**graphic**

Yellowjacket · #91 (**permalink**) 03-07-2008, 09:19 PM

Quote:

the government reflects the people. and the government is murdering people.
its not a good example to set.

Please note this quote from the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

Quote:

nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Quote:

an eye for an eye leaves us all blind

No, only those who take one forfeit theirs, and their victim's is gone regardless due to the original criminal act.

Quote:

if you kill someone you forfiet your freedom.

If your victim forfeits his life, why should you only forfeit your freedom?

Quote:

and many families of victims do not want to see someone killed for them.

And many families do. What about their wishes?

Quote:

what is the victim was against capital punishment? aren't you completely disrespecting their memory?
not only were they killed, but their death will lead to something they were against happening.

What if they were against imprisonment? Do we set their killer free? If they believed in torture, do we torture their killer? The law is set by the majority viewpoint. This is what many refer to as democracy. There ARE ways to change it. The Constitution merely allows capital punishment, it does not mandate it. That is why laws are easier to change than the Constitution.

Quote:

some people think capital punishment is morally wrong. and many people think morals are absolute.

That is their burden to bear. The law is not about one person's morals.

Quote:

(lying is immoral but I'm not going to tell my friend how fat she looks).

Is diplomacy more important than morals? SHAME ON YOU!! :-)

Quote:

honestly, go look at the familes of victims that are against capital punishment.

No question there are many anti's. Also, there are many pro's. I've never seen a complete breakdown by numbers. Don't even know if one exists. Bear in mind, however, victim's families do not have exclusive jurisdiction do determine punishment. That is left to all the people.

Carson · #92 (**permalink**) 03-07-2008, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellowjacket

Please note this quote from the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

No, only those who take one forfeit theirs, and their victim's is gone regardless due to the original criminal act.

If your victim forfeits his life, why should you only forfeit your freedom?

And many families do. What about their wishes?

What if they were against imprisonment? Do we set their killer free? If they believed in torture, do we torture their killer? The law is set by the majority viewpoint. This is what many refer to as democracy. There ARE ways to change it. The Constitution merely allows capital punishment, it does not mandate it. That is why laws are easier to change than the Constitution.

That is their burden to bear. The law is not about one person's morals.

Is diplomacy more important than morals? SHAME ON YOU!! :-)

No question there are many anti's. Also, there are many pro's. I've never seen a complete breakdown by numbers. Don't even know if one exists. Bear in mind, however, victim's families do not have exclusive jurisdiction do determine punishment. That is left to all the people.

ok so the law is bs thats the point

A. Crowley · #93 (**permalink**) 03-07-2008, 11:06 PM

What's Bubba say?

Carson · #94 (**permalink**) 03-07-2008, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. Crowley

What's Bubba say?

Crowleys a coward

36shadow · #95 (**permalink**) 03-07-2008, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf_22

if you kill someone you forfiet your freedom. and many families of victims do not want to see someone killed for them. two wrongs do not make a life. and taking another life will not bring another back.
what is the victim was against capital punishment? aren't you completely disrespecting their memory?
not only were they killed, but their death will lead to something they were against happening.

some people think capital punishment is morally wrong. and many people think morals are absolute. I personally don't think all morals are absolute (lying is immoral but I'm not going to tell my friend how fat she looks).

honestly, go look at the familes of victims that are against capital punishment. the most surprising person I found on that list was the mother of Emmit Till

Apples and oranges Apples and oranges baby. You don't answer the question if they new this person would do the same to another if they did not go for the death penalty then they would probably go for the death penalty. If not they are not rational careing people and do not deserve pitty for their loss. They might not be for it or would like to do that but their are some things more important and that is the protection so their is no chance for there to be other victims.

wolf_22 · #96 (**permalink**) 03-08-2008, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellowjacket

Please note this quote from the 5th amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
legalized murder is still murder

No, only those who take one forfeit theirs, and their victim's is gone regardless due to the original criminal act.
think about how many victims and how many criminals we have. almost everyone would be "blind".
If your victim forfeits his life, why should you only forfeit your freedom?
because two wrong don't make a right
And many families do. What about their wishes?

What if they were against imprisonment? Do we set their killer free? If they believed in torture, do we torture their killer? The law is set by the majority viewpoint. This is what many refer to as democracy. There ARE ways to change it. The Constitution merely allows capital punishment, it does not mandate it. That is why laws are easier to change than the Constitution.
why insult the victim? how is that justice?
That is their burden to bear. The law is not about one person's morals.

Is diplomacy more important than morals? SHAME ON YOU!! :-)

No question there are many anti's. Also, there are many pro's. I've never seen a complete breakdown by numbers. Don't even know if one exists. Bear in mind, however, victim's families do not have exclusive jurisdiction do determine punishment. That is left to all the people.

I'm just trying to make the point that even people effected by murder take issue with the state killing people. almost every civilized nation on this planet has outlawed capital punishment. I know the US doesn't have to listen to its peers but I think we could get some basic info from this.
we're aligned with the 'bad guys' on this issue.
our constitution allows for capital punishment, but the constitution was written years ago- havn't we evolved?
shouldn't we be better than criminals and refuse to take part in the actions they committ?

Yellowjacket · #97 (**permalink**) 03-08-2008, 04:46 PM

Quote:

legalized murder is still murder

Murder is a criminal act, as I stated. Executions, while immoral in the view of some people, is lawful under the Constitution and under most state's laws.

Quote:

think about how many victims and how many criminals we have. almost everyone would be "blind".

Since we're talking about murderers here, the victims are already dead (blind). The number of murderers who currently receive the death penalty (to be "blinded") is very low overall. You can hardly say "almost everyone". Especially when you consider that the victims are already out of the equation.

Quote:

because two wrong don't make a right

Again, you assume everyone believes it wrong to execute murderers.

Quote:

why insult the victim? how is that justice?

Again, what of the victim who believed in capital punishment? Is it an insult to them to deny them justice as they saw it? Are they to have vainly believed that the their life was worth as much as their murderer's? In some cases, a murderer's standard of living actually improves in prison. Some did not have a warm bed and 3 hot meals on the street, much less free medical, dental and vision care, recreation time with nice facilities and equipment, a library including a law library, social services, and telephone service, all in exchange for "loss of freedom".

wolf_22 · #98 (**permalink**) 03-15-2008, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yellowjacket

Murder is a criminal act, as I stated. Executions, while immoral in the view of some people, is lawful under the Constitution and under most state's laws.

Since we're talking about murderers here, the victims are already dead (blind). The number of murderers who currently receive the death penalty (to be "blinded") is very low overall. You can hardly say "almost everyone". Especially when you consider that the victims are already out of the equation.
if we treat murder as eye for an eye, we'll have to treat other crimes the same way and since many people committ at least one crime in their lives and many people are victimized. thus we will get many people who are 'blinded'
Again, you assume everyone believes it wrong to execute murderers.
no but we all believe murder/taking a life is wrong. we say that its okay to kill only if its an execution. which is trying to make a wrong right through another wrong
Again, what of the victim who believed in capital punishment? Is it an insult to them to deny them justice as they saw it? Are they to have vainly believed that the their life was worth as much as their murderer's? In some cases, a murderer's standard of living actually improves in prison. Some did not have a warm bed and 3 hot meals on the street, much less free medical, dental and vision care, recreation time with nice facilities and equipment, a library including a law library, social services, and telephone service, all in exchange for "loss of freedom".

if you truly believe prison is enjoyable you are being silly. you could offer someone almost everything they wanted but if you chose when they could use the things they wanted and ran their lives, they'd hate it.
they would rather have a life with less things and more freedom.

I don't think its an insult to victims to not execute. they wanted revenge and instead we gave them justice. they were still remembered and defended, their killers kept from killing others.

Sudzman · #99 (**permalink**) 03-15-2008, 02:31 PM

This guy Coleman should die. There is no reason to waste tax dollars on keeping him alive for the rest of his life. Raping a 3 month old is crazy. Just wait untill he's sent to prison, the inmates are gonna fuck him up!

Yellowjacket · #**100** (**permalink**) 03-15-2008, 11:18 PM

Quote:

if we treat murder as eye for an eye, we'll have to treat other crimes the same way and since many people committ at least one crime in their lives and many people are victimized. thus we will get many people who are 'blinded'

If we equate death by murder as blindness, and execution as blindness, I guess we must equate robbery as merely "needing glasses". You see, I believe the punishment should fit the crime. When you take, you forfeit the same or an equal value as restitution, plus additional as punitive measure.

Quote:

no but we all believe murder/taking a life is wrong. we say that its okay to kill only if its an execution. which is trying to make a wrong right through another wrong

We don't all equate murder with "taking a life". For instance if I kill in self defense or defense of another, it is not murder. If I kill in the line of duty to prevent a felon from escaping, it is not murder. If I kill in an act of war, it is not murder. In these instances, I not only believe it is not "murder", I also believe it is not "wrong".

Quote:

if you truly believe prison is enjoyable you are being silly. you could offer someone almost everything they wanted but if you chose when they could use the things they wanted and ran their lives, they'd hate it.
they would rather have a life with less things and more freedom.
It still beats the hell out of the coffin their victim got. not to mention any pain or suffering they went through.
I don't think its an insult to victims to not execute. they wanted revenge and instead we gave them justice. they were still remembered and defended, their killers kept from killing others.
We gave them your version of justice, not theirs. Memories fade, the defense was inadequate, and their killers still live and even thrive in their new environment. If you truly believe prison to be such terrible punishment, I would invite you to take a job as a correction officer, and only as a correction officer, preferably in a close or maximum security state prison since these are the most restrictive and usually have the worst inmates, and keep that job for a minimum of one year. Social services or psychiatric services personnel only spend a small portion of their time in the inmate's living environment, which is why I specified "correction officer". After one year, I believe you would have a somewhat different outlook on crime and punishment.