RE: The Washington Sniper —- Death???
>Interesting that nothing has been heard from the “no death
>penalty” brigade to my questions in post 21.
>
>I don’t want to argue with Geforce and others, but if they
>oppose the death penalty, how do they respond to my
>questions?
>
>Or don’t they have any answers?
>
>Regards
>
>Wombat
Okey Wombat I’ll answer your questions, as most of the members on this forum know, I oppose the death penalty for some main resaons. I’ll post them in a few houres.
Your post 21:
To those who are opposed to the death penalty, I must ask the following questions:
1. What penalty should apply, if not death?
2. If life imprisonment is your recommended penalty, why should society be expected to house, feed, clothe, administer medical aid and in many cases, protect prisoners from other violent prisoners, for many years, at massive cost?
3. Why is the death penalty condemned on the grounds that this is the 21st century, which means we should all be civilised and not result to barbaric punishment for serious crimes?
The severity, level of violence exhibited, and degree of planning and pre-meditation that goes into some serious crimes today, far outweighs the nature and severity of crimes in the past. Today’s worst crimes are totally uncivilised, why deal with them by administering “civilised” punishment?
I have asked this question before, with no answer received, so I ask it again – how would those of you who oppose the death penalty, punish Bin Laden if he was captured and it was proven beyond any doubt that he was the planner and instigator of the WTC attacks?
Regards
Wombat
My answer to them:
1. What penalty should apply, if not death?
imprsonment, not even for life. 10 – 20 years.
2. If life imprisonment is your recommended penalty, why should society be expected to house, feed, clothe, administer medical aid and in many cases, protect prisoners from other violent prisoners, for many years, at massive cost?
Because it is their duty. By the way their has been studies done in the US which had the outcome that it was even more expensive to go to all the legal prositures and all the other stuff then to lock up that same human for live.
3. Why is the death penalty condemned on the grounds that this is the 21st century, which means we should all be civilised and not result to barbaric punishment for serious crimes?
Not a good argument by it self. I agree with you treir. But you have to realise that we have come a long way here in Europe. From tortire, excution by burning for whichcraft etc. Live in prison for stealing bread, many inocent people dead.
hope this gives you an answer. I’ll put my reasons for opposing here today or tomorrow.
regards,
jw
Sign In
