We had a discussion in Sociology Monday morning about that very topic: capital punishment/death penalty. It started out fairly innocent, but as it usually does with controversial topics, it gets fairly heated. However, there were quite a few good points, for both sides of the issue.
The main reason I wanted to start this post was to start a discussion. I know what I believe, which will not change drastically based on others' beliefs, but I wanted to hear the opinions of real people out there. It is difficult to have a discussion like that with other teenagers, since they are hasty to accept someone's opinion when it is different from their own. Also, it tends to get more heated, and personalities (and words) tend to clash. I figured that an online discussion involving more mature individuals would be more civil. So, what do you think?
Just to start the ball rolling, I'll give my opinions on the matter. Killing doesn't justify killing. What kind of message are we sending if we kill people? It's saying that the government can kill people, so it can't be all wrong. It all comes down to the Law of Non-Contradiction, which states "something cannot both be and not be at the same time, in the same way, and in the same respect." We can't say that killing is wrong and then kill someone, even if they are murderers. Plus, for these people, death is WAY too easy. Death is instant, and in today's world, virtually painless. A life-time jail sentence is much more drawn out, and can be painful depending on the prison. However, as my Sociology professor pointed out, some prisons treat the prisoners more like royalty than murderers. I think the prison system needs to buckle down and make prison more like boot camp; we can't torture these people, but we should at least be more firm with them. Maybe if our prisons were more like that, we wouldn't have the problems with overcrowding (and a 90% return rate of prisoners after release). What do y'all think about all that?
So anyways, that's all I have to say about that. Now I want to hear from you. Agree or disagree, let's keep it clean! We are (mostly) family here, so I hope we can keep that in mind. We are all adults and are quite mature, and I don't anticipate any problems, so let your voice be heard! Talk to y'all later!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Killing is not as simple as you state. I reject your neat arguement about promoting no killing and then letting the Government kill. First, we are the Government and we do the killing. I am a part of this Government and I agree with it's goals. Second, the goal for the death penalty is to insure that that peoson does not do it again. They are not going to do it again if they do not exist. They can do it again if they are sentenced to long terms in jail. Why? Because there are prison breaks, snafus in the law in which a guilty person is set free on technicallity or the sentence was just not long enough. The death penalty is a protection for members of society. Our society suffers greatly from serial killers, mad dog killers and those who kill for money. They rightly deserve thsir punishment.
I am in favor of the death penalty. The dumbest argument I ever heard against it is that it is not a deterant. I guarantee 100% that the dead guy will not repeat his crime. When the death penalty is really justified I don't care that killing is too good for them. What is too good for them is exercise rooms, TV and legal representation.
Now, although I think the death penalty is a good thing, I would never vote to put it into practice because I don't believe that our system would ever practice it fairly.
So, while I think government sometimes has the right to kill, who to kill becomes the question and unless they put me in charge, I suppose it is still better to let God be in charge.
I agree with the death penalty. If you kill you deserve to be killed. With the technology that we have today, DNA can cinch a guilty verdict, and when that heppens, there is no mistake. So I think we take way too long (years and years), before the actual execution. There's not going to be any chance that there was a mistake made, so get on with it.
Oh yes, the length of time on Death Row, it is far, far too long. A killer was executed eighteen years after having been found guilty. The extreme liberals kept filing motions for extensions. On the other hand, Timothy McVieh, whom the liberals did not like, was executed shortly after he was sentenced. All sentences should be carried out just as fast. I heard today that if Sadam is found guilty he will be hanged on the same day.
I dread the day that Sadam will be found guilty. That is the day we will again be inundated with that picture of the inside of his mouth.
Ah yes Iraq, what better place could there be to help us calibrate our moral compas.
I don't get it. Today we find out that Sadaam will be hanged for the 3-yr trial that he's had, and over there death sentences must be meted out in 30 days. HOWEVER, he still has lots of crimes to stand trial over, so it will be a long time! How crazy is that??
Post a Comment