Who killed Mr. Boddy in the study and with what?: the great debate topic™®

[Nonnel]

i understand morality is subjective and arbitrary, but obviously there's some basic concept of good and bad, otherwise what are laws based off of? robbery is against the law because it's wrong to take other peoples' property. without morality, it could just as well be legal.

It prevents them from killing or severely harming any more people while incarcerated, and it also removes the risk of them escaping to go out and kill again.

serial killers are kept in maximum security prison cells for this very reason

[Ad Bot]

[IkeTheGeneric]

But then what qualifies someone to say who deserves to die? The issue is that every person has a different opinion on what warrants life and death, and leaving it up to a jury of 12 people and a judge is not enough.

Correction: You don't think it's enough. I think if they've made their way through the entire justice system and are still cannot be rehabilitated in any way shape or form, there's really no point into keeping them in prison for the rest of their life. It's a waste of our and their time.

Either way, if you don't give a forget about morals and are willing to kill a criminal, you are no different than the criminal in question.

I'd say if the act doesn't land me in prison for life, then I am definitely different from the criminal in question. Either way, there's a pretty loving big difference in advocating for the death penalty and actually wanting to straight up kill criminals. What are you smoking to believe otherwise?

[Red Spy]

What makes them worthy of death,

Probably if they've had a past criminal record and how they murdered the person

Not every murder should be deserving of the death penalty though

what makes you worthy of life?

Is this just a clever way to tell me to kill myself

Humans cannot be the judge of another human's life.

Should we have killed John Wayne Gacy? Or Ted Bundy?

[Insert Name Here²]

serial killers are kept in maximum security prison cells for this very reason

There's still that risk of them being able to get out or harm someone when the chance comes. Plus there is the cost of supporting them for 20+ years highly outnumbers the cost to put them down, which they'd be deserving after killing multiple people and then some.

If it was just a single murder or rape, then there is no need for death penalty. The death penalty is only served to the worst mass killers and terrorists, which in my opinion are perfectly fine the way they are. Death penalties are not given to single murder cases ( looking at you Path, stop exaggerating stuff to prove a false point. )

[Perry]

Correction: You don't think it's enough. I think if they've made their way through the entire justice system and are still cannot be rehabilitated in any way shape or form, there's really no point into keeping them in prison for the rest of their life. It's a waste of our and their time.


I'd say if the act doesn't land me in prison for life, then I am definitely different from the criminal in question. Either way, there's a pretty loving big difference in advocating for the death penalty and actually wanting to straight up kill criminals. What are you smoking to believe otherwise?

The issue i'm trying to address is that judging someone's life as a human is impossible. Humans are flawed by nature and are influenced by personal bias, beliefs, emotions, etc. Those will always get in the way of the final decision, and results in an unfair or unjust taking of someone's life.

Advocating for the death penalty is different from directly carrying out the execution, sure, but as a supporter you are directly leading towards their death. You may not be the one who injects them with lethal poison, but you and other people are allowing it to happen. That's the issue; you can't dehumanize a human under any circumstances. You can't advocate for murder and be against murder.

[Red Spy]

judging someone's life as a human is impossible.

Bull

[IkeTheGeneric]

i understand morality is subjective and arbitrary, but obviously there's some basic concept of good and bad, otherwise what are laws based off of? robbery is against the law because it's wrong to take other peoples' property. without morality, it could just as well be legal.

Laws are based off of prosecuting deeds that are directly harmful to society. Wantom theft and homicide is illegal because of such. Not because it's bad in an evil sense, but because not prosecuting it would harm innocent people's way of life.

Without morality, it would still be loving illegal to steal other people's stuff.

[Perry]

Bull

How do you fairly and objectively judge someone's life then?

[Red Spy]

Path seems to forget that murder is an illegal killing

How do you fairly and objectively judge someone's life then?

Judge them by the crime they committed?

[Nonnel]

There's still that risk of them being able to get out or harm someone when the chance comes. Plus there is the cost of supporting them for 20+ years highly outnumbers the cost to put them down, which they'd be deserving after killing multiple people and then some.

It costs $1.26 million to go through the legal trouble of euthanizing someone (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty), and between $14,603 and $60,076 to keep individual prisoners per year. (http://thecrimereport.org/2012/02/13/2012-02-the-high-cost-of-prisons-using-scarce-resources-wise/)

[Perry]

Judge them by the crime they committed?

Is killing someone a crime?

[Red Spy]

Is killing someone a crime?

murder is an illegal killing

[Perry]

So are you saying that there's legal killing and illegal killing? What differentiates the two?

[Sheepocalypse]

Life in prison should just equal death sentence. No need to waste tax dollars.

[Red Spy]

So are you saying that there's legal killing and illegal killing? What differentiates the two?

Why don't we prosecute soldiers who've killed terrorists?