Today (8/10) is World Day Against the Death Penalty

ali8775 wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

Sociopaths never change, it is ingrained in them what they do.
They might get bored and stop, but nothing is guaranteed.

Again, we need to differentiate between first degree murders and other murders.

1st degree murders entail carrying out a murder out of carefully laid out plans and determination.

And even that branches further.

To clarify my position, I think rapists, serial killers, drug lords, and multiple killers should all get the death penalty as swift as they can. Because I understand the society of today would not approve the more painful methods of yesterday.

Although I would not mind we use a slow Way of the Five Pains against child rapists and serial killers.

So you think a man, around 18-19 years old, broke, killing someone during a robbery has the same mindset as someone in his 60s after spending years in jail ?

I specified Sociopaths, rapist, and first degree murders. Killing someone during a robbery is a 2nd degree murder.

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

really?

the world is overpopulated, the majority of which live in poverty and squalor and have no hope of anything except to breed and die

IMO we should start culling the population, we do it with any other pest, virus or plague like problem with any other species of animal, why not us.

Prisoners are a good place to start, we can work on semantics later for the rest lmao

That is so wrong on so many levels, these are freaking lives that your talking about, were not a pest, were not viruses, were HUMANS, what you have just said is INHUMANE, you are treating the people as NUMBERS and STATISTICS, for Gods sake...
The day when people choose to follow your views, is the day where people have no hope, people can ALWAYS have hope, this is a free world when anyone can become anything, this isn't the time painted in the media, it's a wonderful time and a prosperous time.

What makes a human any better than any other living creature? Yet we have no problems pushing most of them to extinction.

So you would rather have an overpopulated world where majority of people live horrible pointless lives and where most of our resources our depleted rather than cut our population down to a manageable size and have everyone live well.

There will still be problems but it wont be the mess it is now.

Inhumane or not it needs to be done this world can not sustain our current rate of overpopulation it is simply not possible. Well it is if you want more and more people dying of famine and disease and living out in poverty.

Humans need to be looked at like any other pest.

I may sound inhuman or insane or whatever label you wish to put on me but I feel people that accept the current world as it is and its current direction are actually more inhumane than I.

McLewis wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

McLewis wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

@McLewis, past societies did indeed push the limits of punishments.

Here is a few of the methods used in Legalistic China, where the punishment grows exponentially with the crime.

1- Treason: each limb is fastened to a chariot, and all chariots run in 4 different direction, which would cause dismemberment in about half an hour of extreme pain.

2- Corruption: Getting nailed to a board and thrown from a cliff.

3- Stealing: Beheading.

4- Murder: Way of the five pains (VERY brutal).

5- Multiple Murders: A slower version of the five pains. The more the victims the slower the punishment.

So McLewis, I think the reason we don't push the boundaries of what to do to murderers is that we don't want to re-explore the dark nature of our being. And death would generally rid us of those animals.

Notice that I am only assuming overwhelming evidence is available, and the crime is a first degree murder. Fact is that a serial killer can get a life sentence while someone who killed one person out of the moment could get 25 years which is ridicilous.

So we settle for simplistic barbarity? Why not push the boundaries? Killing just to kill IS part of the dark-nature of our being.

I'm not talking about just physical pain. That's only one facet to true suffering. What about emotional pain? Psychological pain?

These are completely left out when talking about capital punishment when I honestly think they could do more damage than physical pain and ultimately death ever could.

Trust me, Way of the Five pains would include emotional and psychological pain as well.
Also, pain and death are underrated.

I think the security of knowing that a person will not be alive who ended so many lives is the main reason people back the Capital punishment. I think widely implementing it will decrease the number of crimes.

Tell that to the morons in Texas that continue to serve as lambs to the slaughter for the prison system there. They obviously know that if you kill someone there, more often than not, you're gonna get executed. And yet that doesn't seem deter them for doing it anyway and then facing the consequences.

Why do you think it would deter anyone else the world over?

It's a rather popular myth that capital punishment is a deterrent. It never has been and never will be. People will do what they want to do, regardless of the perceived consequence. That's the sad truth when it comes to crime and punishment.

It is was no myth in the empires I specified, it is widely known that the Mongol empire and Legalistic China were one of the safest places to ever exist.

Also, Capital punishment had long been a deterrent in the middle east until the law here completely became corrupt and relaxed. Although other factors may have come to play, but the rate of murders increased 300% + from 20 years ago.

I lived in Singapore for 7 years, which has some of the most draconian legal laws of any 1st world country. Immediate death penalties for murder and drugs, canings...

Safest place I've ever been in.

Of course, I think it has more to do with how educated the people are there, and not totally down to the insane justice system. But Spencer has a point.

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

really?

the world is overpopulated, the majority of which live in poverty and squalor and have no hope of anything except to breed and die

IMO we should start culling the population, we do it with any other pest, virus or plague like problem with any other species of animal, why not us.

Prisoners are a good place to start, we can work on semantics later for the rest lmao

That is so wrong on so many levels, these are freaking lives that your talking about, were not a pest, were not viruses, were HUMANS, what you have just said is INHUMANE, you are treating the people as NUMBERS and STATISTICS, for Gods sake...
The day when people choose to follow your views, is the day where people have no hope, people can ALWAYS have hope, this is a free world when anyone can become anything, this isn't the time painted in the media, it's a wonderful time and a prosperous time.

What makes a human any better than any other living creature? Yet we have no problems pushing most of them to extinction.

So you would rather have an overpopulated world where majority of people live horrible pointless lives and where most of our resources our depleted rather than cut our population down to a manageable size and have everyone live well.

There will still be problems but it wont be the mess it is now.

Inhumane or not it needs to be done this world can not sustain our current rate of overpopulation it is simply not possible. Well it is if you want more and more people dying of famine and disease and living out in poverty.

Humans need to be looked at like any other pest.

I may sound inhuman or insane or whatever label you wish to put on me but I feel people that accept the current world as it is and its current direction are actually more inhumane than I.

First, if you don't see how humans are simply better than other living creatures then you have identity problems.

Second, combating overpopulation is a multi-stage process that does not include mass genocide. It mainly includes birth control and a heavy recycling and decreasing consumption.

For example, the average American consumes more food, energy, and water at a rate nearly 9 times that of the next competitor. Simply dividing the resources the average American uses would allow 9 people to enjoy the life style of the English rather than one person enjoying the lifestyle of the American.

FFS, humans as pests. Ridiculous.

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

My Paranoia? U think it is that easy to keep these animals in prison ever?

A simple scenario.A terrorist was captured and put in prison in connection with bomb blast in Mumbai that killed hundreds of people.But he wasnt put to death due to legal proceedings.

But then an Indian flight was captured and he was released on blackmail to save those in the flight.Then after he was released he proceeded to involve in killing another hundreds of people with another terrorist activity.

U think he shouldnt be put to death but let rot in prison if again captured? What about the 100s of live we could have saved if he was killed in the first time itself? What if the same thing happens again he isnt put to capital punishment once captured?Why is his life so precious than the hundreds of people he killed?

Its not that i am paranoid but more like u are naive.

I certainly don't disagree with Spencer's point, but I'm merely pointing out the other side of the coin. Yes those empires indeed had fantastic track records in terms of how it punished its criminals.

However, as much as it pains me to say it, being that I myself am a student of history: That was then. This is now.

I can only speak from perspective of the US citizen. And I'm telling you guys, capital punishment does not deter anyone from committing crime. It simply doesn't. Yet it continues to be a regular practice. I think that needs to change, but as I've mentioned previously, people are too afraid, too lazy to even consider brainstorming on alternative measures. It's utterly disappointing.

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

McLewis wrote:I've always thought that we, as humans, were capable of being absolutely creative and innovative beings. We've proved this so many times in terms of technology.

Why, in all these thousands of years of civilized existence, do we still see death as the natural punishment for death? Why do we still conform to this "an eye for an eye" mentality?

We're better than that, I like to think.

I absolutely think that there can be worse things than death.

We're just either too lazy or too afraid to actually explore that concept.

Its not not eye for eye mentality.Its just safe guarding the civilized world from uncivilized animals.

And there may be worse things than death but capital punishment is the most efficient way of achieving that.

"What happens to a changed man who dies in a cell?"

What happens when a man escapes prison and again murders hundreds of people?

Why does another man have to die due to your paranoia ? If the prison were to serve it's purpose then the prisoner would never escape. If the police did their job he'd be tracked down before he were to even see a single soul. It doesn't work that way though, because nothing/no ones perfect, people can make mistakes and people can change.

My Paranoia? U think it is that easy to keep these animals in prison ever?

A simple scenario.A terrorist was captured and put in prison in connection with bomb blast in Mumbai that killed hundreds of people.But he wasnt put to death due to legal proceedings.

But then an Indian flight was captured and he was released on blackmail to save those in the flight.Then after he was released he proceeded to involve in killing another hundreds of people with another terrorist activity.

U think he shouldnt be put to death but let rot in prison if again captured? What about the 100s of live we could have saved if he was killed in the first time itself? What if the same thing happens again he isnt put to capital punishment once captured?Why is his life so precious than the hundreds of people he killed?

Its not that i am paranoid but more like u are naive.

Putting him to death wouldn't have saved lives. Those that blackmailed for his release would've probably have just retaliated and killed even more people. Either way, people were going to die.

McLewis wrote:I certainly don't disagree with Spencer's point, but I'm merely pointing out the other side of the coin. Yes those empires indeed had fantastic track records in terms of how it punished its criminals.

However, as much as it pains me to say it, being that I myself am a student of history: That was then. This is now.

I can only speak from perspective of the US citizen. And I'm telling you guys, capital punishment does not deter anyone from committing crime. It simply doesn't. Yet it continues to be a regular practice. I think that needs to change, but as I've mentioned previously, people are too afraid, too lazy to even consider brainstorming on alternative measures. It's utterly disappointing.

I agree on the laziness of the U.S. to explore other legal approaches. It is disappointing the U.S. which is a beacon of improvement and positive change is so afraid of change.

Lord Spencer wrote:

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

really?

the world is overpopulated, the majority of which live in poverty and squalor and have no hope of anything except to breed and die

IMO we should start culling the population, we do it with any other pest, virus or plague like problem with any other species of animal, why not us.

Prisoners are a good place to start, we can work on semantics later for the rest lmao

That is so wrong on so many levels, these are freaking lives that your talking about, were not a pest, were not viruses, were HUMANS, what you have just said is INHUMANE, you are treating the people as NUMBERS and STATISTICS, for Gods sake...
The day when people choose to follow your views, is the day where people have no hope, people can ALWAYS have hope, this is a free world when anyone can become anything, this isn't the time painted in the media, it's a wonderful time and a prosperous time.

What makes a human any better than any other living creature? Yet we have no problems pushing most of them to extinction.

So you would rather have an overpopulated world where majority of people live horrible pointless lives and where most of our resources our depleted rather than cut our population down to a manageable size and have everyone live well.

There will still be problems but it wont be the mess it is now.

Inhumane or not it needs to be done this world can not sustain our current rate of overpopulation it is simply not possible. Well it is if you want more and more people dying of famine and disease and living out in poverty.

Humans need to be looked at like any other pest.

I may sound inhuman or insane or whatever label you wish to put on me but I feel people that accept the current world as it is and its current direction are actually more inhumane than I.

First, if you don't see how humans are simply better than other living creatures then you have identity problems.

Second, combating overpopulation is a multi-stage process that does not include mass genocide. It mainly includes birth control and a heavy recycling and decreasing consumption.

For example, the average American consumes more food, energy, and water at a rate nearly 9 times that of the next competitor. Simply dividing the resources the average American uses would allow 9 people to enjoy the life style of the English rather than one person enjoying the lifestyle of the American.

FFS, humans as pests. Ridiculous.

We are whether or not you want to accept it or not is your problem

Definition of PEST
1
: an epidemic disease associated with high mortality; specifically : plague
2
: something resembling a pest in destructiveness; especially : a plant or animal detrimental to humans or human concerns (as agriculture or livestock production)

vi·rus
   [vahy-ruhs] Show IPA
noun, plural -rus·es.

2.
Informal . a viral disease.

plague
noun \ˈplāg\
1
a : a disastrous evil or affliction : calamity b : a destructively numerous influx

----------------------------------------------------

I agree culling is going abit far

Birth control and a license to breed would be a good start but would be a very slow process

The problem is the current world will not accept either process as it stands and by the time it realises it needs to do anything most of anything beautiful in this world will be long gone. Extinction rate is mortifying....

Half of all living mammal and bird species are predicted to be gone within 150 years at our current rate, was predicted at 200-300 years just 9 years ago. Were speeding up the process pretty well. It's not just animals but the Earth in general were doing a good job and fing that up as well.

I don't know if it's a problem with me but I have no fear of death and see no problem in killing people what needs to be killed.
Prisons all over the world are over populated, if you in for 15+ or 20+ might as well just kill them and be done with it, do as the Chinese do send the cost of the execution to the family of the criminal lmao

Most people living in this world live in poverty and have no hope of ever breaking that cycle but breed none the less and promote the cycle ever more

Something needs to be done but I doubt it ever will because people are too ignorant and stupid to realise a human life is worthless when theres over 7 billion of us on the planet

Crimson wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:

ali8775 wrote:

Crimson wrote:wow you guys look way too deep into it

kill them to save money and lower population problems and clean up society abit better

who cares about the rest lmao

thats so inhumane and wrong

really?

the world is overpopulated, the majority of which live in poverty and squalor and have no hope of anything except to breed and die

IMO we should start culling the population, we do it with any other pest, virus or plague like problem with any other species of animal, why not us.

Prisoners are a good place to start, we can work on semantics later for the rest lmao

That is so wrong on so many levels, these are freaking lives that your talking about, were not a pest, were not viruses, were HUMANS, what you have just said is INHUMANE, you are treating the people as NUMBERS and STATISTICS, for Gods sake...
The day when people choose to follow your views, is the day where people have no hope, people can ALWAYS have hope, this is a free world when anyone can become anything, this isn't the time painted in the media, it's a wonderful time and a prosperous time.

What makes a human any better than any other living creature? Yet we have no problems pushing most of them to extinction.

So you would rather have an overpopulated world where majority of people live horrible pointless lives and where most of our resources our depleted rather than cut our population down to a manageable size and have everyone live well.

There will still be problems but it wont be the mess it is now.

Inhumane or not it needs to be done this world can not sustain our current rate of overpopulation it is simply not possible. Well it is if you want more and more people dying of famine and disease and living out in poverty.

Humans need to be looked at like any other pest.

I may sound inhuman or insane or whatever label you wish to put on me but I feel people that accept the current world as it is and its current direction are actually more inhumane than I.

First, if you don't see how humans are simply better than other living creatures then you have identity problems.

Second, combating overpopulation is a multi-stage process that does not include mass genocide. It mainly includes birth control and a heavy recycling and decreasing consumption.

For example, the average American consumes more food, energy, and water at a rate nearly 9 times that of the next competitor. Simply dividing the resources the average American uses would allow 9 people to enjoy the life style of the English rather than one person enjoying the lifestyle of the American.

FFS, humans as pests. Ridiculous.

We are whether or not you want to accept it or not is your problem

Definition of PEST
1
: an epidemic disease associated with high mortality; specifically : plague
2
: something resembling a pest in destructiveness; especially : a plant or animal detrimental to humans or human concerns (as agriculture or livestock production)

vi·rus
   [vahy-ruhs] Show IPA
noun, plural -rus·es.

2.
Informal . a viral disease.

plague
noun \ˈplāg\
1
a : a disastrous evil or affliction : calamity b : a destructively numerous influx

----------------------------------------------------

I agree culling is going abit far

Birth control and a license to breed would be a good start but would be a very slow process

The problem is the current world will not accept either process as it stands and by the time it realises it needs to do anything most of anything beautiful in this world will be long gone. Extinction rate is mortifying....

Half of all living mammal and bird species are predicted to be gone within 150 years at our current rate, was predicted at 200-300 years just 9 years ago. Were speeding up the process pretty well. It's not just animals but the Earth in general were doing a good job and fing that up as well.

I don't know if it's a problem with me but I have no fear of death and see no problem in killing people what needs to be killed.
Prisons all over the world are over populated, if you in for 15+ or 20+ might as well just kill them and be done with it, do as the Chinese do send the cost of the execution to the family of the criminal lmao

Most people living in this world live in poverty and have no hope of ever breaking that cycle but breed none the less and promote the cycle ever more

Something needs to be done but I doubt it ever will because people are too ignorant and stupid to realise a human life is worthless when theres over 7 billion of us on the planet

What if, regardless of the small possibility of it being so, one of those lives (not the murderers) that are worthless is a future Noble prize winner. I disagree simply because the potential of some human lives is huge.

To deal with overpopulation, massive birth control is needed. And resource management.

Id say the lives of a noble prize winner or two or fifty are worth the changes that are needed to get this planet under control

Crimson wrote:Id say the lives of a noble prize winner or two or fifty are worth the changes that are needed to get this planet under control

The thing is that those people are the ones bringing the change.

(not peace prize winners though)

Lord Spencer wrote:

Crimson wrote:Id say the lives of a noble prize winner or two or fifty are worth the changes that are needed to get this planet under control

The thing is that those people are the ones bringing the change.

(not peace prize winners though)

shrug

talking formalities anyway

nothing will ever change

one of the reasons I will never have children

A simple scenario.A terrorist was captured and put in prison in connection with bomb blast in Mumbai that killed hundreds of people.But he wasnt put to death due to legal proceedings.

But then an Indian flight was captured and he was released on blackmail to save those in the flight.Then after he was released he proceeded to involve in killing another hundreds of people with another terrorist activity.

U think he shouldnt be put to death but let rot in prison if again captured? What about the 100s of live we could have saved if he was killed in the first time itself? What if the same thing happens again he isnt put to capital punishment once captured?Why is his life so precious than the hundreds of people he killed?

Can anyone tell me a sigle justifiable reason why this terrorist shouldnt be given death penalty?

McLewis wrote:

dansik wrote:McLewis,

What are some punishments that would make a criminal actually suffer?

How about we probe the criminal's mind? Instead of finding out what makes them kill, we find out what they fear most. Then we manifest those fears. Everyone has them. No matter how depraved or sick an individual is. There's always something that will undoubtedly unnerve them. We should be trying to find that and using that to make them suffer instead of just killing them, which cheapens everything.

Cruel and unusual punishment. I agree with you, however C&P will prevent that from ever happening.

The reason the death penalty isn't a deterrent is because of how long the process takes. Think about it. You receive the death penalty, you know you've got a long time before you're actually killed. You're going to get 17 million appeals which will take years. Plenty of time for a lawyer to find a loophole, a governor to grant a pardon, or a state to abolish the death penalty.

Now imagine, if upon hearing your sentence of death, you're taken outside, and killed. No appeals, no waiting 15 years, nothing. Even if it wasn't a deterrent, it'd sure make the whole thing a heck of a lot cheaper.

Pedophiles and people who kill innocent people for the heck of it deserve death.

I'm with the death penalty all the way. Of course they have to 100% proof that the individual was responsible.

BeautifulGame wrote:

A simple scenario.A terrorist was captured and put in prison in connection with bomb blast in Mumbai that killed hundreds of people.But he wasnt put to death due to legal proceedings.

But then an Indian flight was captured and he was released on blackmail to save those in the flight.Then after he was released he proceeded to involve in killing another hundreds of people with another terrorist activity.

U think he shouldnt be put to death but let rot in prison if again captured? What about the 100s of live we could have saved if he was killed in the first time itself? What if the same thing happens again he isnt put to capital punishment once captured?Why is his life so precious than the hundreds of people he killed?

Can anyone tell me a sigle justifiable reason why this terrorist shouldnt be given death penalty?

2 reasons.

1. I'd rather that OBL be rotting away in solitary confinement under lockdown 24 hours a day than be shot in the head. It seems like he never really was justly punished for his actions... instead, he was killed, and got the easy way out.

2. Playing off point number 2, by killing OBL we make him a martyr, and actually give him what he wants. His followers believe that he is rewarded in death, but certainly he wouldn't have been rewarded at all rotting away in a 10' x 10' cell.

btw here is a example of Death Penalty in Afghanistan..... where the family of man condemned and he himself accepted his fate....

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/08/world/asia/afghanistan-tribal-justice/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

btw read the article....cnn writer calls it brutal.....but everyone effect by with it agrees with the decision....however it better then they way it happens in US....

everest1 wrote:
2 reasons.

1. I'd rather that OBL be rotting away in solitary confinement under lockdown 24 hours a day than be shot in the head. It seems like he never really was justly punished for his actions... instead, he was killed, and got the easy way out.

So what if the same Terrorist group hijacks another flight to demand his release? Or the lives that could have saved from the bomb blast if he was killed first time itself when captured rather than being let go off due to black mail.

everest1 wrote:
2. Playing off point number 2, by killing OBL we make him a martyr, and actually give him what he wants. His followers believe that he is rewarded in death, but certainly he wouldn't have been rewarded at all rotting away in a 10' x 10' cell.

We should care about him being a Martyr among a bunch of uncivilized terrorists rather than caring the hundreds of people who died first time or could be saved if attempts another bomb blast?

the intelligence level on this forum has dropped...

it used to be about 50 votes for against and 6 votes for...

ali8775 wrote:the intelligence level on this forum has dropped...

it used to be about 50 votes for against and 6 votes for...

Because why? People don't agree with your opinion?

Seriously....

ali8775 wrote:the intelligence level on this forum has dropped...

it used to be about 50 votes for against and 6 votes for...

Nah its just that u are seriously ignorant enough to believe that anyone who doesnt agree with ur opinion have low intelligence.

ali8775 wrote:the intelligence level on this forum has dropped...

it used to be about 50 votes for against and 6 votes for...

I am for the capital punishment, and McLewis is only against the current form of it and
would rather the U.S. explore the situation further.

Sorry Ali, but I argued for the capital punishment and the only one who counter argued
was McLewis who thinks the current punishment is too light and ridicilous to become an
effective deterrent and is not justice.

If you can't support your position with argument or counter argue my posts, then you
need to apologize for calling everyone who supports the capital punishment a low intelligent
poster.

Thank you

Well, I, too, think that capital punishment is sometimes too light.

Take suicide bombers for example: They are willing to end their own life while taking many innocent people with them as well. Say one of them is captured alive; our most vicious punishment to him is death? That's what he was planning to do to himself anyway!!

Or other evil people, who want to kill themselves, but before doing so kill some others, too. If you capture them alive and order a death penalty on them, you're completing their original plan, not punishing them.