CAPITAL PUNISHEMENT-YES OR NO?

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 7:06 am
Hard question, I'll go with no.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 7:07 am
REGARDING COMMENT I READ HERE AND REFERE TO SOME HARD CRIMES, AND PEOPLE ASKED FOR DEATH PENALTY, I WOULD LOVE TO MOVEA TOPIC ABOUT NOT DEATH PENALTY ONLY , BUT ABOUT OF PUNISHEMENT AS ABOUT ONE SOCIAL CATEGORY , AS WELL AS ABOUT LAW AND POLICE SYSTEM, WHO FAIL SO MANY TIMES TO ACT PROPERLY, AND WORSE TO PREVENT.
SO MANY TIMES HAVE MET CASES WHERE CRIMINALS WERE MORE PROTECTED THAN VICTIMS, BUT ALSO MET CASES WHEN INOCENTE PEOPLE WERE JUDGED AND PUNISHED FOR CRIME DID NOT COMMIT!
HOW TO SOLVE THIS?'

CAPITAL CRIME..WHELL LET ME EXPLAIN A TERM IN SHORT-AS ONCE DEATH PENALTY WAS PERFORMED BY CUTING HEAD OFF (DECAPITATION-CAPITA-HEAD IN LATIN)WE GOT A NAME FOR IT THIS WAY AND WE KEEP IT, THOUGH METHODS OF TAKING LIFE AWAY ARE DIFFERENT TODAY IN COUNTRIES WHERE DEATH PENALTY IS STILL PRESENT.


At the dawn of the 21st century, the death penalty is considered by most civilized nations as a cruel and inhuman punishment. It has been abolished de jure or de facto by 106 nations, 30 countries have abolished it since 1990. However, the death penalty continues to be commonly applied in other nations. China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the United States and Iran are the most prolific executioners in the world.

While international documents have restricted and in some cases even banned the death penalty, its application is still not against customary international law. Much debate continues in the US as to whether it constitutes an appropriate punishment, at least to the most heinous crimes. In recent years, the debate has been further fueled by the use of new technologies which have shown that a large proportion of people sentenced to death are, indeed, innocent.



.


At the dawn of the 21st century, the death penalty is considered by most civilized nations as a cruel and inhuman punishment. It has been abolished de jure or de facto by 106 nations, 30 countries have abolished it since 1990. However, the death penalty continues to be commonly applied in other nations. China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the United States and Iran are the most prolific executioners in the world.

While international documents have restricted and in some cases even banned the death penalty, its application is still not against customary international law. Much debate continues in the US as to whether it constitutes an appropriate punishment, at least to the most heinous crimes. In recent years, the debate has been further fueled by the use of new technologies which have shown that a large proportion of people sentenced to death are, indeed, innocent.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 7:42 am
You are smoking hot today, Cebelica! Great Discussion Topic - Care to repost in Human Rights Network?

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 7:53 am
I'm going to have to agree with you on this one Cebelica sweetie. Your right on all accounts gi na li i {my friend}.
I Love your articles, good job, keep them coming. I have noted and forwarded.
Blessings...
FreeSpirit...

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:07 am
Yes.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:14 am
Capital Punishment is the Government
killing people who kill people in order
to show that killing people is wrong.
A definite NO!

Thanks, Cebelica!
noted

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:16 am
Yes SOB..lol am smoking hot, perhaps got dead??!! But dont worry, will take a rest! Otherwise will be fired here at my work!
And ok, will respost it on HUMAN RIGHT too, I think is good topic, and in fact, contains much more subject, that it is visible at first sight!!

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:16 am
I think instead of the death penalty there should be life sentences that really do mean life.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:18 am
my answer is no too, but will wait for a while to see other oppinio, so can post better answer!

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:18 am
Noted-50/50 depending on the crime. Thanks for posting!

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:39 am
This one is hard as I have seen and experienced the families of homicide victims, rape, etc. My belief is that the punishment should fit the crime. Maybe a bit extreme but after witnessing the suffering of the victims it's what I believe in irregardless of how harsh it may seem.

Good article to raise discussion with Cebelica ! TY Mark

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 8:53 am
I have to say NO. Every human being has a right to find peace before they pass on to another journey in life. Is is a passionate question for us all. I don't personally think 2 wrongs make a right. I believe in teaching our children compassion, forgiveness, and to have them understand the true meaning of love thy neighbor as thy self. NO it is not easy to turn the other cheek, but it is healing for the ones left behind in sorrow. The worst a human being can have in their own hearts is hatred, violence and lack of empathy. Do not become what they are also. Be better for the memories of the one that was taken so cruelly...just my opinion folks..Peace and love, Jaylena ...noted and thank you for the e mail.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 9:01 am
In the most agregious cases, where someone has witnessed a murder and the murderer has been found guilty by a judge and jury, only then would I agree to the death penalty, after other possibilities are also considered. Was this person still a threat to society,there are so many variables to consider that the sentencing should also be set down after careful consideration by a jury.

When a person has been found guilty under the guise of guesswork, then I'd say NO, because society would be guilty of murder should that person be actually innocent.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 10:07 am
There are crimes that we all feel are so repugnant that it seems that only the ultimate sentence fits the the bill.

The problem I have with that line is that the ultimate is not always right and once a person has been killed it is too late to go back and say we got it wrong. Also as I see it many of those on death row in the USA are sentnenced to two terms...the over-long wait on death row with the final death sentence. Is it right to keep people in prison for a life sentence before then executing them. It is a form of torture to keep people so long...but you will say that it is so that they can exaust all lines of appeal.

Ultimately execution is many in the US for murder. Is it right for a murderer to forfiet his/her life for what they did to their victims. Natural justice seems to suggest it should be so. Having had a member of our family murdered I feel very strongly though that we should not execute people. How can we say we are not civilised that the murderer if we say that killing people in certain situations is right. Let us be clear. The Law of Moses and hence probably God stated that you shall not kill. That is good enough for me.

So my answer is that we cannot and we must not kill others. So put me down as NO, No and NO.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 10:10 am
Gremlins attacked my third para above. Sentence should read "How can we say that we are more civilised than the murderer if we say that killing people in certain situations is right."

Sorry about that.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 10:30 am
Jaylena, while I am responding to what you wrote, I am not responding to you specifically, just the points you bring up which many others have in the past.

> Every human being has a right to find peace before they pass on to another > journey in life.
If they choose to violate the rights of others, they give up their rights.

> I don't personally think 2 wrongs make a right.
What part of a consequence to someone's wrong coach, makes the response to that choice that they know in advance exists, a wrong? THEY KNEW, before doing what they should not have done, that there would be a consequence. It's not like someone ran up to them and said, "Surprise!"

> I believe in teaching our children compassion, forgiveness,
Agreed, but no part of compassion nor forgiveness means there is a lack of consequence. Every choice has a consequence, even if the only one who knows about it is "you".

> and to have them understand the true meaning of love thy neighbor as thy
> self.
Loving thy neighbor as thyself also involves protecting the innocent. I wouldn't allow someone to murder my family members nor would I allow them to murder my neighbors. It's not just the criminal that is "thy neighbor"; it is the victim [or potential victim] and their families as well.

> NO it is not easy to turn the other cheek, but it is healing for the ones > left behind in sorrow.
So let every rapist, molester, murderer, etc., have at everyone else? There was a prisoner in one of the hard core prisons not far from where I live that was put in jail for murder. While in jail, he murdered a nurse and a female prison guard. Turn the other cheek? How about the number of repeat offenders that are rapists and child molesters. Turn the other cheek? They'll get over it?

> The worst a human being can have in their own hearts is hatred, violence
> and lack of empathy.
Putting someone to death does not mean there is hatred in the hearts of the individuals doing it. A police officer doesn't necessarily hate the person they have to kill to protect the innocent. Nor does a soldier. Not does an executioner. Likewise for violence or the lack of empathy. I don't believe for one moment that all police officers and/or soldiers get up every day saying "I want to blow someone away today." It often times needs to be done, but that is because they have sympathy AND empathy for the victims or the prevention of their being victims. Stop looking at it only from the viewpoint of the criminals.

> Do not become what they are also.
I don't go out looking for someone to kill, rape, molest, rob, beat, etc.. However, I would be more than willing to prevent someone from doing it. If they can't function as a human being in society because they feel their right to kill, rape, molest, rob, beat, etc., superseded the rights of their victim, why is preventing that from happening, [including prison workers], making me like them? I WANT VICTIMS to be NON VICTIMS. For some in the criminal population, that means death. While not all murderers are repeat offenders, there is a consequence to their [wrong] choice. It doesn't make me like them to enforce that consequence that they themselves have chosen.

Thoughts anyone?

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:04 am
Thank you David for your thoughts. Edward great points you have made here also. I might add one more thing..Maybe it is about our own souls of what we can and cannot live within our own hearts to bare. What is our own exceptance of killing, of murder of saying it is okay to take this life. It also may be about if you go in the direction of spiritual or the law of the land...maybe?.Peace,Jaylena

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:05 am
David,

The law of Moses, [God's Word], Exodus 20:13: "Thou shalt not kill." is actually more accurately translated "Thou shalt not commit murder." See the following link for more on this:

http://bibletools.org//index.cfm/fuseaction/Lexicon.show/ID/H7523/ratsach.htm

Aside from that, Scripture MUST agree with Scripture, (and it must be taken in context). Moses also penned, [God's Word], Genesis 9:5-6: "And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

God said it. It is in context. Is that good enough for you?

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:10 am
ok here goes If my daughter was beaten raped killed to be honest with you I would more than likly try my best to get him myself. Sorry but, I can not lie, She's my only child and has 4 childern, I would totaly loose it. For turning the other cheek is when he rape and beat her, then killing her thats the other slap. I think anybody here that has a son or daughter and this happen to them would want to do this too or see to it that that person never gets a chance to do it to someone elses family. Just like Jessica Lang in Florida the man who rape killed buired her next to her home. A child molester. He got the death penalty but they are on hold. Thanks Cebelica noted

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:16 am
Is it in nature of humankind to try to abuse every system?! If not so, we should never exit Eden, for in all all religious books are given superior ethic rules, which are basic for society functioning and personal happiness! And great majority of this world is claiming on Faith and God and Gods rules given in Holly books, and yet we are making countless human laws over it, and have so much misery! So, what it tells about us! Thank you!

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:18 am
Bible is full of contradictory rules. On one side -eye for eye,tooth for tooth and on the other -forgive and ofer the other side of face, or who hits you with stone, you hit him with peace of bread..

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:29 am
What is the use of a death penalty? Does it improve the criminal statistic?
No it does not the countries without death penalty do not have higher crime rates but lower! And i dont think that it works better than prison time!
Or maybe work camps? Let them do something usefull for the society...
Killing someone on purpose is allways murder if a government does that than its no better than if normal murders do it...

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:41 am
I know that I am human and that being so IF my child was treated so cruelly I know I would have anger, hatred and even want to hurt that person myself. If I choose to do this I am sure knowing how I am as a person I would sob and cry because of what act I had committed upon another. If we choose to become that..we have lost a piece of our very own soul I believe. What price do we choose to pay for vengeance? We have to be very careful about what we may except and become because of what we do in our society with each other.OR we may become something we don't want to see in the mirror ...Jaylena

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:55 am
Vengence is not good - that I agree as it is based on emotions/feelings, and as we all know, emotions/feelings "lie". Capital punishment is not something you do based on emotions/feelings, but on intellect. A decision based not on the moment, but on consequence of action. Remember, nothing would happen to these people if they did not choose to do wrong.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 11:59 am
A few people mentioned keeping in mind the victims of the criminals. What I don't understand is how would it help the victims or the friends and family of the victims to get revenge? I don't think that revenge helps anything. It might make them feel a little better but it doesn't undo the crime that was commited. If the person who commited the crime is dangerous to society then it makes sense to keep them in prison. but why is killing them necessary or helpful over keeping them in prison for the rest of their life? Plus it costs a whole lot of extra money to give someone the death penalty than to keep them locked up until they die on their own. Is it worth taxpayer's dollars to kill people? Even if it's to kill people who commited horrible crimes. Some people think that making the convicted person live the rest of their life in jail is worse than killing them. if you're looking for the worst punishment then should they decide based on what the convicted doesn't want?
So I say: no.

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 12:07 pm
Dear Jessica! Jail is like hell for people like Fritzl or childabusers!
One day in prison is more expensive thany any death penalty no matter how you kill! If you hang them like Sadam how much does that cost? or one bullit or injection? I think its not about the cost! Its about the fact that the death penalty has no effect on crime rates! So forget it and act like civillized nations! Only nations that are killing are killing!
Just look at the list the USA, China, Iran all horrible regimes!

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 12:43 pm
Great work Cebelica! Great points Edward :)

Tuesday May 13, 2008, 12:51 pm
If we don't have the death penalty how about life on the chain gang. maybe having to work while in prison, they can pay for their life sentance. Grow their own food build more prisons to house all those with life sentances.