[News] Alabama carries out first nitrogen gas execution

[portlock seagull]

Because civilization?

That’s meaningless. America is still a civilisation. China, India, Singapore…they all are, just with the death penalty. Wanting revenge is perfectly human desire, especially when someone take the life of another. I can understand why people want an eye for an eye. I don’t agree with, you’re already making the mistake of judging me as pro simply because I can see the other side of the argument. Anyway, the poster said it doesn’t work as a deterrent (inferring therefore there’s no point having). Even if that’s true, people might still want capital punishment for other reasons. Like revenge. That’s all. The argument isn’t solely about whether it’s a deterrent or not. Way more complex than that.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Just to clarify your position, is it against capital punishment per se or concerns over possible miscarriages of justice?

I think it's fairly clear. I'm against it because it has been factually proven that it is not a deterrent and it would result in innocent people being killed, time and time again, so there is no reason for it and many reasons against it.

You obviously agree that it is not a deterrent and innocent people would be killed, so maybe you could explain why you support it so ardently

 

[portlock seagull]

Because it’s a thicko mentality, an eye for an eye solves nothing and much as the vengeance might make some ‘feel’ better it won’t in the long run, there’s not one major world issue that would be solved with the ‘eye for an eye’ philosophy

There’s been thousands and thousands of people who have been wrongly incarcerated for years only to eventually be acquitted or proven innocent, the death penalty is a crime against humanity and the fact it still proceeds in ‘civilised’ countries like the US (I use the term loosely) is absolutely deplorable.

Stay on point. None of that is relevant. People may want revenge as a reason for being Pro. That’s all. It’s a very human instinct. You and I don’t need to agree with. But I understand why in some cultures it’s more punishment-centric.

 

[WATFORD zero]

That’s meaningless. America is still a civilisation. China, India, Singapore…they all are, just with the death penalty. Wanting revenge is perfectly human desire, especially when someone take the life of another. I can understand why people want an eye for an eye. I don’t agree with, you’re already making the mistake of judging me as pro simply because I can see the other side of the argument. Anyway, the poster said it doesn’t work as a deterrent (inferring therefore there’s no point having). Even if that’s true, people might still want capital punishment for other reasons. Like revenge. That’s all. The argument isn’t solely about whether it’s a deterrent or not. Way more complex than that.

It really isn't complex. It's not a deterrent and innocent people will be killed, proven time and time again, so no logical reason at all

But revenge ? And revenge carried out in the name of complete strangers ? I think you may have something there

 

[brighton_dave]

I only posted this a page ago but you obviously didn't read that far back, so but here are cases where it is 'cut and dried'

Insightful.
I stand by my point, where if you can categorically prove an animal has committed the offence, then justice/revenge is best served by the life being taken. Are you doubting whether we know who killed Lee Rigby? Do you think they should be allowed out?
Being released for being well behaved is sick. The only case of release should be if there is a miscarriage of justice, I really don't understand why anyone would think otherwise.

 

[portlock seagull]

Because most people have a mental age greater than the average toddler

That’s fact. But how does that have anything to do with this thread?!

 

[WATFORD zero]

Insightful.
I stand by my point, where if you can categorically prove an animal has committed the offence, then justice/revenge is best served by the life being taken. Are you doubting whether we know who killed Lee Rigby? Do you think they should be allowed out?
Being released for being well behaved is sick. The only case of release should be if there is a miscarriage of justice, I really don't understand why anyone would think otherwise.

But you must be able to see that releasing a corpse after a miscarriage of justice and a mistaken death sentence could be .......... problematic

All those people that Ian Hislop pointed out would have been mistakenly killed before the miscarriage was discovered.

 

[Is it PotG?]

But you must be able to see that releasing a corpse after a miscarriage of justice and a mistaken death sentence could be .......... problematic

All those people that Ian Hislop pointed out would have been dead before the miscarriage was discovered.

Is your issue with the death penalty per se or possible miscarriages of justice?

 

[brighton_dave]

You illegally commited murder.

So we're going to legally commit murder?

You of sick mind shot someone with a gun 34 years ago.

So we of sound mind will use Nitrogen gas and asphyxiate you over 25 minutes, 34 years later.

What a waste of money funding the chap for 34 years.
Call me sick, but if it were a member of my family viciously killed, I'd like to see them suffer in pain.
I'm actually very Liberal with most things, but my god if there is zero doubt (see Lee Rigby) and it was purposeful then I think a clean bullet to the head isn't enough.

 

[dangull]

The USA has a lot of deeply religious Christians as well. Not sure that the teachings of Jesus is complicit with revenge or punishment killing of the people he made.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I think you may have a problem with your keyboard as you seem to be repeating yourself ? \My answer hasn't changed

Is your issue with the death penalty per se or possible miscarriages of justice?

I think it's fairly clear. I'm against it because it has been factually proven that it is not a deterrent and it would result in innocent people being killed, time and time again, so there is no reason for it and many reasons against it.

You obviously agree that it is not a deterrent and innocent people would be killed, so maybe you could explain why you support it so ardently

 

[Is it PotG?]

The USA has a lot of deeply religious Christians as well. Not sure that the teachings of Jesus is complicit with revenge or punishment killing of the people he made.

An eye for an eye" is a commandment found in the Book of Exodus 21:23–27 expressing the principle of reciprocal justice measure for measure.

 

[Is it PotG?]

I think you may have a problem with your keyboard as you seem to be repeating yourself ? \My answer hasn't changed

Still no answer.

 

[portlock seagull]

It really isn't complex. It's not a deterrent and innocent people will be killed, proven time and time again, so no logical reason at all

But revenge ? And revenge carried out in the name of complete strangers ? I think you may have something there

What do you mean by “I think you may have something there?” Is that meant as an insult?

Regardless:
It’s not a deterrent - yes, I knew that.
Innocent people have died - yes, I knew that too

But those who believe in capital punishment do so for lots of reasons, revenge also being a potential and very natural one. What’s so hard to understand?

 

[dangull]

An eye for an eye" is a commandment found in the Book of Exodus 21:23–27 expressing the principle of reciprocal justice measure for measure.

That's a statement from the old testament which is more of Jewish origin. Before Jesus and the new testament which most christians believe in.

 

[brighton_dave]

Genuine question.

Your child's is violently stabbed and has their head chopped off by machete? The offender is caught in the act and there is CCTV too.
Are you happy for the offender to spend life in prison and to be released for being well behaved?
Or would you prefer their life to be taken, so there is never any chance of them doing it on release? In their life being taken you wouldn't want to see the suffer?
If there's an issue with how, it's done them let the family decide.

 

[brighton_dave]

But you must be able to see that releasing a corpse after a miscarriage of justice and a mistaken death sentence could be .......... problematic

All those people that Ian Hislop pointed out would have been mistakenly killed before the miscarriage was discovered.

Proved beyond doubt as per Lee Rigby. I reiterate, I said case by case, so the current system, albeit taking the life of those, such where there is zero chance of a miscarriage of justice.
I get your stance, if a member of your family is slautered, you'd be happy to see the killer released to live out their life & have a chance to carry out the same crime.

 

[US Seagull]

Genuine question.

Your child's is violently stabbed and has their head chopped off by machete? The offender is caught in the act and there is CCTV too.
Are you happy for the offender to spend life in prison and to be released for being well behaved?
Or would you prefer their life to be taken, so there is never any chance of them doing it on release? In thr life being taken you wouldn't want to see the suffer?
If there's an issue with how, it's done them let the family decide.

That is not justice. That is mob rule. This is why we have laws. To dispassionately dispense justice.

 

[Is it PotG?]

That is not justice. That is mob rule. This is why we have laws. To dispassionately dispense justice.

To tell them off if they've been very naughty, take their toys off of them.

 

[brighton_dave]

That is not justice. That is mob rule. This is why we have laws. To dispassionately dispense justice.

I'm a firm believer and advocate of fairness.
Allowing Lee Rigby's killers to sit in a cell each day and one day be released is something I don't see as fair.
There would be a queue of people willing to do the necessary with them.
Justice where justice is due, retribution where there are such vile acts of crime. Who is the justice for, the killer?
I'd like to think I'm being balanced with this.
I'm giving up with replying. We all have different views and aren't changing one another's by continuous debate.