The death penalty.

[Shytalkz]

Ah but who is the sock puppet? (Genuine q as I don't have clue!)

 

[joe-90]

Ah, the morning bait from the non-smoking, non-drinking, non-speeding, non-anything remotely outlandish, why-would-anyone-need-any-position-other-than-the-missionary-position-and-then-only-to-procreate-if-we-must one.

Yes I do agree with the death penalty. No, I take no perverse pleasure from it and have no particular wish to flick the switch, pull the lever, fire the bullet. I would rather that people behaved in such a way that it wan't required. But they don't, never have, never will.

And what is plain to see is that the current way of dealing with perps does not work.

So says the person that wantonly speeds and puts everyone's life at risk. How about the death penalty for killing people because you want to speed? Is that a good idea?

 

[joe-90]

So you like the idea of state-sponsored revenge? You just love the killing bit don't you? Weren't in the army were you? That's where all the psychopaths head for. Bees to a honey pot.

So you don't give thanks to the allied army when they drove the nazi's back to Germany thus allowing you/us to carry on with our free speech which you clearly enjoy by critiscing others who disagree with you on capital punishment.

My Dad was in the army as were three of my uncles. They weren't regular psychopaths - that is the domain of the 'regular'.

 

[sooey]

So says the person that wantonly speeds and puts everyone's life at risk. How about the death penalty for killing people because you want to speed? Is that a good idea?

If you were driving at two zillion miles an hour through a built up when you killed someone. Bloody right it is.

 

[megawatt]

BAS wrote:

No point answering your questions, as whatever anybody says you'll find ways to disagree which ignore the simple and unarguable position that killing people as a means of punishment and control is wrong.

This is the classic response of someone who has no meaningful argument.

It is far easier to simply make banal statements such as

Secondly, I know that I am right. It's not just "an opinion" - it is an absolute moral certainty, and with as much certainty I know that people who think otherwise are wrong to think so.

Oh really, you seriously need to get over yourself ... You really are a legend in your own mind

I once respected your posts as they were always factual and well argued but now you have neither respect nor credibility.

All you are prepared to do is make foul and abusive statements to anyone who doesn't share your point of view and not post anything meaningful in defence of your position.

You are, therefore, a total waste of good breathing air and should be exterminated for the good of humankind.

MW

 

[godsoftandjoearedull]

I love it when regular posters set up sock-puppet accounts.

Dear, oh dear, oh dear, I've just been listening to Starsailor's, "Love is Here" album and track 2 reminded me of you. (He'll look)

It means that the real poster is too afraid to take me on, ergo, I win.

Hmmm. Take you on? This is a forum, it's not a game or a sport, as I've said before you need to get out more and spend less time on here. You can't "win" on here josephine. (He'll try)

 

[securespark]

MW: Now hang on, that gets us back on topic of the morals of execution...

joe: I challenge you to go a whole thread without putting "he or he'll........." in brackets.

Can you rise to the challenge? (He can't)

 

[Shytalkz]

So says the person that wantonly speeds and puts everyone's life at risk. How about the death penalty for killing people because you want to speed? Is that a good idea?

I don't wantonly speed as you put it.

No I do, come to think of it .

Yeh, I'd take a flier on that.

 

[Shytalkz]

If you were driving at two zillion miles an hour through a built up when you killed someone. b****y right it is.

Which, for the avoidance of doubt, Guiseppe, I don't do.

 

[Shytalkz]

My Dad was in the army as were three of my uncles. They weren't regular psychopaths - that is the domain of the 'regular'.

If they were full time ARABs and not weekend STABs, then they were indeed "regulars". Heyho, son of a psycho .

 

[joe-90]

Why do people keep going on about the death penalty being the 'ultimate deterrent'? I, for one, would be much more fearful of a sentence of 'life in prison without the possibility of parole' in an American style penitentiary. If I were a drug dealer in a drug gang I'd know there was a pretty fair chance of my being shot and killed, but I'd be far more inclined to take that risk than life without parole. So I put it to you all that the reason there are less murders in the non-death-penalty-states - is for that very reason. Life behind bars until death is the ultimate deterrent. If that's wrong - you prove it (they won't).

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I think that the example you quote would be met with fairly universal abhorrence. That is not the case with the death penalty.

I abhor it.

In anycase, I'm not dismissing your opinion, I just recognise that it's completely divergent from mine. I don't think that I'm any more right than you though, or vice versa.

You see, I feel about your opinion the same way, (I surmise) that you do about the opinions of the paedophile torturer.

Secondly, I know that I am right. It's not just "an opinion" - it is an absolute moral certainty, and with as much certainty I know that people who think otherwise are wrong to think so.

No you don't. You might think that you do and as far as you are concerned you do.

You misunderstand - I don't think I'm right, I know I am.

I think you're wrong, no make that misguided, in your beliefs, as do plenty of others.

I know, but you, and they, are all wrong.

I certainly think that it's less wrong to put someone to death for committing a crime than it is for that person to commit that crime in the first place.

This is not a case of shades of grey, of degrees of right and wrong - it is an absolute moral imperative. Dead is dead - it's not possible to be "less dead", nor is it possible to be "less wrong". By killing you render yourself just as wrong as the person you kill.

Firstly you are ignoring the fact that the law should not operate on the same low standards as people who kill.

It wouldn't. It (the state) is not going out and stabbing, raping, otherwise killing, in an orgy of drugs, anger, or just sheer sadism.

No, but it is killing. It is taking another person's life to get what you want. And if you look at murder trials you'll see that special condemnation is reserved for those who cold-bloodedly plan and carry out their killings, compared to those who kill in the heat of the moment. Also look around you at the people who support you in your desire to kill - tell me that they are not consumed with anger and rage.

It would. Their death would be humane and painless. And entirely warranted, if the law so allowed it to take place.

And this is why you are completely unable to lift yourself from the cesspit of violence and inhumanity in which you wallow. You simply do not have the moral fibre or the human decency to see that killing is wrong.

I don't see how having the ultimate deterrent in order to allow those of us in the majority who are law-abiding, honest and decent, would be in any way corrosive.

You talk about the "ultimate deterrent" in that way (fascinating isn't, how all you people use all these euphemisms - "ultimate deterrent", "execution", "capital punishment" - what's the matter, don't you like to say "kill"?) - do you want it for everything? It would allow you law abiding honest decent people to go about your business free from the scourge of littering, graffiti, noisy neighbours.

Maybe not painfully, but if they aren't prepared to mete it out themselves then they have no right to ask others to do it for them.

That would smack of vigilantism. That is not what this is about: it's about expecting the state to ensure that they can go about their lives in safety, as is their every right to expect.

Not vigilantism, but you have to be prepared to carry out the killings ordered by the court.

The law is clear that DIY is not necessary - if you hire a hit man to murder somebody then you are a murderer.

Agreed.

Similarly if you ask the state to kill on your behalf you are a killer.

But that's a non-sequitur. I expect the state to keep the roads in a reasonable state of repair, but I'm b*ggered if I'm going out to repair them.

You are responsible for the road mending taking place because you ask them to do it and you pay them to do it.

So if you ask them to kill and you pay them to kill you are responsible for the killing taking place.

By your definition, therefore, aren't we all murderers anyway - including you?

Do I ask them to do it?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

BAS wrote:

No point answering your questions, as whatever anybody says you'll find ways to disagree which ignore the simple and unarguable position that killing people as a means of punishment and control is wrong.

This is the classic response of someone who has no meaningful argument.

How many times do I have to tell you that ultimately it comes down to an absolute moral conviction that killing for punishment and control is wrong before it sinks in that there is no "argument" involved?

I once respected your posts as they were always factual and well argued but now you have neither respect nor credibility.

The fact that a killer like you does not respect my morality and decency does not dismay me.

All you are prepared to do is make foul and abusive statements to anyone who doesn't share your point of view and not post anything meaningful in defence of your position.

How many times do I have to tell you that my position is one of an absolute certainty that killing for punishment and control is wrong before it sinks in that therein lies the only meaning you will ever see?

How many times do I have to tell you that my position is based on an absolute moral conviction before it sinks in that it is not based on any analytical process which I can share with you?

As for the "foul and abusive statements", I think that sums up your depravity pretty well - you don't like me calling people names but you think it's OK to call for people to be killed.

My "foul and abusive statements" are genuine expressions of the disgust, loathing and contempt that YOU make me feel about YOU. They aren't some abstract debating point.

You are, therefore, a total waste of good breathing air and should be exterminated for the good of humankind.

Now why am I not surprised to learn that you want to kill me to get your own way....

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If you were driving at two zillion miles an hour through a built up when you killed someone. b****y right it is.

You're missing a trick there. Why wait for them to kill someone? You could completely prevent people from driving at two zillion miles an hour through built up areas if you killed everyone who drove at more than 30mph....

 

[tim west]

You are, therefore, a total waste of good breathing air and should be exterminated for the good of humankind.

Now why am I not surprised to learn that you want to kill me to get your own way....

Perhaps he suggests it out of total boredom?

Before you have a go at me its a joke ok!