|
|
Post by attitude on Jan 3, 2006 5:22:20 GMT -5
It is not hatred that motivates me to decide to be a pro dp supporter, or revenge is neither a motive. The reason why I support the deathpenalty is that I see it as as the just punishment for deliberately taking a human life.
You see you cannot bring back a murder victim from the dead. You all know this of course, but it seems not that important. You complain that the Dp in the USA is arbitrarily applied, but please stop and ask what the hell is murder. You complain that the state is violating the human rights of the murderer by executing him when all what is happening is that he is just paying the price for his evil actions. You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more. You forget that those rights are there becuase yes people are wrongly accused, it is the standard of this state that people are given the right to speak in their defence and demand that the prosecution prove their case. Yet the victim generally had no right to beg for mercy for his or her life.
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Jan 3, 2006 5:48:40 GMT -5
Dear Cyclone,
The whole point of the Anti-CP movement is that we as a society are better than people who commit murder. We try to teach our children that killing is wrong, then we go and kill people.
For probably a large majority of the people who are against Capital Punishment, the criminal is not relevant to their beliefs. It is not about how they see criminals but how the State sees and treats criminals.
You say your beliefs are not based on revenge but if you read what you have written, it is all about revenge. He killed, so we must kill him etc.
If Capital Punishment remains I see a time where people kill people who kill people they love, then people who loved that person, kill the person that killed the person they love and it will be an unending line of violence and murder. After all the State says it is ok to murder somebody who murders.
Love and hugs,
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by paleone on Jan 3, 2006 9:53:34 GMT -5
but the thing is...what is this teaching the younger generations? you have parents saying "two wrongs don't make a right"...kids getting punished in school for punching someone back who punched them..etc. yet, we then say "we will kill you if you kill"...so basically...a kid gets two different teachings...and so they begin to think "oh yeah...well he stole from me, so i am stealing from him.." or "he killed my friend..i am killing his friend" etc...it's a never ending cycle of violence...
ok...it's one thing to punish someone, it's another to punish them with something like that...ok...so let's say a child takes the bottle of grape juice and pours it all over their parent's bedroom floor...should the parent therefore take the bottle and pour it on thier child's floor? or do they get "grounded" or "put on time out" or whatever? and don't say beat them with a belt because the way society is now, parents can lose their kids over "physically punishing them"...
odd how a mother can lose her custody if enough complaints that she spanks her kid with a wooden spoon yet the government turns around and says that "you kill...we kill you"...
it's actually rather silly if you ask me...honestly the grape juice analogy makes perfect sense and i am sure no one realizes what this is teaching our youth...think about it, why hasn't the crime rate gone down int hose states? and why did texas have 28 juviniles on death row? society continues to teach children that violence is the answer...how about using the millions upon millions spent to kill people on things such as special educational and training programs in at-risk areas... add to the educational programs in highschools and whatnot...
so my point is...grounding that kid for "pouring the grape juice" or taking something of value from that kid like their precious video games is "their prison term"..if i kill someone, put me in prison..don't kill me...it doesn't change anything for anyone other than the blood vengeance of pros
|
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Jan 3, 2006 11:46:26 GMT -5
It is not hatred that motivates me to decide to be a pro dp supporter, or revenge is neither a motive. The reason why I support the deathpenalty is that I see it as as the just punishment for deliberately taking a human life. You see you cannot bring back a murder victim from the dead. You all know this of course, but it seems not that important. You complain that the Dp in the USA is arbitrarily applied, but please stop and ask what the hell is murder. You complain that the state is violating the human rights of the murderer by executing him when all what is happening is that he is just paying the price for his evil actions. You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more. You forget that those rights are there becuase yes people are wrongly accused, it is the standard of this state that people are given the right to speak in their defence and demand that the prosecution prove their case. Yet the victim generally had no right to beg for mercy for his or her life. dude, we know what murder is. Many of us dealt with murder on a personal basis. We don't forget about the victims....that statement is a bunch of BS. This is an anti-dp forum, therefore, we focus on saving DR inmate lives. You know all our reasons why we are against the death penalty, so please don't insult us by making the accusations you made. And as far as the "wrongly accused" are concerned, once they are executed, you can't bring them back and say "I'm sorry, but you were the risk we had to take in order to execute the guilty." hugggz, Suzanne |
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jan 3, 2006 12:10:46 GMT -5
It is not hatred that motivates me to decide to be a pro dp supporter, or revenge is neither a motive. The reason why I support the deathpenalty is that I see it as as the just punishment for deliberately taking a human life. You see you cannot bring back a murder victim from the dead. You all know this of course, but it seems not that important. You complain that the Dp in the USA is arbitrarily applied, but please stop and ask what the hell is murder. You complain that the state is violating the human rights of the murderer by executing him when all what is happening is that he is just paying the price for his evil actions. You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more. You forget that those rights are there becuase yes people are wrongly accused, it is the standard of this state that people are given the right to speak in their defence and demand that the prosecution prove their case. Yet the victim generally had no right to beg for mercy for his or her life. cyclone ... you said (quote): "You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more." what the f*ck you mean by that? do you say that a murderer doesnt deserve a fair trial? what is justice without a fair trial? if you really mean what you said about an accused person not deserving a fair trial then im seriously wondering whos been sh*tting in your brain lately ... Mo-DAWG |
|
|
|
Post by capitalistswine on Jan 3, 2006 17:54:42 GMT -5
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human.
Execution is the lawful killing of a human.
Who determines what is lawful? The state.
The state's power to determine something as unlawful or lawful is completely and utterly arbitrary as laws are determined by aesthetics or convenience. Really has nothing to do with justice but everything to do with one defying the state's will and how the state chooses to punish that perceived transgression.
And yes, capital punishment is revenge under the guise of justice. It's revenge by the state as the state is not acting in lawful self-defense. Since the state is not acting in lawful self-defense, it creates a law to make the execution of murderers legal. Notice how some states have determined that execution is illegal?
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Jan 3, 2006 18:30:38 GMT -5
Just because a government makes murdering inmates legal it does not mean that it is not murder or a crime. Just look at all the laws the Nazis and Sadam Hussein bought in, like the USA and CP they are still crimes, thus CP is murder.
|
|
|
|
Post by attitude on Jan 3, 2006 18:51:59 GMT -5
lol Mo - you have some charming expressions. I think all those accused of all crimes do have the right to a defense and to be heard. However I do not think this excuses them when they are found guilty from a just punishment. From my understanding it appears there are two types of "innocent" on death row... The first are those who have had nothing to do with the murder, and the second lost are those who are guilty of murder but not of capital murder (ie should be deserving a lesser penalty)... I think the difference between society and the murderer is that the society should apply a fair punishment after a fair hearing, and the murderer acted on his own selfish desire. yes I think the death penalty is appropriate for murder (I disagree that it is appropriate for minor crimers such as car theft). I don't agree with the argument that capital punishment is a garbage disposal tool, (You could apply that argument to repeat criminals who have never murdered) as I believe punishment should be based on what people have done and what they may do in general. I do believe those who prove a constant danger to the community should be locked up though, but only it should be reviewed frequently if they are not serving time for a crime. I know this last bit sounds contradictory but I think that this last bit should apply to only a few as most get over their criminal inclinations by the age of 40 or they are dead. It is not hatred that motivates me to decide to be a pro dp supporter, or revenge is neither a motive. The reason why I support the deathpenalty is that I see it as as the just punishment for deliberately taking a human life. You see you cannot bring back a murder victim from the dead. You all know this of course, but it seems not that important. You complain that the Dp in the USA is arbitrarily applied, but please stop and ask what the hell is murder. You complain that the state is violating the human rights of the murderer by executing him when all what is happening is that he is just paying the price for his evil actions. You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more. You forget that those rights are there becuase yes people are wrongly accused, it is the standard of this state that people are given the right to speak in their defence and demand that the prosecution prove their case. Yet the victim generally had no right to beg for mercy for his or her life. cyclone ... you said (quote): "You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more." what the f*ck you mean by that? do you say that a murderer doesnt deserve a fair trial? what is justice without a fair trial? if you really mean what you said about an accused person not deserving a fair trial then im seriously wondering whos been sh*tting in your brain lately ... Mo-DAWG |
|
|
|
Post by spearmint on Jan 3, 2006 18:54:35 GMT -5
deleted do to calling a murderer a disrespectful slang....Suzanne
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jan 3, 2006 18:59:14 GMT -5
lol Mo - you have some charming expressions. I think all those accused of all crimes do have the right to a defense and to be heard. However I do not think this excuses them when they are found guilty from a just punishment. From my understanding it appears there are two types of "innocent" on death row... The first are those who have had nothing to do with the murder, and the second lost are those who are guilty of murder but not of capital murder (ie should be deserving a lesser penalty)... I think the difference between society and the murderer is that the society should apply a fair punishment after a fair hearing, and the murderer acted on his own selfish desire. yes I think the death penalty is appropriate for murder (I disagree that it is appropriate for minor crimers such as car theft). I don't agree with the argument that capital punishment is a garbage disposal tool, (You could apply that argument to repeat criminals who have never murdered) as I believe punishment should be based on what people have done and what they may do in general. I do believe those who prove a constant danger to the community should be locked up though, but only it should be reviewed frequently if they are not serving time for a crime. I know this last bit sounds contradictory but I think that this last bit should apply to only a few as most get over their criminal inclinations by the age of 40 or they are dead. cyclone ... you said (quote): "You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more." what the f*ck you mean by that? do you say that a murderer doesnt deserve a fair trial? what is justice without a fair trial? if you really mean what you said about an accused person not deserving a fair trial then im seriously wondering whos been sh*tting in your brain lately ... Mo-DAWG sally i AM charming ... ;D ok you ve made your point of view clear with this post ... i was concerened about your statement in the other post when i read it but since you made it clear now i ll take the assmuption of someone having sh*tted in your brain back .... Charming-DAWG ;D |
|
|
|
Post by capitalistswine on Jan 3, 2006 19:05:33 GMT -5
Just because a government makes murdering inmates legal it does not mean that it is not murder or a crime. Just look at all the laws the Nazis and Sadam Hussein bought in, like the USA and CP they are still crimes, thus CP is murder. I think you didn't understand a word I wrote or the context thereof. |
|
|
|
Post by attitude on Jan 3, 2006 19:19:55 GMT -5
Suzanne,
I wonder how many on this board work on saving the lives of those who are likely to end up on death row or serving LWOP before they commit their crimes. I wonder how many people on the pro board do the same.
If one could do that then perhaps there will be fewer victims.
I know this is a bit off the subject....
Suzanne, I do intellectually know that antis in general are not anti victim. However doing things such as calling convicted murderers "heroes" is a bit much. Personally calling them friends is not offensive to me but I am not a MVS and I can understand for a MVS the right for a murderer to have any joy in their life is a dreadfully offensive concept. Also you might say the around invovling the death of Tookie Williams just gives pros more proof that antis are not only anti dp they are into murderer worship. Why is he different to all the other inmates on DR in California.. I suspect on California's Death Row there are maybe a few other candidates who are more likely innocent...and no I am not making some hidden reference to Scott Peterson here.
|
|
|
|
Post by robert on Jan 4, 2006 0:17:48 GMT -5
Severe,
I think that society as a whole is working to prevent murders from happening using several methods. One of the things I might point out here is that, at least in the metropolitan portions of the US, violent crime is statistically going down. Here in California, we have a "3 strikes law" that is, quite frankly, working overall and is keeping repeat felons behind bars (albeit with controversy about its application). Our policing in Southern California is also improving and that is having a dramatic effect on crime.
I do not think that most anti-DP people would idolize anyone behind bars. Take a look at some of the profiles of people (listed on the internet for many states) who are on death row. The vast majority had serious substance abuse problems that affected their behavior on the day that they committed their murders (cocaine and crystal meth being the most common). Compound this with the fact that many on DR are clinically psychotic, a picture emerges of people who are ILL but not inherently EVIL. Simply stated, even if the inmate is guilty and chronically antisocial, snuffing that sick person does not make any sense, and it does not deter crime.
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Jan 4, 2006 7:55:10 GMT -5
Dear Cyclone,
It is the people of the USA as a whole that should be working to reduce crime. I have stated many times what many of things are that need to be done and until the people of the USA faces up to its social responsibilities, crime can never be defeated.
Love and hugs,
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by sclcookie on Jan 4, 2006 8:45:52 GMT -5
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human. Execution is the lawful killing of a human. Who determines what is lawful? The state. The state's power to determine something as unlawful or lawful is completely and utterly arbitrary as laws are determined by aesthetics or convenience. Really has nothing to do with justice but everything to do with one defying the state's will and how the state chooses to punish that perceived transgression. And yes, capital punishment is revenge under the guise of justice. It's revenge by the state as the state is not acting in lawful self-defense. Since the state is not acting in lawful self-defense, it creates a law to make the execution of murderers legal. Notice how some states have determined that execution is illegal? Just because it's "lawful" doesn't mean it's right. I'm going to borrow one of Mo's fav. example and remind you of slavery which was once "lawful". I bet they thought they were civilized back than when slavery was legal here in the US. |
|
