Blindness Cave

[gibsondodds]

Should it be reinstated?

[Loneliness Unbroken]

I don't think it should be. I think a life term in a maximum security prison is worse.

[Jack]

I think people who kill other people should be publicly executed for all to see. The world we live in right now is so lax, you can get away with anything nowadays. Take drinking and driving, you just have to kill someone when you're drunk and you're out in two years. What's that? I say if someone actually plans a murder than the state should plan theirs, with everyone watching it on late night television.

[Brown Desk]

If I may make a literary suggestion, you should read Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes. I believe you would be in agreement with many things he has to say.

[berryfairy10]

So the state whould be allowed plan a murder?.. Is this justified? Pardon the saying, but 2 wrongs don't make a right. Taking another person's life is unforgiveable. So why should the government be capable of making a decision when a murderer should die? I think spending a lifetime in jail is more suitable because it breaks the soul and lasts alot longer than a quick death.

[Brown Desk]

You must understand that not everybody has a soul.

[berryfairy10]

Thats your opinion, im entitled to mine..
Please dont tell me what i do not understand

[Brown Desk]

I'm not so sure it's the government who makes the decision between who lives and who dies, either. It's a judge from a judicial court of law. If there's anybody qualified to make that kind of decision, it's them. I know it would be convenient for god to descend from the sky and have him make the verdict, but that doesn't happen. Until then, I still think that if you murder a person in a premeditative manner, you deserve to die. Simple as that. There are other forms of killing a human that I would not implement capital punishment for. But for premeditative murder, you bet.

[Leviathan]

Brown desk, I think that you might have forgot that in democratic countries, like our own, there is a thing called the jury and it is not the judge alone who makes the decision. The judge merely finalizes and orchestrates the debate. Now I don't claim to be an expert on law but I do know that fact.

As for capital punishment upon premeditative murder, I agree with you in some aspects and disagree in others. There have been cases, for example, in the US, where innocent people have been convicted of murder and sentenced to death. It is all in a matter of how the ideas are presented, what facts are presented and what facts aren't; and really, the sentence is decided upon which lawer's story is found more compelling by the jury. Setting an example would be great but it is easier said than done.

[Brown Desk]

Sorry for the inconsistency about the Jury, I disregarded that fact. I agree that there will always be human error in serving justice, and that often innocent people are convicted. However, what's better: having the occasional error or having no judicial system at all? Or do you, Leviathan, have a different idea for the process of conviction, and the punishments that should be laid out?

[Knuckles]

Hmmm... if someone kills another person, then yah, death should be the price to pay. Otherwise justice is not served in the long run. If someone steals something from a corner street market or commits some other "mild" crime, then no, going to jail for a certain number of years should be just fine to reflect what a naughty person you've been. That's kind of pushing it. In the end, some form of judicial law where the punishment equals the magnitude of the crime should be instated, but capital punishment may be a little extreme.

[Leviathan]

I personally think the whole judicial system should be remade and carefully revised. In my opinion, the only way to best serve the greater population would be for justice to serve the 'greater good.'
This may sound sadistic but think of someone rotting in a life sentence with no death penalty. That same person is using up precious resources that could be going to, per say, someone in Kambodia or something. I do think that the death penalty is appropriate in many ways but there must be several revisions made before I will entriely agree.... but judging that law is part of our economy, I see nought but a bleak view for the future of this idea called justice.

[chief]

I've only got one thing to say about this, i will not reply to it.

If you take someone else's life, for no apparent reason, your own life should be taken from you.

[gibsondodds]

I think the chief's solution is too simple and too easy. An quick fix and a quick escape. No, I think that people who murder for selfish gain should be required to stick around and wait in line. And wait in line for a long time.

[hollywood*]

heck yes it should be reinstated
ill put that sentence on a child raping murderer any day.

[UAV online]

I'll keep this short and sweet. I don't think it's right to take someones life away, the next best thing is to send their life away to prison. Also it would probably hurt our reputation as being a peacekeeping nation if we started killing people who broke our laws.

[ABCD]

How is one expected to learn and discover the meaning of mistakes if those who commit to crime are simply dispatched because of their wrong doings? "Don't run from your mistakes". If i'm not mistaken isn't that also comparable to the saying running away from your mistakes? And how are the others suppose to incorporate the suffering into the consequences of their own actions. Others meaning the 7.5 billion individuals who are expected to be civilized and to not to accompany crime.

If you compare the two: Life sentence & capital punishment, prisoners usually emphasize how tough it was and how much they had suffered. Most continue to go the right path. By suffering one can learn from their mistakes to prevent it from happening again. Now, where as capital punishment, who suffers other than their innocent family?