Page 3 of 3 [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,612

27 Jun 2013, 10:00 am

Ancalagon wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Punishing people to the point of them dying shows a lack of mercy, though.

Not really. It might if the crime was minor, like stealing bread, but what about a serial killer? For someone who makes a hobby of murdering people in the most horrific ways they can think of, an execution that is not allowed to be "cruel and unusual" is merciful.


Do you think that there will be no people that think of the US-soldier who already killed 2000 people, as a serial killer? If someone is wrong or right is always a matter of oppinion. I think the cause why most european countries dont have death sentence anymore, is highly because people dont want to risc that their life one day will be depending on someones personal oppinion. There may be some true, true, true evil criminals who live because of that. But the major part is, that there will be never a true innocent dying because of that, as long as it doesnt exist anymore.



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

27 Jun 2013, 10:21 am

Ancalagon wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Punishing people to the point of them dying shows a lack of mercy, though.

Not really. It might if the crime was minor, like stealing bread, but what about a serial killer? For someone who makes a hobby of murdering people in the most horrific ways they can think of, an execution that is not allowed to be "cruel and unusual" is merciful.


I don't think killing anyone is merciful unless they're in a hell of a lot of pain.

Some people have done some things so horrible that you can't really punish them for it adequately, anyway. I think serial killers should be allowed to take their own lives, a lot of them do actually want to die - and execution gives them a blaze of glory to go out with so to speak - let them do the work themselves, instead. Otherwise put them away forever to protect everyone else, if they would rather live than die.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


NewDawn
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Age: 69
Gender: Female
Posts: 306
Location: Netherlands

27 Jun 2013, 10:50 am

Schneekugel wrote:
I think the cause why most european countries dont have death sentence anymore, is highly because people dont want to risc that their life one day will be depending on someones personal oppinion.


Complete abolishion of the death penalty (both for ordinary crimes and war crimes) is a binding agreement if a country wants to be part of the EU. It is now laid down in protocol 13, but in the early stages of what is now the EU, the European Convention of Human Rights was drafted by the Council of Europe. One of the main reasons for abolishing the death penalty was to prevent what happened in Nazi Germany from happening ever again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... man_Rights



TheValk
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 645

27 Jun 2013, 11:54 am

Fnord wrote:
TheValk wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Ancalagon wrote:
Fnord wrote:
It seems that "Mercy" - an original Christian value - is no longer considered important, and has largely been forgotten.
"Mercy" doesn't mean "don't punish people for their crimes".
Murder for murder is not mercy.
Isn't it the peculiar Western variation of Christian 'mercy' to baptise people before executing them? Tough luck if they already are Christian though.

New one on me. Evidence, please?


Referring to the classic (p. 262):
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/28054/28 ... 054-h.html

I'd read that it was based on some existing document some years ago and just now tried to do some research on that; turns out the biographers of the writer never did find any written document of the kind, so fiction based on the author's philosophical point of view is about as far as 'evidence' will be represented here - still something to ponder and not the least important view to take into account.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,953
Location:      

27 Jun 2013, 12:08 pm

"The Brothers Karamazov" is indeed a work of fiction, and therefore can not be considered as evidence to support your claim.

Read it at uni, wrote a 12-page paper on it, got a "B", sold the book to a bookstore, and sold the manuscript to a sophomore woman at another uni.

She received an "A" for it.

:roll:


_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.


TheValk
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 645

27 Jun 2013, 3:43 pm

Fnord wrote:
"The Brothers Karamazov" is indeed a work of fiction, and therefore can not be considered as evidence to support your claim.

Read it at uni, wrote a 12-page paper on it, got a "B", sold the book to a bookstore, and sold the manuscript to a sophomore woman at another uni.

She received an "A" for it.

:roll:


You don't have to be so boring you know.

:wink: