Jump to content

State-sponsored Killings


Pragmatopian

State-sponsored killings  

44 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest chunkylover
I was joking. Simply because I find such trials as Nuremberg to courts with no justifiable authority other than the prosecutors being victors does not mean I think they should be let off scot free.

 

Ah, thanks for clearing that up - i assumed all of your posts were jokes to be honest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest chunkylover
I just assumed you weren't that clever, being honest.

 

 

Depends what you mean by clever - I've had a good education but have come to accept that a nobel prize for any subject is unlikely................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just assumed you weren't that clever, being honest.

Depends what you mean by clever - I've had a good education but have come to accept that a nobel prize for any subject is unlikely................

Never give up, you are still in with a chance. They give Nobel prizes to people who have often done Sweet FA these days.

post-2251-1258846402_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But one question to all those who are against capital punishment, are you all saying those convicted of genocide and other such crimes should not be executed, if so the you are saying the neuremburg trial should have only sentenced the guilty to a period of imprisonment and then allowed them to be released if the show remorse.

Yes there should be a good protection system to eliminate the chance of innocent being executed, but in events where there are several witnesses to the crime or several pieces of evidence that show without doubt only this person commited the crime then they can can be executed without any doubt occuring as to the innocence.

 

I agree - this must be a first. :)

 

However I voted wrong and nulled my vote .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But one question to all those who are against capital punishment, are you all saying those convicted of genocide and other such crimes should not be executed, if so the you are saying the neuremburg trial should have only sentenced the guilty to a period of imprisonment and then allowed them to be released if the show remorse.

Yes there should be a good protection system to eliminate the chance of innocent being executed, but in events where there are several witnesses to the crime or several pieces of evidence that show without doubt only this person commited the crime then they can can be executed without any doubt occuring as to the innocence.

The whole point of justice for me is that it is about not decending to the levels of those who abuse justice.

 

I can remember exactly when I realized capital punishment was wrong. Prior to that I'd had an attitude that murderers etc should be executed and definitely would have agreed that genociders should be killed and probably with little mercy, but one day at university I read an Amnesty Amnesty flier - it was about torture and the deathpenalty - I knew in my gut that torture was wrong and counter productive. The article made the parallel that if it was wrong to string someone up to torture them to extract information from them, how much wronger was it to string someone up to kill them as an example to others and to satisfy feelings of revenge.

 

Jimbms you make a very good argument, but with one serious defect - there is no way whatsoever that any genocider, sociopathic multiple murderer etc should be released, no matter how remorseful they are. In fact my attitude is that if such a person wished to be released then they could not be remorseful enough - catch 22 I realize, but if such a person wishes to exress their remorse then they can do it from prison through writing and such. That penetence will not give them release, but could give them dignity.

 

Prison needs to reflect the dignity the prisoner expresses - Mandela in the last half decade of his imprisonment had his dignity reciprocated, creating a situation where reconciliation was possible. Mandela had orchistrated a terrorist campaign - but over the period of his imprisionment circumstances changed which enabled a peaceful solution to emerge.

 

The apartheid regime was vastly injust, but its court system does seem to have been able to have maintained more dignity. Mandela expected to be executed for his actions - he and most comentators, and especially the political elite of the Afrikaana apartheid state, were shocked when he was imprisoned for life. Now the little justice that existed in that court case shines clear.

 

The death penalty has no place for dignity - and that removes any justice in such an act.

 

Life imprisonment is a real punishment, but one which allows those sentenced to it to attempt to restore their dignity. In the worst cases that will NOT result in any release, but will allow for a person to live out their life in penetence - for others penetence will result in release allowing them to return to society.

 

The system we have isn't perfect and is abused, but I feel it is far superior to any grubby system which takes life in a flawed ideal of justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are times when capital punishment is right and proper in order for justice to be extracted on behalf of the victim and their family.

 

There is NOTHING WRONG in wanting to take revenge for a wrong having been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are times when capital punishment is right and proper in order for justice to be extracted on behalf of the victim and their family.

 

There is NOTHING WRONG in wanting to take revenge for a wrong having been done.

 

And yet there is something wrong with acting upon that want.

 

an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are times when capital punishment is right and proper in order for justice to be extracted on behalf of the victim and their family.

 

There is NOTHING WRONG in wanting to take revenge for a wrong having been done.

 

And yet there is something wrong with acting upon that want.

 

an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

 

Those who had not thus far taken an eye would think twice before doing something that might cause someone to loose one of theirs.

 

It is GOOD morality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...