The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Who agrees with the Death Penalty. I perosnally would like to see it come back for cases of Murder, Child molesering and so on. I know people say yo can get the wrong guy, but if complex detective worked is first carried out, I belive that all the Sickos should get fried! Whats you guys opinions?
Page:
Gígž wrote:
> Maybe, definetly, if its for cases like that and the police have got
> there right man. Use it for terorism??
Most terrorists seem quite willing to die as it is, hence not exactly going to make a difference is it ? As it is many terrorists are killed whilst being aprehended, and various organisations now have the freedom to 'remove' known terrorists given the chance - as the CIA has done in Afghanistan many a time.
> Maybe, definetly, if its for cases like that and the police have got
> there right man. Use it for terorism??
Most terrorists seem quite willing to die as it is, hence not exactly going to make a difference is it ? As it is many terrorists are killed whilst being aprehended, and various organisations now have the freedom to 'remove' known terrorists given the chance - as the CIA has done in Afghanistan many a time.
RoJ wrote:
> I'm for the death penalty, as long as the criminal is definitely
> guilty.
Yeah 100%
> I'm for the death penalty, as long as the criminal is definitely
> guilty.
Yeah 100%
I'm for the death penalty, as long as the criminal is definitely guilty.
Maybe, definetly, if its for cases like that and the police have got there right man. Use it for terorism??
I'm not in favour of the death penalty at all. No one has the right to end another's life, and that means even a judge and jury. I would prefer a life sentence to mean life, not free in 20 years, no matter how much it costs the state. You do the crime, you do the time, you don't get parole, and you don't get killed, thats a let-off big time in my opinion.
Surely it wouldn't be impossibly to create a system for the sorting of murders.
And wardens shouldn't be needed. Just create a prison controlled by computers. And Magnets. With daily floggings.
And wardens shouldn't be needed. Just create a prison controlled by computers. And Magnets. With daily floggings.
I have to do "the death penalty (capital punishment)" for my general studies project that is to be presented in fron of the entire sixth form. Hurrah.
G-Virus wrote:
> I agree
Me too
> I agree
Me too
@ng3l wrote:
> So you’re saying that a murderer has the right to take someone’s life
> and then has the right to live his life! Totally wrong. NO matter how
> much counselling they have it does not change the fact they have
> ended someone’s life.
No. I'm saying that I no longer believe a death penalty would be any deterrant to the vast majority of criminals. Consideration has to be given to each case indivdually depending on circumstances.
Say:
A man kills another man, on purpose, in a fight.
A woman kills her husband, who hits her, but she purposely planned and comitted his murder.
With a death penalty both could fry/die.
Bet you anything @ng3l that there'd be more people wanting the woman to be spared than the man, and that's because it's impossible to seperate emotions from how people view situations. It's remarkably easy to want the death penalty for people, but not so easy when you find out about the details of actual cases. In addition our legal system often seems to have trouble getting the right person in some cases, say all you want that "we'd always be sure they were guilty" but the jury was sure people were guilty in every miscarriage of justice there has been.
For crimes like Child Molesters/Pedophiles such a harsh penalty would do more harm than good. Say, as some seem to want, you make serial child molesters/pedophiles/abusers face the death penalty. Now suppose that one of these people takes a child, or is abusing one in secret. Do they;
a) release the child/let the child live, with the risk of the death penalty
b) kill them and hide the body ensuring there chance of capture is limited at best.
Yes, many do kill children already, but bring in the death penalty and you'll see it rocket.
In addition to all this I feel it's wrong to write off every single person who has taken a life, it's not always going to be someone you don't want in society. After all, we don't keep soldiers locked up do we ? Soldiers are not murderers (though some would probably debate that) but they certainly takes lives of others, and when necessary they receive help for their experiences.
I think, now, that the better solution to crime is to root out the causes of it where possible - give people a reason not to commit it rather than just building bigger prisons.
> So you’re saying that a murderer has the right to take someone’s life
> and then has the right to live his life! Totally wrong. NO matter how
> much counselling they have it does not change the fact they have
> ended someone’s life.
No. I'm saying that I no longer believe a death penalty would be any deterrant to the vast majority of criminals. Consideration has to be given to each case indivdually depending on circumstances.
Say:
A man kills another man, on purpose, in a fight.
A woman kills her husband, who hits her, but she purposely planned and comitted his murder.
With a death penalty both could fry/die.
Bet you anything @ng3l that there'd be more people wanting the woman to be spared than the man, and that's because it's impossible to seperate emotions from how people view situations. It's remarkably easy to want the death penalty for people, but not so easy when you find out about the details of actual cases. In addition our legal system often seems to have trouble getting the right person in some cases, say all you want that "we'd always be sure they were guilty" but the jury was sure people were guilty in every miscarriage of justice there has been.
For crimes like Child Molesters/Pedophiles such a harsh penalty would do more harm than good. Say, as some seem to want, you make serial child molesters/pedophiles/abusers face the death penalty. Now suppose that one of these people takes a child, or is abusing one in secret. Do they;
a) release the child/let the child live, with the risk of the death penalty
b) kill them and hide the body ensuring there chance of capture is limited at best.
Yes, many do kill children already, but bring in the death penalty and you'll see it rocket.
In addition to all this I feel it's wrong to write off every single person who has taken a life, it's not always going to be someone you don't want in society. After all, we don't keep soldiers locked up do we ? Soldiers are not murderers (though some would probably debate that) but they certainly takes lives of others, and when necessary they receive help for their experiences.
I think, now, that the better solution to crime is to root out the causes of it where possible - give people a reason not to commit it rather than just building bigger prisons.
I agree
Page: