Wait wait, I know this one.

The whole "eye for an eye" thing in old testimate times was only to be implemented by the judges of the time. An individual was not premited to carry it out.

Yes so therfore the bible condones the death penalty... stoning was the death of choise.

Ever wanted to be tied down and people drop giant stones off of building onto you? Its a pleasant experience, be happy the death penalty is a whole lot more civil now.

quote:

You know what it says, an eye for an eye.

That's in the old testament. Most of that is irrelevant or has been changed when Jesus arrived. Don't start throwing around quotes you don't know anything about.

quote:

Originally posted by Tonic:
You also have to concider keeping them alive costs money too.

Not nearly as much money as it does to put them on death row. Not only does the act of giving someone the death penalty cost money, but the trials cost more money, the appeals cost more money, the lawyers cost more money, it costs more time for the city/county/state and their governments, and not to mention the emotional trauma it causes jurors.

That all said, I'm starting to care less and less if it's abolished or kept. It doesn't make a damn difference on crime rates. It helps some sleep at night, and plagues others. It's just fine to keep it as a state's responsibility whether or not they have it.

Don't like the Death Penalty? Write to your legislators and try and change it.

quote:

Originally posted by Speak:
2:if we are doing this because they did it to someone else look in the mirror your no better then they are

Yeah, I would ultimately like to think that I'm better than someone who has killed someone else. For every action there is an equal reaction or consequence.

Don't start to throw the Bible or God around. You know what it says, an eye for an eye.

1. Don't use God in an argument. That only makes you seem like someone who has no real reason. Besides, some people don't believe in God -points to self-.

2.Heh. So me, a someone who hasn't taken a life and is trying to save some is no better than some sarden cracknob who took away the life of an innocent person? Yeah, okay then.

3. Yeah. No rebutle, because this is just one dumb statement.

4. What the hell?

5. Okay. So while the murdered person has lost their life, the other, murdering bastard is sentenced to life. Life in a prison, where every day he/she is fed, clothed, and let out of the cell to play video games for an hour. Nice tradeoff. Oh, and the feeling guilty thing? It compensates for nothing.

Bigred2007, welcome to YN. I recommend that you don't post any personal information on the boards, such as your first name. I tried to edit it out, but it seems it is in your signature. I recommend that you take it down. It's really not safe to post it on the internet. Also, it would be appreciated if you tried to refrain from posting everything in Cap Locks, it gives the impression to other members that you are yelling.

Thank you.

THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT WRONG, THOSE PEOPLE ARE KILLERS. THEY DESERVE TO DIE FOR ALL OF THE PAIN AND SUFFERING THAT THEY HAVE CAUSED. WHY WOULD WE JUST LEAVE THEM TO JUST WASTE AWAY OUR TAX MONEY BY JUST STAYING IN A JAIL CELL WHEN WE CAN JUST KILL THEM AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT THING?

You also have to concider keeping them alive costs money too.

The death penalty costs a lot of money.

Personally, I don't mind shelling out the tax money (has anyone ever even noticed?) to put bastards to sleep. *Shrugs.*

I agree with using the death penalty in some extreme circumstances.

quote:

why wouldn't you care its just another innocent soul you know hell and heaven could fill up fast

Heaven and Hell can't "fill up." They're not on the material plane. There is no "distance" or "filling up" to be had.

Also, innocent is a matter of debate.

In 2000 the state of Illinois found 13 death row inmates innocent. I don't think this was an isolated occurance. Just because a jury convicts someone, doesn't mean the person actually commited the crime. Jurors and police can make mistakes. And DNA can't solve everything. A cigarette at a crime scene with a defendants DNA doesn't mean they commited the crime, it means they smoked a cigarette. As the Illinois case shows, the system is not fool-proof. I would rather have hundreds of brutal murderers sitting in prison for the rest of their lives than put to one innocent person to death.

We all know the death penalty doesn't do a thing. You've got a better chance of staying alive if you're on death row, since the constant appeals mean you'll stay there for 10 or more years before anything actually happens to you.

But even so, I still support it. If you did something bad enough to warrant the death penalty, chances are you're screwed up enough that prison won't do a thing to change you.

quote:

Originally posted by Speak:
ok you know what the death penalty is wwong because
1: We aren't the ones who are supposed to chose who dies or who lives God does
2:if we are doing this because they did it to someone else look in the mirror your no better then they are
3:if they are a threat to the WORLD yes its right but to one person no
4:would you want to die if you did this you wouldn't get to see your family for the next at least 20-40 years
and 5: we should be making them feel guilty for who they killed and why they killed them give them PRISON FOR LIFE!!!

1.) We've got every right to decide who lives and who dies. The only source of the "right to life" comes from human society, not divine law. I can detail this if you like.
2.)Wrong. They killed innocents, we execute the guilty.
3.)So you support killing people like Hitler but not Charels Manson? Why?
4.)What?
5.)Why make them feel guilty? Much better to use them as an example to the rest of society.

why wouldn't you care its just another innocent soul you know hell and heaven could fill up fast

quote:

ok you know what the death penalty is wwong

Probably. However, consistant apathy has caused me not to care.