|
Post by ela on Jul 3, 2005 12:34:35 GMT -5
I would like to hear some new arguments about supporting death penalty; possibly those arguments should be something different from: Murderers only deserve to die Murderers only deserve to die Murderers only deserve to die Murderers only deserve to die This point is very clear. Anything else to say?
|
|
|
Post by ela on Jul 3, 2005 13:34:04 GMT -5
HMMMMMM I see... not much more to say....
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Jul 3, 2005 15:40:39 GMT -5
LOL, ela you're wanting a good debate today, I see. It's nice to have a good debate. Our pro friends are probably out for the weekend. It's 4th of July weekend here in the US of A....See, I have no life, that's why I'm still home! LOL. Actually, I'm a nurse soooooo work doesn't shut down for the holidays. Working tonight, tomarrow night hugggz, Suzanne
|
|
|
Post by ela on Jul 3, 2005 15:56:21 GMT -5
At this point, I want to know and understand...I mean, they are here, they will have something to say....( beside making not so kind comments about us). For the moment this "murderers only deserve to die" thing is all what they have been able to say about their point... I am open to know more.
|
|
|
Post by antideathpen67 on Jul 3, 2005 16:04:40 GMT -5
I heard them say: Executed murderes don't kill again... Murderers are a waste of oxygen... But I do not consider those arguement as good ones either
|
|
|
Post by ela on Jul 3, 2005 16:06:44 GMT -5
This is almost the same thing than saying murdereres only deserve to die; of course the second part would be " they deserve to die so that they won't kill again.." not so different ... LOL
|
|
|
Post by antideathpen67 on Jul 3, 2005 16:09:11 GMT -5
This is almost the same thing than saying murdereres only deserve to die; of course the second part would be " they deserve to die so that they won't kill again.." not so different ... LOL Yes you are right about that... they do not have much of an arguement really.... I mean they would never admit that it is revenge....
|
|
|
Post by garp on Jul 3, 2005 16:26:22 GMT -5
Why else would a person need to be executed? What other argument are you looking for? Murderers should be executed is at the heart of the argument, can't you understand that? Executing these murderers who raped and robbed their way onto death row should be executed to protect people. Do you think they should be let out? Maybe we should send them all to canada and set them loose doing whatever they want. Would you like that? I'd love to deport all these killing thugs over to the great country of Canada.
|
|
|
Post by glennf on Jul 3, 2005 16:28:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ela on Jul 3, 2005 16:32:04 GMT -5
Of course I am not able to understand... it is the second time today that someone of you turn to me with such a statement. Thank you, you are very kind. No, that murderers only deserve to die is not enough; I just find it superficial. But oh... I am not able to understand.. so that's just my poor point of view.... you have the truth... of course.... Howver... ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY?
|
|
|
Post by ela on Jul 3, 2005 16:36:29 GMT -5
what I am looking for is a different argument; if you don't have it, no matter that you repeat the same thing over and over and over....
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Jul 3, 2005 17:55:11 GMT -5
Why else would a person need to be executed? What other argument are you looking for? Murderers should be executed is at the heart of the argument, can't you understand that? Executing these murderers who raped and robbed their way onto death row should be executed to protect people. Do you think they should be let out? Maybe we should send them all to canada and set them loose doing whatever they want. Would you like that? I'd love to deport all these killing thugs over to the great country of Canada. Being that execution involves man killing another man, there has to be a better arguement, please.
|
|
|
Post by antideathpen67 on Jul 3, 2005 18:02:05 GMT -5
Why else would a person need to be executed? What other argument are you looking for? Murderers should be executed is at the heart of the argument, can't you understand that? Executing these murderers who raped and robbed their way onto death row should be executed to protect people. Do you think they should be let out? Maybe we should send them all to canada and set them loose doing whatever they want. Would you like that? I'd love to deport all these killing thugs over to the great country of Canada. Don't you think that people are capable of change? I certainly believe so, and I am sure that most are not the same people after 10 years as they were when they came in. I know murder can not be atoned for... but by killing what you call "thugs" victims do not come back... only more people end up suffering.. Well, Germany gives people a second chance, and most get out after like 15 years, sometimes less, they had a chance to learn something in prison, to get education if needed, and they were treated as human beings, and most of them do not offend again.. actually the group that re-offends the most are sexual offenders, and for those there should be the option of LWOP...
|
|
|
Post by blahblahblah on Jul 3, 2005 18:16:38 GMT -5
What antis dont understand is justice. It needs to have a meaning. Not LWOP, but the DP for murderers. You can get LWOP for robbery, for drug offenses, do you think those are on the same level as serial killers? I certainly dont and that is why there needs to be a more severe punishment for more severe crimes.
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Jul 3, 2005 18:23:50 GMT -5
LWOP for murderers. Robbers? Different sentences of coarse:
§ 29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he: (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death. (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.
§ 29.03. AGGRAVATED ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he commits robbery as defined in Section 29.02, and he: (1) causes serious bodily injury to another; (2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon; or (3) causes bodily injury to another person or threatens or places another person in fear of imminent bodily injury or death, if the other person is: (A) 65 years of age or older; or (B) a disabled person. (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the first degree. (c) In this section, "disabled person" means an individual with a mental, physical, or developmental disability who is substantially unable to protect himself from harm.
|
|