly "an eye for an eye". A life for a life. It's barbaric and lazy imo. It's based on pure emotion and we humans are not very rational creatures when we allow our emotions to run unchecked.

We should be pushing the limits of just how we can punish the murderer. I happen to agree completely with Art Morte. Death is far too kind for some of these truly depraved people. I find it highly disappointing that we'd rather put them down like dogs in the name of "efficiency" then actually force them to atone for their crimes.

It isnt done in retaliation but to stop others from suffering from same fate from the hands of an uncivilized animal and as a justice to those suffered.

Looking at history, the safest societies that ever been were Legalistic China and the Mongol Empire. Societies that had an absolute, swift, and painful law.

Simply put, I see the reason more serial killers are in America and Europe because those psychopaths are secure in the knowledge that the worst thing that will happen to them is death. And that is the least likely possibility.

More Serial killers have been sent into luxurious mental hospitals than the electric chair.

@McLewis, past societies did indeed push the limits of punishments.

Here is a few of the methods used in Legalistic China, where the punishment grows exponentially with the crime.

1- Treason: each limb is fastened to a chariot, and all chariots run in 4 different direction, which would cause dismemberment in about half an hour of extreme pain.

2- Corruption: Getting nailed to a board and thrown from a cliff.

3- Stealing: Beheading.

4- Murder: Way of the five pains (VERY brutal).

5- Multiple Murders: A slower version of the five pains. The more the victims the slower the punishment.

So McLewis, I think the reason we don't push the boundaries of what to do to murderers is that we don't want to re-explore the dark nature of our being. And death would generally rid us of those animals.

Notice that I am only assuming overwhelming evidence is available, and the crime is a first degree murder. Fact is that a serial killer can get a life sentence while someone who killed one person out of the moment could get 25 years which is ridicilous.

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

When someone kills a person and we as a society decide to kill the murderer in retaliation, that's certainly "an eye for an eye". A life for a life. It's barbaric and lazy imo. It's based on pure emotion and we humans are not very rational creatures when we allow our emotions to run unchecked.

We should be pushing the limits of just how we can punish the murderer. I happen to agree completely with Art Morte. Death is far too kind for some of these truly depraved people. I find it highly disappointing that we'd rather put them down like dogs in the name of "efficiency" then actually force them to atone for their crimes.

It isnt done in retaliation but to stop others from suffering from same fate from the hands of an uncivilized animal and as a justice to those suffered.

It's not justice. It's revenge masquerading as justice.

It's only truly justice when the criminal actually suffers imo. Death ends the suffering before it ever truly begins in many cases of capital punishment.

How is that justice?

McLewis,

What are some punishments that would make a criminal actually suffer?

dansik wrote:McLewis,

What are some punishments that would make a criminal actually suffer?

The Way of the Five Pains would.

wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

Lord Spencer wrote:

@McLewis, past societies did indeed push the limits of punishments.

Here is a few of the methods used in Legalistic China, where the punishment grows exponentially with the crime.

1- Treason: each limb is fastened to a chariot, and all chariots run in 4 different direction, which would cause dismemberment in about half an hour of extreme pain.

2- Corruption: Getting nailed to a board and thrown from a cliff.

3- Stealing: Beheading.

4- Murder: Way of the five pains (VERY brutal).

5- Multiple Murders: A slower version of the five pains. The more the victims the slower the punishment.

So McLewis, I think the reason we don't push the boundaries of what to do to murderers is that we don't want to re-explore the dark nature of our being. And death would generally rid us of those animals.

Notice that I am only assuming overwhelming evidence is available, and the crime is a first degree murder. Fact is that a serial killer can get a life sentence while someone who killed one person out of the moment could get 25 years which is ridicilous.

So we settle for simplistic barbarity? Why not push the boundaries? Killing just to kill IS part of the dark-nature of our being.

I'm not talking about just physical pain. That's only one facet to true suffering. What about emotional pain? Psychological pain?

These are completely left out when talking about capital punishment when I honestly think they could do more damage than physical pain and ultimately death ever could.

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

Sociopaths never change, it is ingrained in them what they do.
They might get bored and stop, but nothing is guaranteed.

Again, we need to differentiate between first degree murders and other murders.

1st degree murders entail carrying out a murder out of carefully laid out plans and determination.

And even that branches further.

To clarify my position, I think rapists, serial killers, drug lords, and multiple killers should all get the death penalty as swift as they can. Because I understand the society of today would not approve the more painful methods of yesterday.

Although I would not mind we use a slow Way of the Five Pains against child rapists and serial killers.

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

really?

the world is overpopulated, the majority of which live in poverty and squalor and have no hope of anything except to breed and die

IMO we should start culling the population, we do it with any other pest, virus or plague like problem with any other species of animal, why not us.

Prisoners are a good place to start, we can work on semantics later for the rest lmao

McLewis wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

@McLewis, past societies did indeed push the limits of punishments.

Here is a few of the methods used in Legalistic China, where the punishment grows exponentially with the crime.

1- Treason: each limb is fastened to a chariot, and all chariots run in 4 different direction, which would cause dismemberment in about half an hour of extreme pain.

2- Corruption: Getting nailed to a board and thrown from a cliff.

3- Stealing: Beheading.

4- Murder: Way of the five pains (VERY brutal).

5- Multiple Murders: A slower version of the five pains. The more the victims the slower the punishment.

So McLewis, I think the reason we don't push the boundaries of what to do to murderers is that we don't want to re-explore the dark nature of our being. And death would generally rid us of those animals.

Notice that I am only assuming overwhelming evidence is available, and the crime is a first degree murder. Fact is that a serial killer can get a life sentence while someone who killed one person out of the moment could get 25 years which is ridicilous.

So we settle for simplistic barbarity? Why not push the boundaries? Killing just to kill IS part of the dark-nature of our being.

I'm not talking about just physical pain. That's only one facet to true suffering. What about emotional pain? Psychological pain?

These are completely left out when talking about capital punishment when I honestly think they could do more damage than physical pain and ultimately death ever could.

Trust me, Way of the Five pains would include emotional and psychological pain as well.
Also, pain and death are underrated.

I think the security of knowing that a person will not be alive who ended so many lives is the main reason people back the Capital punishment. I think widely implementing it will decrease the number of crimes.

Lord Spencer wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

Sociopaths never change, it is ingrained in them what they do.
They might get bored and stop, but nothing is guaranteed.

Again, we need to differentiate between first degree murders and other murders.

1st degree murders entail carrying out a murder out of carefully laid out plans and determination.

And even that branches further.

To clarify my position, I think rapists, serial killers, drug lords, and multiple killers should all get the death penalty as swift as they can. Because I understand the society of today would not approve the more painful methods of yesterday.

Although I would not mind we use a slow Way of the Five Pains against child rapists and serial killers.

So you think a man, around 18-19 years old, broke, killing someone during a robbery has the same mindset as someone in his 60s after spending years in jail ?

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

really?

the world is overpopulated, the majority of which live in poverty and squalor and have no hope of anything except to breed and die

IMO we should start culling the population, we do it with any other pest, virus or plague like problem with any other species of animal, why not us.

Prisoners are a good place to start, we can work on semantics later for the rest lmao

That is so wrong on so many levels, these are freaking lives that your talking about, were not a pest, were not viruses, were HUMANS, what you have just said is INHUMANE, you are treating the people as NUMBERS and STATISTICS, for Gods sake...
The day when people choose to follow your views, is the day where people have no hope, people can ALWAYS have hope, this is a free world when anyone can become anything, this isn't the time painted in the media, it's a wonderful time and a prosperous time.

dansik wrote:McLewis,

What are some punishments that would make a criminal actually suffer?

How about we probe the criminal's mind? Instead of finding out what makes them kill, we find out what they fear most. Then we manifest those fears. Everyone has them. No matter how depraved or sick an individual is. There's always something that will undoubtedly unnerve them. We should be trying to find that and using that to make them suffer instead of just killing them, which cheapens everything.

Lord Spencer wrote:

McLewis wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

@McLewis, past societies did indeed push the limits of punishments.

Here is a few of the methods used in Legalistic China, where the punishment grows exponentially with the crime.

1- Treason: each limb is fastened to a chariot, and all chariots run in 4 different direction, which would cause dismemberment in about half an hour of extreme pain.

2- Corruption: Getting nailed to a board and thrown from a cliff.

3- Stealing: Beheading.

4- Murder: Way of the five pains (VERY brutal).

5- Multiple Murders: A slower version of the five pains. The more the victims the slower the punishment.

So McLewis, I think the reason we don't push the boundaries of what to do to murderers is that we don't want to re-explore the dark nature of our being. And death would generally rid us of those animals.

Notice that I am only assuming overwhelming evidence is available, and the crime is a first degree murder. Fact is that a serial killer can get a life sentence while someone who killed one person out of the moment could get 25 years which is ridicilous.

So we settle for simplistic barbarity? Why not push the boundaries? Killing just to kill IS part of the dark-nature of our being.

I'm not talking about just physical pain. That's only one facet to true suffering. What about emotional pain? Psychological pain?

These are completely left out when talking about capital punishment when I honestly think they could do more damage than physical pain and ultimately death ever could.

Trust me, Way of the Five pains would include emotional and psychological pain as well.
Also, pain and death are underrated.

I think the security of knowing that a person will not be alive who ended so many lives is the main reason people back the Capital punishment. I think widely implementing it will decrease the number of crimes.

Tell that to the morons in Texas that continue to serve as lambs to the slaughter for the prison system there. They obviously know that if you kill someone there, more often than not, you're gonna get executed. And yet that doesn't seem deter them for doing it anyway and then facing the consequences.

Why do you think it would deter anyone else the world over?

It's a rather popular myth that capital punishment is a deterrent. It never has been and never will be. People will do what they want to do, regardless of the perceived consequence. That's the sad truth when it comes to crime and punishment.

ali8775 wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

Sociopaths never change, it is ingrained in them what they do.
They might get bored and stop, but nothing is guaranteed.

Again, we need to differentiate between first degree murders and other murders.

1st degree murders entail carrying out a murder out of carefully laid out plans and determination.

And even that branches further.

To clarify my position, I think rapists, serial killers, drug lords, and multiple killers should all get the death penalty as swift as they can. Because I understand the society of today would not approve the more painful methods of yesterday.

Although I would not mind we use a slow Way of the Five Pains against child rapists and serial killers.

So you think a man, around 18-19 years old, broke, killing someone during a robbery has the same mindset as someone in his 60s after spending years in jail ?

I specified Sociopaths, rapist, and first degree murders. Killing someone during a robbery is a 2nd degree murder.