What is your opinion on capital punishment?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
It's true, we also have some of the tightest gun regulation laws in the world and a supposedly conservative party that burns money just like Labor.
 
deep said:


Is this true?


Or just a load of often repeated crap?

Actually, it is true. Many areas of law today stem from principles found in Scripture.

But that was not the intention of BLS's post, but a nice diversion to take another crack at Christianity.
 
Last edited:
originally posted by indra
Perhaps we should let Lyndie Englund at 'em! That will teach 'em!

But really, what would be "just" punishment? Cattle prod to the testicles? The problem is, reasonable, non-sadistic people can't hurt truly vicious people without losing their own humanity. Allowing a person convicted of horrible crimes to have certain minor privileges simply means the rest of society has not become just as brutal


I am not advocating torture. What I mean is it isn't fair that a criminal gets to have certain privileges while they are serving their time. Some people commit evil, vicious crimes and they get to hang around and enjoy themselves. I am not saying they should suffer brutality, but prison shouldn't be a picnic for them.

I see capital punishment and how inmates should be treated as a very complex issue. Some prisoners would say prison was awful for them because they have limited freedoms, while others didn't mind being there because prison is the only place where they had a structured environment (having a curfew, mealtimes,etc.). Some criminals get so used to the prison environment that they can't handle being out in the real world. And they commit crimes deliberately just to go back in.

And criminals who repeatedly commit crimes even after they are let out after serving their sentence is another reason why I think capital punishment might be necessary. Some people cannot be rehabilitated and are completely out-of-control that the death penalty looks like a worthy sentence. (and this is not because they feel safe in a prison environment; they're simply far too mentally ill that they cannot be stopped and are a danger to society) I think the alternative to this would be to literally have those criminals spend the rest of their lives in prison, without parole. I don't understand why criminals are not serving their full sentence. If someone is given life, they should serve a life sentence, not twenty years and several years parole.
 
Against except very rare cases. For example, Timothy McVeigh deserved to die. Osama bin Laden would deserve to die. I know I'm basing it on body count, so be it.

But generally against because there are so many problems with the system. I would highly recommend reading up on the Anthony Porter case. He was 50 hours away from being executed and received a reprieve because the court did not think he was smart enough to understand what was happening to him. The reprieve gave more time to David Protess and a class of journalism students and Northwestern University to investigate the case. They not only proved Porter was not guilty but the found the person who was guilty of the double murder and had him confess on video tape to the crime. A class of college students got Anthony Porter off when his lawyer couldn't. A college class saved Porter from death.

link
Two days later, Porter was released from prison on a recognizance bond and the murder charges against him were officially dropped the next month. Porter thus became the tenth person sentenced to death in Illinois under the present capital punishment law to be released based on innocence.

The cae eventually led to then Gov. George Ryan to outlaw the death penalty in Illinois. The Chicago Tribune ran a great package a few years ago about the death penalty that I would also recommend as required reading.

The system needs to be overhauled.
 
i'm 100% against it. thank god we got rid of it long ago here in Canada. good movie to watch about this "Dead Man Walking" with sean penn and susan surandon.
 
I think it depends on the crime. I believe there are some people who deserve to die. Such as OBL who have committed terrible crimes. When someone committs murder or some other horrible crime, they are making that choice so they should suffer the consequences of their choice.
 
shart1780 said:


Why would that make Jesus a liar?

If I remember right Jesus stopped a stoning(legal capital punishment according the quack who wrote the piece previously quoted) and told those who were free of sin can cast the first stone. Also said to turn the other cheek. Didn't sound like he was all into capital punishment to me.
 
I said an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. She didn't kill anyone, she was a prostitute. I don't think we should kill prostitutes.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


If I remember right Jesus stopped a stoning(legal capital punishment according the quack who wrote the piece previously quoted) and told those who were free of sin can cast the first stone. Also said to turn the other cheek. Didn't sound like he was all into capital punishment to me.

Does this amount to a categorical rejection of all forms of violence?

Does this admonition apply just to vengeful individuals, or does it also apply to state actors who are (for the sake of this argument) dispassionately acting in the interest of the people?

I don't have a particularly strong opinion one way or the other on capital punishment, I'm just asking.
 
Last edited:
I can only answer this personally. Yes it applies to all forms of violence unless pure self defense or the defense of another. Revenge is not defense.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


If I remember right Jesus stopped a stoning(legal capital punishment according the quack who wrote the piece previously quoted) and told those who were free of sin can cast the first stone. Also said to turn the other cheek. Didn't sound like he was all into capital punishment to me.

Why do we always forget that Jesus also told the woman to sin no more.....?
 
nbcrusader said:


Actually, it is true. Many areas of law today stem from principles found in Scripture.

But that was not the intention of BLS's post, but a nice diversion to take another crack at Christianity.

In one of the other threads, someone posted regarding how the OT doesn't support murder.
How is this hypocrisy explained? I can see the religious argument for not supporting abortion, I can see the religious argument for not believing in cold blooded murder. So how about this Jury of Peers playing God? Legally killing someone? And the one thing I really do not understand, the deciding on ending another life. A life that (in religious terms) was a gift from God. You're entering God Territory by deciding you can make this decision to remove someone else's gift.

Can you explain that for me please?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I can only answer this personally. Yes it applies to all forms of violence unless pure self defense or the defense of another. Revenge is not defense.

Ok.

But capital punishment isn't necessarily about individuals seeking for revenge to be implemented institutionally. It's presumably also about deterring others from committing crimes, which is a defensive measure. How effective this sort of deterrence is is open to argument, but it's plausible.
 
The value of capital punishment as a detterent can be seen in the fact the US still has violent crime today. Capital punishment is not a very good detterent for such crimes.
 
speedracer said:


Ok.

But capital punishment isn't necessarily about individuals seeking for revenge to be implemented institutionally. It's presumably also about deterring others from committing crimes, which is a defensive measure. How effective this sort of deterrence is is open to argument, but it's plausible.

Presumptions are dangerous. Ok first of all has murder declined?

But even if it has, my belief against capital punishment has nothing to do with future crime. You can't deter evil with punishment only with love.
 
Back
Top Bottom