- 4,718
- 15
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2007
I think its acceptable. If you take a innocent life purposefully, you should die.
Death Penalty Vol. Do People Deserve To Die For Their Actions?
- 21,632
- 10,251
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
I def agree with you OP its a strange paradox
I think it should be legal let me say that. If you are an admitted killer and there is basically a 0% chance you are innocent, to save tax payers money I think the death penalty should be an option.
I also think as an admitted murderer you should be able to say yes I want the death penalty if they sentence you to life in prison you should be allowed to die if you want to regardless if it's legal in the state you were convicted in or not.
But from a morality stand point I firmly believe 2 wrongs don't make a right (I know childish) but if the person is convicted but is actually innocent and he/she is killed via the death penalty then what? the jury that convicted him/her should have some repercussions. I think its a very slippery slope and should be reserved for the worst of the worst criminals or by choice of the criminal.
I think it should be legal let me say that. If you are an admitted killer and there is basically a 0% chance you are innocent, to save tax payers money I think the death penalty should be an option.
I also think as an admitted murderer you should be able to say yes I want the death penalty if they sentence you to life in prison you should be allowed to die if you want to regardless if it's legal in the state you were convicted in or not.
But from a morality stand point I firmly believe 2 wrongs don't make a right (I know childish) but if the person is convicted but is actually innocent and he/she is killed via the death penalty then what? the jury that convicted him/her should have some repercussions. I think its a very slippery slope and should be reserved for the worst of the worst criminals or by choice of the criminal.
- 21,632
- 10,251
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
I def agree with you OP its a strange paradox
I think it should be legal let me say that. If you are an admitted killer and there is basically a 0% chance you are innocent, to save tax payers money I think the death penalty should be an option.
I also think as an admitted murderer you should be able to say yes I want the death penalty if they sentence you to life in prison you should be allowed to die if you want to regardless if it's legal in the state you were convicted in or not.
But from a morality stand point I firmly believe 2 wrongs don't make a right (I know childish) but if the person is convicted but is actually innocent and he/she is killed via the death penalty then what? the jury that convicted him/her should have some repercussions. I think its a very slippery slope and should be reserved for the worst of the worst criminals or by choice of the criminal.
I think it should be legal let me say that. If you are an admitted killer and there is basically a 0% chance you are innocent, to save tax payers money I think the death penalty should be an option.
I also think as an admitted murderer you should be able to say yes I want the death penalty if they sentence you to life in prison you should be allowed to die if you want to regardless if it's legal in the state you were convicted in or not.
But from a morality stand point I firmly believe 2 wrongs don't make a right (I know childish) but if the person is convicted but is actually innocent and he/she is killed via the death penalty then what? the jury that convicted him/her should have some repercussions. I think its a very slippery slope and should be reserved for the worst of the worst criminals or by choice of the criminal.
- 3,684
- 66
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
I disagree with the death penalty. That's an easy way out for a criminal that takes a life. Let them rot. Who am I to judge though? Who is anyone to?
- 3,684
- 66
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2009
I disagree with the death penalty. That's an easy way out for a criminal that takes a life. Let them rot. Who am I to judge though? Who is anyone to?
- 6,564
- 1,081
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
some of you are trying to make it seam like its Kill someone = Death penalty no matter the circumstances, even though you know thats not really how it is
- 6,564
- 1,081
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
some of you are trying to make it seam like its Kill someone = Death penalty no matter the circumstances, even though you know thats not really how it is
whyhellothere
Banned
- 18,975
- 2,397
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2011
kill them. my tax dollars shouldn't be wasted feeding and sheltering them in prison while they do nothing and i struggle my @*$ of on the outside.
whyhellothere
Banned
- 18,975
- 2,397
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2011
kill them. my tax dollars shouldn't be wasted feeding and sheltering them in prison while they do nothing and i struggle my @*$ of on the outside.
- 12,660
- 5,290
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2008
- 12,660
- 5,290
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2008
- 5,172
- 27
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2008
I think I'd be more miserable behind bars for life. I'd rather /myself. Let them rot in jail.
- 5,172
- 27
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2008
I think I'd be more miserable behind bars for life. I'd rather /myself. Let them rot in jail.
- 5,873
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2007
i'm against it for several reasons that i don't feel like typing up right now.
- 5,873
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2007
i'm against it for several reasons that i don't feel like typing up right now.
- 272
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
death is natural.
if you pop at my family or myself, ima pop back.
and thats gon be that.
the government has no say in anything i do so i could careless about the death penalty
if you pop at my family or myself, ima pop back.
and thats gon be that.
the government has no say in anything i do so i could careless about the death penalty
- 272
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
death is natural.
if you pop at my family or myself, ima pop back.
and thats gon be that.
the government has no say in anything i do so i could careless about the death penalty
if you pop at my family or myself, ima pop back.
and thats gon be that.
the government has no say in anything i do so i could careless about the death penalty
- 247
- 21
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2006
I disagree with it also. Spending life in prison is far worse IMO. Besides, taking away that persons life is gonna prove what?
- 247
- 21
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2006
I disagree with it also. Spending life in prison is far worse IMO. Besides, taking away that persons life is gonna prove what?
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
Why should the government decide who lives and who dies?
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
Why should the government decide who lives and who dies?
- 5,522
- 133
- Joined
- May 2, 2007
Eye for an eye IMO.
- 5,522
- 133
- Joined
- May 2, 2007
Eye for an eye IMO.
- 37,248
- 12,669
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
No. Reason being is there are dozens of people who are convicted of crimes that are punishable by death, that are innocent.. They sit in jail for 20 years wasting away when they didn't do the crimes.. How much worse would it be if we killed the guy. You can't bring him back.
The problem is you can never be 100% sure.. That is why trials are not verdict that comes from Absolutely Certainty, and instead conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence during the trial could point to 1 person, 10 years later they find evidence that points to entirely different person.
The problem is you can never be 100% sure.. That is why trials are not verdict that comes from Absolutely Certainty, and instead conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence during the trial could point to 1 person, 10 years later they find evidence that points to entirely different person.
- 37,248
- 12,669
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
No. Reason being is there are dozens of people who are convicted of crimes that are punishable by death, that are innocent.. They sit in jail for 20 years wasting away when they didn't do the crimes.. How much worse would it be if we killed the guy. You can't bring him back.
The problem is you can never be 100% sure.. That is why trials are not verdict that comes from Absolutely Certainty, and instead conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence during the trial could point to 1 person, 10 years later they find evidence that points to entirely different person.
The problem is you can never be 100% sure.. That is why trials are not verdict that comes from Absolutely Certainty, and instead conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence during the trial could point to 1 person, 10 years later they find evidence that points to entirely different person.
Similar threads
