Death Penalty

The human rights activists started screaming.
Seriously though, financially, it makes sense. Life without parole costs taxpayers no small amount of greenbacks, and it's cheaper for a syringe than a cell. Also, closure to the family of the victim, knowing the purpetraitor is no longer able to endanger others...

""As I sit before the fire, I wonder how many before myself have been burned.'"

we should be like china. after beng found guilty they take the criminal out side. put a bullet in the back of his head and then charge the family 80 cents for the bullet. Kill them all let GOD sort 'em out.

"I'd rather be superstitious about jumping jacks than superstitious that I needed to be drunk to do what I needed to do, or that I needed to have a specific pair of underwear on - jumping jacks, you don't need anything. - Gerard Way"

One thing I don't think the Bible answers this because in many ways there are two books: the Old Testament and The New Testament and it is in the former, not the latter, that we hear 'an eye for an eye' stuff. Be interesting if I am wrong? Anyway I much prefer the New Testament (seems to be more about the positive) and cringe when people quote the Old.

Anyway I'd hate to decide this if I were a politician. I'll add my thoughts. I will assume murder for sake of ease.

For:

Killing is killing. If you murder then you are taking the life of another (must be for wrong reasons) therefore it is logical (in a closed sense) you are killed. Also, you are a burden to society economically if you stay in prison your entire life. Some argue it is morally better to kill the person than live in a prison without freedom. It gives some solace to those who grieve the person they murdered. Executed people are actually used for scientific resaech because there organs remain in very good condition.

Against:

You can never be 100% sure the person is guilty. It is wrong to kill no matter what reasons. There is a cause behind everything it is right to forgive sometimes. The murderer may be researched to prevent this happening again.

I still have no idea. I think in SOME cases it is right but the obvious problem is Laws need rules so that if X is exceeded generally the outcome is Y. Just hope there is a very wise judge for each case because after you kill someone you cannot take it back.

""No words""

the bible says two totally oposing things about this. first it says "an eye for an eye" then later jesus tells us to "turn the other cheek". take what has happened with no thoughts of retribution, as gods justice will deal with it in the end, more properly than any human justice.

on the non religious side, i think the death penalty is mostly quite a good idea. it is the easiest and cleanest way to do things. though it should only be done with evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt. as for costs, the methods used for execution are too costly, to kill someone, a gun is just as easy and much cheaper. either that or a syringe full of air would do the job, blocks the arteries and kills you. plus you dont need to change the needle or syringe, it doesnt matter if you give them aids or hepatitis, cos theyre going to be dead in half an hour.

"So Schrodinger's Cat is not only neither dead nor alive, but might also be sexually aroused by elbows and peanut butter?"

yeah i never understood why they sterilize the needles and such for lethal injection. other than to an extent it could be considered cruel and unusual.

"I'd rather be superstitious about jumping jacks than superstitious that I needed to be drunk to do what I needed to do, or that I needed to have a specific pair of underwear on - jumping jacks, you don't need anything. - Gerard Way"

They sterilise the needle becasue the injection is administered by a doctor who is legally compelled to sterelize it before every injection lethal or not.
As for the death penalty, I don't think we should kil anyone for any reason. Look at Europe for example, they abolished the death penalty long ago, and look at their standard of living, it's much better than the united states. I think that the US government has got it wrong. the key to preventing crime is not to make more laws. again, i look at europe, where they have considerably fewer laws, and their crime rate is not nearly as high as the US. I think we could learn a thing or two from Europe.

"He who does not question is lost."

unfortunately britain is following america in that respect. more and stricter laws, and unfortunately more crimes. europe definitely does seem to have got things sorted out better. for example in germany, they have a younger age for alchohol consumption (about 15), but they have a much lower amount of binge drinking. and in another counrty (i think somewhere like belgium) they have a lower age for sexual consent, and sex is much less of a taboo subjet there, but the average age for loss of virginity is higher, and the teenage pregnancy rate is lower. britain and america still continue to make more laws for teenages to rebel against, increasing the problem.

"So Schrodinger's Cat is not only neither dead nor alive, but might also be sexually aroused by elbows and peanut butter?"

quote:

---

britain and america still continue to make more laws for teenages to rebel against, increasing the problem.

---

"He who does not question is lost."

Crime will always go down when you remove laws. But that doesn't make people behave any better. People only commit crimes because there is relatively no punishment for it. Stiff punishment like corporal and capital would make people realise that they would suffer for a crime and then there would be incentive to not commit a crime. Now people do anything that they can get away with and with the lawyers at work the guy with the most money wins.

"Speak out, even if what you have to say is unpopular"

yeah and in south america there is a country with the legal age of consent at like 12! do you think america should let 12 year olds should legally be able to go around and sleep with 60 year old men? the only thing that would promote is more perverts and if we lower the drinking age yeah binge drinking may go down, but by the time the kids are old enough to realize the health risks of the alcohol ts too late and they are already alcoholics with liver failure! kids dont think about the risks. my barely 13 year old cousin drinks more alcohol than most adults. she is already and alcoholic and drug addict and has been for about 2 almost 3 years. if we lowered the drinking age she would actually go drink more and hide it less because she could. and the alcohol would be more easily accessed for her. meaning she would drink more and lowering the ages and making laws less harsh would only promote the bad things you are trying to prevent by doing so. im not saying to make things more strict, but going easier on people is not the answer. yeah if there are less laws the crime rate would go down because then people could do those things legally. like if we made it legally to steal a car, the amount of crime would go down becuase grand theft auto would no longer be a crime. so it wouldnt actually be any better, but the numbers would look better.

"I'd rather be superstitious about jumping jacks than superstitious that I needed to be drunk to do what I needed to do, or that I needed to have a specific pair of underwear on - jumping jacks, you don't need anything. - Gerard Way"

and commenting on downloading, my uncle clifton was fghting the RIAA and is the biggest downloader i know of with over 50, 000 songs per computer not to mention the movies he has. i saw mr. and mrs smith like 2 weeks ago at his house. no audience watch as many times as i want. it was awesome. anyways. Its only illegal to upload and they only target uploaders generally. its completly legal to download because when you download (i think its when you download, ) the type of file is changed and the copy right is only on the format that it was recorded on. so mwhen you change the file type to say, WMA then the file is no longer under their copyright, technically.

"I'd rather be superstitious about jumping jacks than superstitious that I needed to be drunk to do what I needed to do, or that I needed to have a specific pair of underwear on - jumping jacks, you don't need anything. - Gerard Way"

Mmm. In the USA...ok some states are different...

You can enter armed forces at 17 (with parents consent).
You can buy a gun at 16 (different for different some states)...from a supermarket?
You can smoke at 18
You can drink at 21

Think about thses from outside the box. Then think about the consequences relative to the reality already experienced.

""No words""

okay, fnck off, im not saying that the legal age for sex should be that low. i think it that case, i was merely trying to suggest that the taboo should be lifted, not the law. as for the alchohol limit, it is binge drinking that causes the health problems. you could drink a pint of beer every day of your life, and it would do you more good than harm. so if you start kids drinking a beer or a glass of wine with a meal a couple of times a week when they are too young to think of going out prtying and getting drunk, by the time they get to that age, they would not think of alchohol in that way, they would think of it like any other drink, so they might have some at a party, but they would be less likely to go out and get smashed every weekend. if you look at french people in the 18-30 age group, i bet you they have a lot less trouble with alchohol than brits or americans of the same age group.

making the laws less strict is not going to answer the problem in all cases, and definitely not just on its own, it needs a change of viewpoint, from kids as well as adults.

as for whatever european country it is that has the lower teen pregnancy rate, i think that the age of consent is still about 15 (only one year younger than in britain), but over there, there is a kids magazine, which is read by most of the teens, which explains all about sexual activity, in absolute clarity. but over here, or in america it would be illegal to sell the same magazines to under 18s, as some of the images would be counted as pornographic, but with children having things explained to them with nothing hidden, they dont not feel the need to investigate, and find out what the adults are keeping from them.

as for buying a gun, and buying cigarettes, its my opinion they should be illegal full stop.

"So Schrodinger's Cat is not only neither dead nor alive, but might also be sexually aroused by elbows and peanut butter?"

quote:

---

Crime will always go down when you remove laws. But that doesn't make people behave any better.

---

"He who does not question is lost."

the fact that the rest of you cant see it shows, why our countries are the ones with the problems. our societies are prudish to the extreme, which causes the problems.

"So Schrodinger's Cat is not only neither dead nor alive, but might also be sexually aroused by elbows and peanut butter?"