jute Posted May 6, 2003 here. if a country is going to hold that murder shouldn't be committed, then, if it wants to keep some measure of logic, it shouldn't commit murder. it's pretty simple. 0 Share this post Link to post
Arioch Posted May 7, 2003 pregnant with worms said:here. if a country is going to hold that murder shouldn't be committed, then, if it wants to keep some measure of logic, it shouldn't commit murder. it's pretty simple. Wrong. The definition of murder implicitly includes the condition that it was done unlawfully. Executions are legal, hence they are not murder. 0 Share this post Link to post
Fletcher` Posted May 7, 2003 Aah yes, the government at work. Makes you yearn for the days when the indians weren't found only in casinos. 0 Share this post Link to post
Ed Posted May 7, 2003 AndrewB said:You see, this is wrong. Because, what if the person turns out to be innocent? How do you propose they reattach them? How can you possibly compensate? "Whoops" 0 Share this post Link to post
jute Posted May 7, 2003 Arioch said:Wrong. The definition of murder implicitly includes the condition that it was done unlawfully. actually, yes. you are correct. in fact, it's even explicit. the word 'unlawfully' is in the definition. sorry about that. but fighting the taking of life with the taking of life does seem like fighting fire with fire, if you ask me. 0 Share this post Link to post
Dingus Khan Posted May 7, 2003 Nuke the bastards. Let God sort them out. Fuck yes I'm all for it. I'm always for legal killing. 0 Share this post Link to post
Fredrik Posted May 7, 2003 Arioch said:Executions are legal, hence they are not murder. Executions of civilians were legal in Iraq, yet claimed to be one reason to invade the country. So why did you SS*'ers have a problem with it? * stars and stripes 0 Share this post Link to post
AndrewB Posted May 7, 2003 Exactly. There's good law, and bad law. But it's like far too many people on either side don't look deeply enough into the issue. I always seem to see "Death penalty is wrong, just because." and "Death penalty rules. 'Nuff said." Not from everyone, but from like 80% of people, on each side. People aren't asking the right questions. 0 Share this post Link to post
Use Posted May 7, 2003 Arioch said:Wrong. The definition of murder implicitly includes the condition that it was done unlawfully. Executions are legal, hence they are not murder. Oh I see, so the law can justify the taking of another person's life. hmmm, No. 0 Share this post Link to post
Zoorado Posted May 7, 2003 Not sure who the word "we" is referring to... If you mean the US, then I would like to point out that death penalty does exist, but only for extreme crimes. And most of the time, I find it justifiable, or even necessary. An example is as follows: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/oklahoma/stories/ok081597.htm 0 Share this post Link to post
dsm Posted May 7, 2003 Zoorado said:An example is as follows: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/oklahoma/stories/ok081597.htm Somebody apparently executed that link, 'cause it's dead now. 0 Share this post Link to post
Lord FlatHead Posted May 7, 2003 AndrewB said:No permanent damage of any kind to prisoners. I agree. And I suppose death qualifies as 'permanent damage' as well. 0 Share this post Link to post
fodders Posted May 7, 2003 Zoorado said:Not sure who the word "we" is referring to... If you mean the US, then I would like to point out that death penalty does exist, but only for extreme crimes. And most of the time, I find it justifiable, or even necessary. An example is as follows: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/oklahoma/stories/ok081597.htm In his five years as governor of Texas, George W. Bush presided over 152 executions, indisputably the highest number of any US governor. Numerous studies have revealed that Texas has routinely put to death inmates who have received inadequate counsel, who are mentally ill, who are overwhelmingly poor and disproportionately comprised of minorities. The US Supreme Court, which handed the presidency to Bush, supports the death penalty and has also demonstrated that it is in favour of the execution of juvenile offenders, the mentally impaired and foreign nationals 0 Share this post Link to post
Janderson Posted May 7, 2003 Ever heard of an eye for an eye... if God agrees with it we should too. 0 Share this post Link to post
AndrewB Posted May 7, 2003 Janderson said:Ever heard of an eye for an eye... if God agrees with it we should too. Eye for an eye sucks. It's for the weak-minded who can't be bothered to think things through. 0 Share this post Link to post
Sharessa Posted May 7, 2003 Janderson said:Ever heard of an eye for an eye... if God agrees with it we should too. But Jesus says 'turn the other cheek'. 0 Share this post Link to post
jute Posted May 7, 2003 Janderson said:Ever heard of an eye for an eye... if God agrees with it we should too. i'm not sure, but i believe the bible mentions that 'an eye for an eye' is a judgement reserved for god, while we humans are told to, as the danarchist pointed out, 'turn the other cheek.' i would also like to clarify that i don't give a fuck if people die. i just wanted to point out what seems to me like an error in logic. and pedophiles are awesome, guys. 0 Share this post Link to post
Ubik Posted May 7, 2003 "Eye for an eye" is from the Old Testament god, the old bastard who saw fit to smite cities and such on a whim, and even sent down two bears to maul a group of children who were making fun of a prophet's bald head (yes, it's in there). "Turn the other cheek" is from the New Testament god, who sent down his son to be whacked by a bunch of Romans and emphasized mercy and compassion above all else. Personally, I feel the death penalty is just ONLY in cases where there has been sufficient, undeniable evidence (e.g. DNA evidence and the like), and where the crime is such that the criminal would be likely to pose a lethal danger to society in general when released. Obviously mistakes and shitty decisions are made and will be made (look at Dubya's record again), but if it manages to get reformed somewhat I can seee it as a protective measure for society in general. 0 Share this post Link to post
Dark Fox Posted May 7, 2003 The ideal of life in prison is harder on the mind then the thought of death. I personally would not know either, but I would rather die then live my years in a 4 by 4 cell till I'm granted that wishful death. Either way, the person would die. I would rather it been sooner then never in my case. 0 Share this post Link to post
Captain Red Posted May 7, 2003 Janderson said: Ever heard of an eye for an eye... if God agrees with it we should too. Jesus himself said "a eye for an eye will leave the world blind." 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted May 8, 2003 Arioch said:Wrong. The definition of murder implicitly includes the condition that it was done unlawfully. Executions are legal, hence they are not murder. Nah... Some dictionaries give that meaning preponderance, but by no means does it fully define the word. Basically, to commit murder is to kill someone either with malice, in a barbarous or inhuman manner, or unlawfully. 0 Share this post Link to post
sargebaldy Posted May 8, 2003 oh pah, i've never understood that argument. that's like saying putting criminals in jail is no different than kidnapping. the gov't has to be able to do things that are above the law for everyone else, or the gov't would be no different than an inefficent nonprofit organization. 0 Share this post Link to post
Janderson Posted May 8, 2003 Life in prison is 10 years, in some cases a little more. That's also why you can have multiple life sentences. 0 Share this post Link to post
Lüt Posted May 8, 2003 Use3D said:Oh I see, so the law can justify the taking of another person's life. hmmm, No. Well, from a biblical perspective he's right-on, but I doubt that's where he's coming from :Pct_red_pants said:Jesus himself said "a eye for an eye will leave the world blind."Actually, all he said was: Matthew 5 (ESV) - [38] You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' [39] But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. [40] And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. [41] And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. [42] Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. 0 Share this post Link to post
Fredrik Posted May 8, 2003 "An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind" was Gandhi. A man much greater than Jesus, btw. 0 Share this post Link to post
Lüt Posted May 8, 2003 Gandhi doesn't get you to Heaven for free, so I can't possibly see how you come to that conclusion :P 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted May 8, 2003 That dude may be great somehow, I don't know, but there's nothing free there, considering you have to subject your very soul to the avatar's being. 0 Share this post Link to post