Someone who would kill a mother and rape her child IS less than people. In fact, they're less than human.
For those arguing the merits of the death penalty based on costs, you may find this of interest. Basically, it costs the states more to execute someone than to imprison them for life. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29552692/
I disagree with the death penalty. I prefer the gulag/labor camps. Sentence them to life of hard work with no pay, and barely enough food and cloth. This way you get free labor. If there is nothing to build or use them for, they can be executed.
I am against the death penalty, it is a criminal act in itself, committed by the state instead of an individual. Taking a life should never be considered a good thing, no matter how bad that individual is in your opinion.
If the law in a given jurisdiction authorizes the death penalty, then, by definition, it is NOT a criminal act. The killing of another individual is not a crime under a great many circumstances, such as in defense of another person, or the prevention of a felonious criminal act, etc.
It may not be an illegal crime indeed, but in my opinion every murder is a crime. I do acknowledge circumstances. For instance, if someone would rape my daughter I would kill that guy. Doesn't mean it's not a crime.
An "illegal" crime? lol There's no such thing as a "legal" crime - those two concepts are diametrically opposed to one another. And you don't get to decide what is or is not a crime. That is defined in the law, and the law says such acts are not criminal. You don't get to make up the definition of words to suit your own purposes.
When I wrote that I knew I should have put "illegal" between "'s. And I do make up my own laws and I do have my own ideas. Maybe I used the wrong words, but I just wanted to give the general idea and I guess the general idea I wanted to transmit is clear.
well it might not be such a bad thing if it were possible to determine reliably who did what. but there's no way 12 people, or any other number can do this by debating over it. also of course, the state murdering a murderer is still murder. so i see no logic in supporting it and both morality and logic in opposing it.
Exactly. They are applying penalty based on their own morals rather than on a killer ones. Children are assholes. Thats why people go to jail for jacking off in some countries...
No human being has a right to take the life of another, ever. We murder people for murdering people to show people that murdering people is wrong. If someone harms my loved one, do I want them dead? Sure, that's natural. But in the end no person has the right to take another life. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
So, in your view, if I witness someone about to take another person's life, I don't have the "right" to stop them from doing it by taking their life? I beg to differ.
ok. that sounds a bit like what hitler did.send the strongest ta work for them and kill off the weakest. so in my opinion in that case ,the death penalty would be more compassionate.