This Utah law maker wants to bring back execution by firing squad

[Guest]

Holy shit that is ignorant, games are on the internet and is nationless, talk to the Germans about violent music, and many foreign developers move to the US. We haven't had any wars on our soil in more than a century. We also have more invested in humanitarian errors than any other country.

Can you say the same?

Yes because I live in America

[Volbet]

I don't see why not. The person committed a crime. Let the state take back what was stolen. Now, I do believe that what was stolen should be given back, of course. So let the state take back what was stolen and give it back to the person who it was stolen from. 

Taken the stolen item back to it's owner, is not stealing from the thief, it giving the owner his/her property back. This would be more like the state going: "We will, at random times, show up at your house, and take some of your things. And this will keep happening for the rest of your life". Becuase if murder sanction murder, why shouldn't stealing sanction stealing?

 

You're right, it doesn't bring back the person who was murdered, but it does provide some sort of compensation to the family of the murdered person. If that family doesn't want the person executed, then they can say, and the person won't. This happened a few weeks ago, in fact. 

This is a very childish way of looking at justice. Equal payback isn't the right answer. And the families are not in a position to make a rational decision about another persons life. There are way to many emotions for them to do that. 

And "compensation"? What do these families get out of this? Are people really wishing to see the death of another person? They just experienced going through the murder of their own loved one, and now they will have a different family go through the same. 

And if murder is morally wrong, why is it OK for the government to do it? If I murder someone, you would be right to condemn me, me I will equally condemn any government that kills it's own people (or any people for that matter).

You can't make a moral example, with "Do as I say, not as I do".

 

Idea: 

Instead of killing the guy, make him the afflicted family's slave. At least they actually get something then. 

I don't think i would like having a convicted killer living in, or near my home. 

But in theory, I like the idea 

[Tech_Dreamer]

Wait, Who's the criminal here? us or them? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ninja fights for justice nomatter who he faces

[Mooshi]

While I do support the death penalty, I am more in favor for making absolutely sure the person behind bars is in fact guilty. For drug related crime, don't waste prison space or someone's life because they smoke weed. For the harsher drugs, try to get the people into some sort of treatment. For harsher crime like rape or murder, if there isn't video evidence or the equivalent as proof, go straight to DNA ASAP, no exceptions! Eye witness is terribly flawed. what happens if someone was around the crime scene not even a part of it was black and the 'eye witness' was a racist? This method is incredibly flawed. Video evidence, audio or DNA, everything else should be automatically dismissed.

 

Then and only then if someone is proven guilty without a doubt, bring in the firing squad.

[jezza39]

This is a very childish way of looking at justice. Equal payback isn't the right answer. And the families are not in a position to make a rational decision about another persons life. There are way to many emotions for them to do that. 

And "compensation"? What do these families get out of this? Are people really wishing to see the death of another person? They just experienced going through the murder of their own loved one, and now they will have a different family go through the same. 

And if murder is morally wrong, why is it OK for the government to do it? If I murder someone, you would be right to condemn me, me I will equally condemn any government that kills it's own people (or any people for that matter).

You can't make a moral example, with "Do as I say, not as I do".

Great points here, in some Middle Eastern countries, compensation can be given if the family of the victim chooses so and spares the life of the condemned. Here's the thing, you have a right to criminal representation, why? Because being poor or rich shouldn't determine whether or not you go to jail, guilt should. THe rich walk away with their lives, the poor are murdered. 

 

Exactly, how can you say 'Murder is wrong' when the government executes people.

 

 

While I do support the death penalty, I am more in favor for making absolutely sure the person behind bars is in fact guilty. For drug related crime, don't waste prison space or someone's life because they smoke weed. For the harsher drugs, try to get the people into some sort of treatment. For harsher crime like rape or murder, if there isn't video evidence or the equivalent as proof, go straight to DNA ASAP, no exceptions! Eye witness is terribly flawed. what happens if someone was around the crime scene not even a part of it was black and the 'eye witness' was a racist? This method is incredibly flawed. Video evidence, audio or DNA, everything else should be automatically dismissed.

 

You can't rely soley on DNA evidence for rape, because the accused will claim sex was consensual, while the victim will claim it's not. All the DNA proves is sex happened. You should see the effects drugs like heroin have on the public and the user. The users leave needles, probably with HIV or Hepatitis, eventually the users are killed from addictions, dealing heroin is practically manslaughter and I have no problem with heroin dealers spending long stints behind bars. The users are completely wasted, they get aggressive, they murder people, they stumble across roads and cause accidents etc. Heavy drugs have a hugely negative effect on society.

[thebennyboy]

Any form of execution/death sentence is totally wrong. It's outdated and completely inhumane. What if it turns out he/she was innocent a few years down the line? Anyone who supports the death sentence is living in the past. In 1998 the death sentence was completely abolished in the UK, you have to wonder why it was abolished. Also, if somebody committed mass murder or some other crime that was only justified by a life sentence and that person should spend their life living under poor conditions defined by the state. The USA needs to get a grip, the same country that is paving the way for a restricted internet model now wants to bring the death sentence to a new level of low. I apologise if my opinions offended anyone, i am VERY firmly against the death sentence. Bringing this in would be a step backward.