M Busby Airlines 7 Posted March 7, 2006 Whatever your opinion this guy makes you think again. Dad rapes daughter,3. Dont waste taxpayers money keeping him alive. At least he's now behind bars. let's hope they catch this sick bastard Its a shame that Sainsburys only offered 5,000 reward,while a sleazy rag like the Sport offered 20,000 more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tempus Fugit 214 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
M Busby Airlines 7 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. Every case is unique,by highlighting different cases,the merits of both arguments can be discussed. By executing Ruth Ellis was justice served ? Almost certainly not,it was, like most domestics,a crime of passion. Would the UK have kept the death penalty far longer if she had simply been jailed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harvester Of Souls 40 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. Maybe if the contributors were to post why the articles warrant a good old fashioned hanging? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadian Paul 97 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. People try to justify general opinions with extreme circumstances. It's human nature, because for post people, there's always some circumstance where they would go against a lot of what they wouldn't do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tempus Fugit 214 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. People try to justify general opinions with extreme circumstances. It's human nature, because for post people, there's always some circumstance where they would go against a lot of what they wouldn't do. That is gobbledegook worthy of Banshees. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadian Paul 97 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. People try to justify general opinions with extreme circumstances. It's human nature, because for post people, there's always some circumstance where they would go against a lot of what they wouldn't do. That is gobbledegook worthy of Banshees. I don't quite follow what you mean, aside from the fact that it should say "most people" instead of "post people." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tempus Fugit 214 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. People try to justify general opinions with extreme circumstances. It's human nature, because for post people, there's always some circumstance where they would go against a lot of what they wouldn't do. That is gobbledegook worthy of Banshees. I don't quite follow what you mean, aside from the fact that it should say "most people" instead of "post people." Maybe it's me but I can't make sense of it. Give an example of your argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadian Paul 97 Posted March 7, 2006 This thread used to be about the merits or not of the death penalty. It now seems to be a place where people post links to sensationalist news stories of paedophilia and murder. Seems to have lost its way somewhat. People try to justify general opinions with extreme circumstances. It's human nature, because for post people, there's always some circumstance where they would go against a lot of what they wouldn't do. That is gobbledegook worthy of Banshees. I don't quite follow what you mean, aside from the fact that it should say "most people" instead of "post people." Maybe it's me but I can't make sense of it. Give an example of your argument. Let's say I'm against abortion and you aren't. We could sit here for arguing general circumstances about when life begins, whether it's murder or not, and all the issues involved with it. We probably won't get anywhere because the other side will be aware of the other's points and will have counterpoints and a firm belief of their own. If I tell you, however, that when I was born, I had a 5% chance of living and my mother had a 5% chance of living, and that she chose not to have an abortion and everything turned out fine, then I'm trying to discredit the point that abortions should be carried out in circumstances where the mother's health is in danger. Similarly, if I were to tell you that Ludwig Beethoven had all the circumstances that would usually merrit abortion, that might discredit it as well. In both cases, I'm using a strong emotional statement to sway you away from your reason (by the way, I have no idea what your real stance is, I'm just trying to make a generic example). Similarly, if you review the posts in this thread, no one was changing their mind one way or the other based on the usual issues of debate (ie. Death penalty prevents the crime from happening again, possibility of executing an innocent person, economic cost to society, strength as a deterrent etc. etc.). So people who are for the death penalty bring up the most horrible cases they can possibly find in order to attempt to sway your emotions and your opinion on the matter. For example, a man who commits a murder and vehementely denies it is a good average case of debate as to the merrits of the death penalty. But if post an article on a man who rapes and skins six year old girls in painful torture, it might be more difficult for you to say that you don't want to see this man dead if he fully confesses. Thus, an extreme situation is presented to sway you away from your general rationale of being against the death penalty (again, haven't been paying attention to your opinion on the Death Penalty, but it's just an example). Personally, it doesn't work on me, it's human nature to want to rid ourselves of the things that offend or hurt the most. Sure, if that guy in the above example existed, I'd love to see him get stabbed to death in prison, but that doesn't mean I support the death penalty. Hell, if it were up to emotions, I'd like to see the guy who betrayed me at student council get run over by a steamroller and at least one of my exes take a long walk off a short bridge, but that doesn't mean I support killing people overall. In extreme cases, one just hopes for a little karma. Hope that clarifies it a bit, but when I get long winded, it tends not to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tempus Fugit 214 Posted March 7, 2006 Yes, now I understand what you were saying, thanks for clarifying. That kind of emotionally extreme argument doesn't work on me either, in fact it usually has the opposite effect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7 Posted March 20, 2006 Here's an interesting link coming out of Texas: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/deathrow.htm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
M Busby Airlines 7 Posted March 20, 2006 Here's an interesting link coming out of Texas: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/deathrow.htm I liked the, experiencing printing problems ?. Should be black or white - no? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beebee 1 Posted March 20, 2006 i am against the death penalty. as far as i know, it's never been shown to be a detriment to murder, it costs a lot of money and i believe it is morally wrong. however, some offenders i have a hard time considering human. child killers. i had the terrible experience of witnessing part of a murder. that guy, after they execute, i am going to go piss on his grave. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Life Begins at 5 o'clock 7 Posted March 20, 2006 Well, here's another controversial execution. Apparently he was a Vegan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moody Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canadian Paul 97 Posted March 20, 2006 Well, here's another controversial execution. Apparently he was a Vegan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moody I didn't know you could get executed for Veganism. Good show though! Oh boy, I don't want to add a debate about Vegetarianism into a thread that already contains a debate about The Death Penalty... perhaps Sigismund isn't doing his job... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lady Die 63 Posted March 20, 2006 Well, here's another controversial execution. Apparently he was a Vegan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moody I didn't know you could get executed for Veganism. Good show though! Oh boy, I don't want to add a debate about Vegetarianism into a thread that already contains a debate about The Death Penalty... perhaps Sigismund isn't doing his job... It says he was "of marginal intelligence". The same could be said of a lot of people.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Fauwgh Posted April 11, 2006 Well, here's another controversial execution. Apparently he was a Vegan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moody I didn't know you could get executed for Veganism. Good show though! Oh boy, I don't want to add a debate about Vegetarianism into a thread that already contains a debate about The Death Penalty... perhaps Sigismund isn't doing his job... It says he was "of marginal intelligence". The same could be said of a lot of people.... I do not agree with the death penalty, although I sometimes find myself thinking whether I would mind if people as sick as Hitler were executed (if he were still alive, obviously). Overall I think it's wrong because if you kill someone, how could they possibly "learn their lesson"? Also, what if the person was framed or mistakenly accused? It's a bit difficult for someone to suddenly say, "Oh bugger, sorry mate, turns out you didn't murder 'em after all! Whoopsie!" Y'know what I mean? If I am talking rubbish, please feel free to ignore or delete this post...I am only passing by. Oh...and just to say...I disagree with people who think this website is sick or whatever...I think it's interesting to know who has died recently and discuss it and stuff. So yeah, good on ya! *waves flag* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dave to the Grave 11 Posted August 5, 2008 You can now love your neighbour's wife in Iran without getting stoned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cowboy Ronnie 78 Posted August 5, 2008 Here's a novel approach to avoiding the death penalty - What would have happened if they'd issued a a fat-wa against him? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Godot 149 Posted August 5, 2008 Here's a novel approach to avoiding the death penalty - What would have happened if they'd issued a a fat-wa against him? It says he gets migraine headaches. I suppose they could always stone him. That would cure the headaches. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Miser 18 Posted August 6, 2008 Interesting poll...I'm surprised its so close being a UK site. I say extend it to child molesters...we would get Garry Glitter then (both Obama and McCain agree). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pretty In Pink 1 Posted August 6, 2008 I would be very apprehensive to agree wholeheartedly with the death penalty. There is too much room for mistakes to be made. But, I must say, I agree on this: Sidney Cooke should hang along with Ian Huntley and other child predators like them. They are guilty, they cant be cured and should never be released. They are a waste of space and tax payers money. Scum of the earth. Maybe one way round it would be to offer their victims families the decision on an appropriate punishment? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarolAnn 926 Posted August 6, 2008 The whole "lethal injection is a violation of the cruel and unusual punishment" argument is all the rage in the US these days as condemned inmates try to get get out of being shoved off. This is just another take on it, but one that has been shot down. So, either you are a foreign national who was denied access to your consulate or you can't have a needle stuck in you easily. In the first case, don't come to the US and rape and murder two teenage girls. In the second case, oh gee I'm sorry.... OK. I'm done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TAFKAG 70 Posted September 16, 2009 High-profile death row inmate, the 'DC Sniper' John Muhammad, is due to face the music in November. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TAFKAG 70 Posted November 10, 2009 High-profile death row inmate, the 'DC Sniper' John Muhammad, is due to face the music in November. Frying tonight. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites