The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

Ok... now heres the deal this is sort of a two part question... I was doing a report for school and I wanted to know everybodys opinions on these.

1. Death Penalty: Fair, not fair? I mean like when somebody kills another person not in self defense. An eye for an eye? or just plain wrong?

2. Now what about juveniles...? Should anybody be able to take a kids life under 18 because they killed in the same situation (not self defense). Should they have a slap on the wrist and be sent back into the community? or be killed? o and another idea of being in prison for the rest of their lives...

hmm... I'm hoping that makes sense, if not I'll come back and fix it... enjoy!

-Madeline-

hmmm...i say the second would be unfair but in a way they can try the young person for muder or w/e untill they become an adult then that would be fair...caz to me murder is just wrong even if the so called murderer was tryin to get revenge on the "victim" becaz of his or hers lost
kno what i am saying?
its very hard to explain

**murder** dammit

i dont think anybody has the right to take anyone's life under any circumstances.

its not for anyone to decide who lives or dies.

(although under a raging moment you might think otherwise)

i believe in Karma....if u kill someone, it will come back to you eventually and there is no running from it.

you will eventually live out the consequences of your actions whether you like it or not.

I would like the opportunity to jump on the PRO-DEATH band wagon.

I belief that if you commit a crime that is so heinous or so evil...you should die. If you are that bad, then Society can no longer tolerate the possiblity of you committing the crime again or you reproducing.

So not only to I believe in a death penalty, I think we need interesting and very painful ways of endorsing it.

Lethal Injection is too nice....Proof: they rub your arm with alcohol before putting in the needle, just so you don't get an infection!

Electric Chair is not bad....but they need to prolong the pain. How about a series of little jolts before the big one.

Hanging is good, but only if the dude's neck doesn't snap....If his victem died painfully, so should he.....Oh fuck it, he should die painfully regardless.

Firing Squads are questionable. Sure the dude dies, but some of the "bullets" are blanks, so the shooters can doubt they were the killing shot. And again it's too quick. If you head south of the equator...A firing squad is completely loaded and start shooting at the knees, working upwards. That's how you shoot a dude on Death Row.

Fire....Perfect. First you tei the dude to a pole, then you surround the area with flammable materials (wood, hay, paper, etc), douse the dude and material with gasoline (or not...your choice), and light the match. First he panics, then he screams, nexts he burns. Slow.....painful.....and creates a deterant to crime.

And the best part, we put it on PAY-PER-VIEW.....everyone would pay a couple of bucks to watch someone die. Especially if the dude was a world class scumbag.

Viva la capital punishment!

well put hawk

that is why we have jails...to keep those who are a threat to society away....

this whole killing thing is just not right.

why should we lower ourselves to that person's level and kill as well? we're giving out a bad example because we go right ahead and do the same.

they should be locked away & rid of any privileges, like....forexample, they should be locked in a cell all alone for ever...that'll punish them more, eat away at their conscience .....and have them deal with what they did...eventually they will go insane...because a person can only take such amount of loneliness, instead of killing them which not only make us look bad but we're just making the exit easier for them.

because they dont have to deal with what they did ever again....

I'm all for capital punishement/death sentence for serious cases.

Jail is simply not good enough. They get free meals, cable television, clothes, excercise equipement, ect....

I'd rather see them die than having my taxes provide for all of the above to people who to honest deserve to rot in hell.

well maybe we should change that!

they shouldn't get that stuff...its JAIL...

i think we should start a petition to stop that...it really annoys me too..

Well I pretty much agree with hawk on the subject!
Now being as I'm a child councellor I haveta disagree with Elly ... children at the age of 2 are able to understand the concept of right and wrong.... by the tyme most are 6 they know what murder is and they know it is wrong!
I follow the simple rule of 'do unto others as you wish to be do unto you' but when it comes to the death penalty how can that be so? then that means someone is appointed to re-inact it *scratches her head* so it keeps going round ... but anyways I belive murderers should be punished the way they commited the crime .. seems only appropriate (tho that doesnt really make sense if you know what I mean in some cases)

i prefer not to argue but havent u noticed that it cost us as the ppl, as the tax payers,we have to pay to keep em in jail...but by doin the society a favor and killing the so called murderer is ( dont mean to sound cruel) is better

i will say no more about this....

DB.....I would agree, but the cost of keeping these reprobates alive in jail is too expensive.

Death is cheaper.

mmm i think the government needs to work on this a little more, its just people dont' voice their opinions, they just kind of go with the flow.

i strongly disagree with the fact that they have some types of privileges behind bars. they should be getting PUNISHED not rewarded.

also, i think they do get those types of rewards because if you look at it, mostly all succesful corrupted people go to jail and so they want commodities but thats another subject im not going to get on.

basically, the government needs to realize these things and we the people need to make them conscious of these things....

use our rights, voice your opinions....thats why we have them in the first place ....i just diont thihnk they should die....we're not
"god" or any thing to be deciding who lives or dies

I'd have to agree with Hawk, they don't deserve the luxury of prison

there are different kinds of punishments for different types of crimes....some less harsh, other more serious......but nevertheless no one deserves to die.

I think society runs too much in the world, I will go with karma on this one. What goes around comes around.

i agree with the666inside

Ok... for the UMPTEENTH TIME...

Enough with that font, sugar-lips...

And so... with my qualms of Elly's font ASIDE (cause thats damned near worse than all caps, sister-girl)...

I agree with Nic and Hawk on this.
My father was a cop....and a prison guard.
On the other end, I work for a criminal defense law firm.
Even-so with those influences...

I say if someone brutally beat and raped my sister, friend...WHOMEVER...
I'd like to see that done to that person.
I understand thats a mighty big pebble to throw into the karma pond...
But hey, I'm a vindictive bitch...
It's my job.

>:)

i agree with Elly.


anyway, karma is a bitch & in the end you get what you deserve.....

Hehehe....well... my handbaskt to hell is being built on a points system.

The more points you have... the more stuff you get on your ride....

Right now Im up to
Heated Leather Seats.. WITH back massagers...
Dvd player in the front console,
PS2 in the back...
My name in 24k Gold on the head rests...
Diamond studded handle...
Cashmire pillows EVERYWHERE...
And a killer alarm system...

>:)

what do you think is cruel and unusual? comparing lethal ingection (gah cant spell), electricution (again cant spell), being hanged, firing squad, gas chamber... am i missing any?

lol..mine has an xbox so grrr

i have no clue what i am talking about
::bangs her head on the counter::

I think the brittish had the best plan a couple of hundred years ago.
put all the murderers and hardcore criminals on a boat and send them to new zealand, if they can kill for money and fun, they can damn sure kill to survive.

Nadeline are you doing your report on our thoughts...that cheating missy LOL
im just kidding =)


anyway i have a PS2! soon to be replaced by the infamous XBOX!

(what can i say im addicted to video games as well...i have no life lol)

MM-
Thats actually Australia.
Not NZ.

DB i would never use your guys ideas on my paper! never!
... *throws notebook of her shoulder*

*big smile* :P

Actually I correct myself, MM....

Its both countries.
I'm just not used to hearing NZ mentioned in the bannishment of British criminals.

:D

Penalty should fit the crime.

You kill = you DIE...

You steal = you lose your hand.

You rape = you get RAPED by large foriegn objects with points then you DIE

you get my point.

As for the already over crowded jails and over taxed people for these jails.. DIE, DIE, DIE they all should DIE.... sorry bad mood. DIE F*@KERS..** Wicked Smirk **

LOL Madeline.

thats cuters =)

omg DB u play games 2, i have both xbox and ps2
::runs to hug darkness::

yah... *brushes off her shoulders* im cool like that :P

i think life in prison is the best way to go its cheaper and more humain plus those prisoners can serve purpose working in prison labor groups.

but on another tangent i believe child melesters should he castarted an then incarcerated. any coments

I think there should be consequences for the heinous acts rather than allowing them to sit in jail and eat, play, do drugs and workout or study books. Why not force criminals to work with victims families? Study their own psycology to learn why they commit murder? make them face their actions rather than hide from their choices and life in a jail where they are safe. Change the mindset and maybe just maybe that will help. *shrugs* as I ponder the evil in the world...

well put. maybe criminals should be used for human testing to cure cancer and such

This subject is standard Debate 101 fodder. It is extremely easy to argue either side.

I have changed my position on this subject countless times. I may change my position again... But for the last several years I have been anti-death - in any form. I consider suicide, euthanasia, murder, capital punishment, abortion, and animal slaughter all to be wrong.

i agree Cancer, but in the abortion topic i must differ in opinion....thats something you have to actually experience first hand. as a woman is not easy to think about this, but sometmes given certain circumstances, unfortunately that has to be an option.

im not saying its right its right or acceptable either...

FACt.. violence breeds violence... peodifiles cuase more peodofiles... at the end of the day, most people are'nt born evil, they have had it dished out to them, eg, people who are violent, tend to of grown up in a violent background, same with child molesters, they more often and not have been abused themselves... These people have to die, so they can not inflict more pain and suffering onto others... not to mention the cost of keeping these scum alive......

I don't believe in incarceration either. I believe in banishment. There's very little cost associated with banishment.

what do you mean by banishment?...

entry found for banished.
ban·ish ( P ) Pronunciation Key (bnsh)
tr.v. ban·ished, ban·ish·ing, ban·ish·es
To force to leave a country or place by official decree; exile.
To drive away; expel: We banished all our doubts and fears.




there you go.

so if that's what it means, isn't it wrong as well? you're letting a criminal go to another society to possibly commit the same crimes instead of just locking him up...unless you banish him to a deserted island or something, like they did with napoleon (was it napoleon?).

Murdering the convict would solve a menagerie of problems. Society does not need to be paying for the errors of others. Yes, literally paying. thirty-million dollars are flushed into penitentiaries each YEAR for convicts. This provides them with warm food, cable, and recreational facilities. Mind you, many individuals in lower class society don't have money to purchase a television set of their own. Many times, murders are released and placed back in society.

Why are they given a second chance when the person who was murdered wasn't?

we aren't saints. When slapped, we don't turn our cheek so we can be struck once again. I say we should cut the problem at the root--rid society of murderers and not recycle them back into their playground.

I think the death penalty is fantastic, for no other reason than that each conviction results in one less person in a terribly over crowded world.

In the same respect, not only am I pro choice, I believe abortion should be mandatory.

As for juveniles, this is an issue to do with mental matiruty, not chronological age.

please expand , glass.

all abortions should be mandatory? Are you saying individuals should not procreate?

ok, i can see that....banish them into an uninhabited island...where all criminals live, that way they can deal with eachtoher.....

sounds reasonable...

The death penalty should be abolished less than one percent of all inmates are on death row the prisons are open anyway I dont see why we feel the need to kill anyone no mater what they have done

you shouldn't kill anyone kids especially

Deity, people can screw all they want, just no more babies! If you don't like mandatory abortion, mandatory castration will also do.

Please note I possess a somewhat cynical sense of humour, altough I really would sign this into law if I could. It's important to me.

Glass...i take it you dont want kids?

I'd rather jump off a cliff.

For me, I do not believe in the Death Penalty. I believe in jailing people for their entire life so they are unable to harm other people.

America is a multi cultural country with many beliefs, and eventually, Ireland,the United Kingdom may be the same, but predominately it is a Christian State and so, therefore, Christians beliefs apply to our society here.

The death penalty is a cheaper option 'tho as opposed to keeping a person alive.. I never really understood it 'tho as its not in my nature to kill, harm or maim another person.

OOh, and yea.. I like your font Elly :)

I believe they should be put to death if convicted and done so fairly quickly. The death penalty is more fair than life in prison, that is cruel and unusual punishment.

I think the best punishment would be to simply deprive them of their human rights (No bed , fair treatmen) feed em on bread and water for the rest of their lives with absolutely no human contact not even from the guards because i don't believe in killing (If I di a paramedic would not be my job of chioce lol) but i do believe in punishment BIG TIME as 4 the rest definetly not no one should ever EVER kill a child (everyone is a child to me till their 18)

(Looks around for a Mod to trot by with the RIP stick...)

A person has no right to ascert themselves to the level of an omnipotent being by deciding who gets to live and who gets to die. If there be a person that foolish (for lack of better words) their fate should be handled in the same fashion. If this were the case in the end every one would be killed off, and thats completely pointless. Ok did that mmake sense to anyone? I'm lost.... ^_^ teehee Anyway the point I'm trying to make is no human has the right to take the life of another, period. As punishment or anything. Its not our place to decide such a thing. Personally I say torture them till they go insane then toss em some where to rot but I'm weird like that. Do you realize it actually costs more money to keep a person on death row than in just normal jail. If you've got an issue with cost. In the end the death penalty doesn't make a bit of sense outside the Justinian laws. "An eye for an eye." What sense does that make? Will knowing that the murderer of your family member or whatever has been killed bring that family member back? Does it give you some kind of inner peace? In an execution the family members of both the victim and the murderer are invited to watch. Its sick. Does that give them some kind of sick twisted peace of mind knowing that they're sitting there watching a fellow human being murdered in cold blood?

*shrugs* to each their own I guess. I hope at least some of that made sense, I have a short attention span.

don't we all? lol

There's a hell of alot of 'banished' people over here then... i think htey call they something else over here, oh thats it illegal immirgrants

a little off the subject we are all talking about but i believe that US law is a hell of a lotn better than UK law as if somone over in the US goes to prison for life they do LIFE but here in the UK somone is put away for life and they are out in about 20 30 years. i beilive that if somone murders somone not in the heat of the battlefield or in self defence that they should go straight to prison no death sentence business as if a murderer is killed then he goes straight to the after life.which he may then be judged by a god or a higher power. this is in my eyes a realese from the evil he has done. also a little something i believe that if a youth does a crime he should go to proper prison not youth prison or whatever you call it.i think this because most the kids that do things got off very lightly for some of the things they have donje in there

Slaz...y'r wrong about that life part...many times if an inmate gets a life sentence...they are up for parole in 8 years (14 for a murder charge) 99.9% of the time they are refused thier first time around...but then they are again eligable (sp? sucks) for parole again every 8 years...they do stand a chance of being released...it all depends upon the victim/victims family, and community that are given the oppertunity to go before the parole board and state their rejections as to why the person should not be allowed parole...if there is no one to do that, and if the inmate has shown imporvement and can show that they are no longer a threat to society then they can be granted parole...I've seen it happen...

Having said all that...if an inmate recievs a sentence of life + one or any more years...then no they will never see the light of day outside of bars...

furthermore...I may piss alot of people off in saying this...but being an inmate is not as easy as you think...free meals, no work, cable and all that...yes and no...and YES YES I know..you do the crime you do the time...I too believe in that...IF you've done the crime...there are those in prison who DID NOT do the crime they are accussed of and due to a poor justice system and lack of funds or lack of proper defense, they are stuck in prison, away from family, their names are ruined, and they loose all there rights as a US citizen...and most never recover their names once they are able to prove their innocence...I'm not advocating that the death penelty is right or wrong...

and please do not PM me about wither or not my views are good or bad...this is a forum to post y'r oppinion....

very good one......look up the name jason dix
falsely accused....faked evidence....pressured witnesses....spent years in prison for a doulbe execution style murder...
in the states he prolly would have died for it.....but then again.....I am for capital punishment.....but also a better justice system

I think the death penalty er kids is wrong, no kid should ever be harmed i belive. On the other hand if a Adult kills in an un just manner (Not in self defence), that person should have the "penelty".

My believe is that the death penalty could be kept just onto for extreme cases, say for a example a serial killed whose been proved not to be suffering from mental ilness (consider they are quite rare) .. or some kind of terrorist crimes.. obviously I would stay in favour to lifetime imprisonment as the bottom line, but this is not just a case of which "punishments" are apllied bur more of HOW they are applied within the law books...it really has to do with how society works in a locality.

Death. I'm for it.

I'd rather that than either having our revolving door system spit someone back out on the streets to be revoltingly repetitive or have my taxes used to pay their cable bills and provide degrees for lifetime penitents. If I have trouble getting a scholarship (with a 4.0) then I DAMN SURE don't want a free education going to some pederast.

Banishment.

Just where on this world would we banish criminals TO? Antarctica? Death sentance for most of them. Just as guilty as if you fried them. Moon colony? More tax dollars going to the welfare of convicted felons.

If you get caught, you pay the piper. The more heinous the act, the more heinous the price. Hell, if I snap someday and take out folks, I'd like to think I'd be fried rather than allowed to continue. Just more ... fitting.

On the banishment bit, append "from where they will not be able to make their ways back into society."

Banishment is not a new concept. If a caveman committed a sociological crime, his fellow cavemen would banish him from the tribe. They didn't give him a lethal injection.

As to where criminals would be banished to, my primary answer is: not my problem. Ever heard of the Palestinians? They're all banished from Jordan. And none of the surrounding Arab countries will let them in either. Banishment exists in many parts of the world already.

A more tempered answer as to where they would go:

Banishment is only a way to shove them out of the country or society in which they originally gave offense. "Let them go to Mexico and slaughter people, as long as it isn't CINCINATTI!"

Crap on that.

Let them go where they will? With today's available knowledge, yes they can survive in deserts, on tropical islands, etc. But - are we to foot the additional bill to make sure they stay tehre? That they don't go wandering and commit the same crimes elsewhere on innocent populations? (I realize innocence is relative.) That is simply another form of incarceration.

sounds good.

The only thing we'd have to do is seal the borders and keep people out who aren't suppose to be here.

This is something that should be done ANYWAY.

Requiem, your not realizing the higher concept here. There is no human alive who is fit to punish another human. Spiritually it is all wrong. Nothing but bad karma will result.

Not only do I hold capital punishment to be wrong, I hold incarceration of offenders to be wrong. The total removal of all rights and freedoms compounded with the squalid conditions of American penitentiaries makes incarceration unacceptable.

Given these 4 options: capital punishment, incarceration, ignorance of crime, and banishment, I consider banishment to be the most logical and best spiritual solution.

Do you have a 5th option?

I see your point; I understand your opinion and the logic behind your reasoning - I simply disagree with it. Banishing them, even if they could not get out of the area to which they were banished, would still allow these people to prey on others (even if it is simply other criminals). As you bring up karmic debt, how much more bad karma would they accrue this turn of the wheel?

Creating a situation in which they could freely prey upon one another or any other, how much bad karma would the creators of said system accrue?

Speaking logistically, which country(ies) would be willing to set aside portions of land for these malcontents' banishment? Alaska ... nice idea, but I heartily doubt that our government would be willing to turn those lands so rich in oil and other natural resources into an area for the banished. I know, I know, Alaska was only an example. Protests would come about from most suggestions ... "That's OUR land!" "That's next door to our land!" "We've emeralds/oil/diamonds/forest here!" "This is the last know habitat of the (insert almost extinct animal here)!" Etc., etc., ad nauseum.

As I said, I understand the logic behind your position, but I disagree with it.

You may verbally lambast me, if you choose; but at this point in time, I do not agree.

5th option?...use them for medical research? as lab rats?.......that way they can serve society and be punished for it with a productive outcome, maybe saving the lives of others??

*shrug*


just a thought...

Hmmmmmmmm.......

Death by Medical Experiments

I like it!

I love it!

Do not assume I consider this position to be adopted anytime soon in the United States.

A wife is being beaten by her husband. She gets a restraining order against him. She banishes him from their home. Does this woman accrue karmic debt for protecting and isolating herself? Of course not.

I do not see how there would be any creation of any situation for banished individuals to prey on others. I am not advocating sending criminals anywhere. I am advocating keeping them out of the country.

I understand your impulse to question, Well, what then? However I don't think that is important.

Take your own poll. Go to any prison and question those incarcerated for life. Tell them you will let them out, but they can never live in the United States again. See how many decide to stay.

I said in the beginning this was a very complicated subject. I could write volumes on a viable banishment plan. This thread has only scratched the surface.

I agree with Cancer there...as my ex is in prison now...on of the ones that is innocent and has not been able to prove himself innocent yet...

but I do know in talking with many inmates that if given the choice to stay in prison or be banished somewhere (anywhere) they would choose to not stay locked up...

good point Cancer

The "Well, What then?" IS important.

It isn't as simple as a restraining order ... the husband can walk right through that restraining order and kill her for the temerity of kicking him out.

Paper no-no's don't do it.

If out of the US, then to WHERE?

In order for it to be a valid idea, a valid prospect or alternative, the "Then what?" has to be taken into consideration.

A restraining order (in order to be effective) needs to be enforced. In this case, the wife could not be murdered.

This is why I have said the US borders need to be sealed. It would be an enforcement of policy.

Why is it important where they go? I look to early portions of this thread and your first response was to murder them. Now you want to know where they will live?

I have to go back to the Palestinians. Do you think Jordan was concerned about where they would go after they were kicked out of the country? What about all the Cubans Castro kicked out a few years back? What about the Cambodians that were banished during their civil war in the early 1980's? Do you have any idea how many African nations banish their citizens?

Why must the US always be concerned with every aspect about everything? Why can't things be made more simple instead of more difficult?

I have offered an alternative that offers little cost, does not involve murder, and which will protect the inhabitants of the society. What else is required?

please those of you who are against....defend this woman...but explain your reasons......i see absolutely no reason for her to continue to sully the reality the rest of us must live in...
I am not always pro capital punishment.....but in some cases....this is clear cut....she is not denying having done it....


Mom Allegedly Kills 12-Year-Old Daughter For Having Sex
Daughter Reportedly Forced To Drink Bleach

POSTED: 7:12 am EST January 17, 2005

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. -- A woman angry with her 12-year-old daughter for having sex forced the girl to drink bleach and sat on her until the child died, a police detective said.

The girl's 9-year-old brother was forced to watch the attack, Detective Warren Cotton testified Thursday in a preliminary hearing for Tunisia Archie, 31.

Archie is charged with capital murder in the asphyxiation death of her daughter Jasmine. If convicted, she could be sentenced to death or life in prison without parole.

Cotton said Archie, who has been jailed without bond since shortly after her daughter's Nov. 26 death, told authorities she was disturbed because "her daughter told her that she was no longer a virgin."

She said she poured bleach into Jasmine's mouth and the child vomited, he said, then sat on her until she stopped breathing, Cotton testified.

Archie forced Jasmine's 9-year-old brother Jacorey to watch the attack and "told him that if he shed a tear that she was going to kill him, too," Cotton testified.

I understand the impulse to seek vengeance. Those who are pro-capital punishment don't call it that, but let's be honest. The rest of the reasons are justification.

I understand the impulse, but I cannot support the action.

and i'm sorry cancer but closing all borders would be pointless...try going tohe other way...NO borders....you do not own the land...you live on it....what right have you to restrict anyone from enjoyment of it

eye for an eye, make the mother drink bleach and get someone to suffocate her, so she can suffer the pain and torment her daughter suffered, then ressusate her and do it again and again, until she dies.

i agree eye for an eye

my mom always said " an eye for an eye made the world go blind"

I don't agree though. I think every one deserves what they give. a better parabole, "reap what you sow" .

I'm going to go watch escape from newyork!

Mm I've grown up with the quote, Do unto others as you would have done to yourself, so if you kill someone, you die as well, you hurt someone you hurt as well, If you do not want hurt, do not hurt others

the name Castro just made me throw up...


X(

why so Darkness :-(?

he has made all my people's lives miserable....

many have lost their lives because of him


if someone deserves banishment is him....forget that.....im no for death, i dont wish it upon anyone, but he does deserve death....

he has murdered so many and still is....

='(

i hate him.

castro...ah yes...real piece of work......
pinochet is still kicking too.....
two more for the slow death kevorkian machine....

Hmm, without thinking this out deeply, or researching if there are already successful penal colonies established my first thought/reaction to having
a state, place, country, island.. for *hard* criminals to be banished too, could lead to more trouble than what we could care for.

By doing this, surely we are creating a population full of anarchy. When that particular population grows, with the right resources they could become a threat on the rest to the rest of the world...
Just a thought...

I have never advocated penal colonies (like Australia). I am not advocating sending criminals anywhere.

I disagree that a person cannot lay claim to a portion of land.

I disagree the border's can't be sealed. Back between 1950 - 1980ish the USSR did a DAMN good job sealing their borders, and they had more than double the perimeter of the US.

We would do an even better job than they did. If we tried. Eliminate the penal system and the INS. Pile all that money up and less than half of it would get the job done.

a man kills someone....you banish that man....he goes elsewhere and kills again...
YOU are partially responsible for not having stopped that man from repeating his crime...for someone who CLAIMS to have higher morals and enlightenment you seem to only be advocating betterment for americans and damn the rest....the world is however much bigger than the altered states of america....

very good point, banishment only creates a bigger problem for people outside our borders, why take the risk?

Also, i think the term should be changed, then we may not get so many people thinking its wrong.. because when you mention penalty, the 1st thing that comes into your head is dread and everything that goes with the term penalty..... so if i was in power.. *grins* i would call it The Death Award.... make it sound more appealing.. alot of people still to this day in Jail can barely read or write.. so if they heard the word, Award.. they would be eager to take up the offer....

trick them into taking the death award... hmm thats an interesting idea... "Hey i just got back from meeting the prosecutor and he says we can plead you for the death award!"
hey thats actually does sound appealing...

Madeline.. you knows it!.. i'm sure with your charms, you could help lots of 'wrong doers' get the right result!!

haha *shrugs* well, thats just what i do *innocent smile*

It is not my place in the cosmos punish another individual. It's not your place either. That is the higher standard.

I cannot speak for Canada, as I am not versed on its law or politics... But in the United States we are already banishing certain offenders.

If a foreign visitor, legal alien, or illegal alien (essentially anyone in the country that is a non-citizen) commits a crime, that person can be ejected from the country. If they try to re-enter, they will be denied entry. I simply want to extend this to all US citizens.

canada has the same for foreign nationals,,most countries do.....mt point is that you are doing nothing but moving the problem around.....it's like saying you are cleaning your house by merely picking something up and setting it down in another area.....it is still there....but if you are not open to the possibility of actually helping the problem for all....not just for amerikkkans(a little movie trivia there) then this stops being a discussion and becomes a fanatical rant...yes banishment is done....and no it has never proven effective.....lots of people got both into and out of russia during the iron curtain......and would you really want to live under such restriction....if so....i'm sure some communist nation would accept you....that is the type of mindset they want....people who welcome restriction for the good of the nation...me i'm for things that are good for mankind....I am a human from earth....not merely a canadian.....my country is where I reside.....earth is where I "LIVE"
country patriotism is for the small locally minded.....I realise this sounds insulting....but it is my own opinion on locking borders and banishments....

there is replacement for displacement

I hate to disagree with Hawk but the Death penalty is not cheap. It costs more than to keep a person in jail, also it takes about 15 to 16 years for a person on death row to actually be killed. Personally I believe in the death penalty but not how it is run. If there was a massive murder in town, yes I want the SOB convicted, and sentenced to death.

What about rapists? How do we handle them? We put a slap on their wrists and they wait about 20 yrs to get on parole.

I don't care what the punishment for rape or child molestation is but their should be harsher punishments for more than 1st degree murder.

For "juveniles", I believe any child that understands right and wrong that commits murder should be punished. Not by death but a harsh sentence. Anyone who says a child's mind isn't fully developed untill they are 25 is probably right but as long as the child knows right from wrong should be strong enough to accept their own consequences.

A jury is supossed to look at mitigating and aggrivating factors to make their dececion and personally I think most peopel are racist, sexist, etc. etc. and just attempt to give a "just punishment" so they can get it over with.

I live in the UK...

As recently as 1965 - when Britain abolished the death penalty for murder - there were just 12 countries in the world that had fully abolished the death penalty.

Today, 69 countries have abolished for all crimes, 13 have abolished for all but exceptional crimes (such as treason and wartime offences) and a further 23 countries are abolitionist de facto - in that they have not executed anyone for at least ten years. In the last ten years alone 34 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, while a further 3 countries have got rid of the death penalty for ordinary crimes. In the last year, Lithuania, Latvia, Bulgaria and Azerbaijan abolished the death penalty. Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan suspended executions.

And becuase of this our crime rate has been on a steady rise ever since. As compared to the USA, who still uses the death 'award' look at these figures!
crime rate lowest since 1973
Posted by Wes at August 25, 2003 03:00 PM
Yesterday the Justice Department released the results of their annual crime survey. Apparently crime is as low as it's been since they started keeping track back in 1973. It's certainly an interesting read if you're into that sort of thing.

Here are some interested bits and pieces:

Robbery dropped 19% from 2001 to 2002 and is down 60% from 1993.

Men were more likely than women to be victims of crime, as were blacks and those under age 24.

Women are most often victimized by someone they know while men are more often victimized by a stranger.

There was a 74% drop in murders of black men from 1976 to 1998.

In 2002, 53% of violent crime happened during the day, between 6am and 6pm.

In 2002, 21% of violent crime was committed with some sort of weapon present.

Eight percent of the 6.3 million violent crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and assault involved a firearm.
There is much more in the stats but that should give you a good sampling of what it says.

So if I may intermingle this post with my last, I find it hard to argue that exposure to violent media causes a more violent society when statistically, our society is as non-violent as it has been in 30 years while violent entertainment is at an all time high.

And on a slightly related note, it would seem France and the UK are having a tough go at keeping their crime rates under control. Hrmmmmm.

By David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent
(Filed: 01/12/2002)

England and Wales have the highest crime rate among the world's leading economies, according to a new report by the United Nations.

Can anyone get me oput of this place...... I can cook, clean, work any household machinery.. wash dishes.. very neat and tidy person.. i'll work for free.. just please, i beg of thee.... let me be free...

I think that banishment from a country would present the enforcing government with a terrible logistical problem.

ENFORCING said banishment, by closing the borders might well be as financially draining as the prison system we now have in place.

I like the idea. But, I think establishing it and managing it effectively is about as difficult and likely as a manned mission to Jupiter's moons. Possible? Sure. Likely? Not in our lifetime.

"Run, baby, run! Escape from L.A.!"

How about the Soylent Green alternative?

Soylent Green = Organic solvent?

LOL Never mind. Looked it up.

Cannibalism. Feed the world's starving off the refuse of society.

"Forty million New Yorkers can't be wrong . . .
They can however taste like crap."

not if you add salt.

but on further reading. Stats show that places with the death 'award' show no signs of reduced homicides, in fact the reverse...
According to data released on October 28 as part of the FBI's Uniform Crime Report for 2001, the South again has the highest murder rate of the four regions in the United States. The South was also the only region above the national average. In 2001, almost 80% of executions in the country occurred in the South. The report noted that the Texas crime rate rose 4% in 2001, nearly five times the national average, and the state posted a 7.6% increase in homicides. At the same time, the total number of executions in Texas is more than three times that of any other state in the nation. The Northeast, the region with the lowest murder rate, had no executions in 2001

So after my brief induction to the Death Award, i'm AGAINST it.. It is proven that it does not deterr people from killing..... and if anyone is still in doubt read this..

Homicide Rates Fall in Canada After Abolition of Death Penalty
The abolition of the death penalty in Canada in 1976 has not led to increased homicide rates. Statistics Canada reports that the number of homicides in Canada in 2001 (554) was 23% lower than the number of homicides in 1975 (721), the year before the death penalty was abolished. In addition, homicide rates in Canada are generally three times lower than homicide rates in the U.S., which uses the death penalty. For example, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, the homicide rate in the U.S. in 1999 was 5.7 per 100,000 population and the rate in Canada was only 1.8. Canada currently sentences those convicted of murder to life sentences with parole eligibility. (Issues Direct.com, 8/4/02).

LOL Deity

:o] requiem.

i was just trying to lighten the mood.

*throws salt at deity, then chucks a couple of slugs on her too and watches the melt and fizzle*

wow, that was so mean :o[

i am totally grossed out by slugs.

they make me want to gag. if i decide to throw up, ill make sure it's on you. lol :o]

here is my diatribe on the dealth penalty. Its not like its a light sentence, and not something generally chosen lightly. Humans are a waste though. We are monkies with too much time on our hands, and too little brains in our heads. Add this to the capacity to kill, and like any rabid animal we need to be put down.

i think the death penalty should only applie to those who are serving consecutive life sentences, those who will die in prison.... they're not getting out so why waste space and resources on them....

with regards to children.... they can be turned so i think perhaps not the death penalty for them unless they go on an actually killing spree and again wont get out during the natural term of their life....

I see no point in anyone serving like a true 'life sentence' in prison. if their not getting out then why not kill them, save the tax payers more money.... it should also only be fore those who were actually caught in the act if its just one homocide. There's too much of a risk that the jury has given a guilty verdict and yet the person may actually be innocent, though this is only when the circumstances suspiciously point to the accused but it may not actually be them......

::steps off soap box::

ahhh yes here I agree.....for those who will never get out of prison...make it death...as effectively their productive life is over...they will never again be anything but a drain on the rest of the country....

As Don Quixote says in his madness "Tell me thy company, and I'll tell thee what thou art." Elly you've clocked up another number on your friend's list 'cos of the way you said what you said.

I am still pro-vengeance, Cancer.

In asking where will we put them in regards to banishment, I am looking for a viable answer. Something other than simply "put them out."

I am trying to see the argument for banishment from your point of view, but the "Then what?" still has not been addressed satisfactorily. At least not for me.

**

In regards to medical research: Not a bad idea; it has merits. It would keep them from imposing further misdeeds upon the remainder of society and the convicted murderers, serial rapists, what have you, would provide a very valuable service to the rest of society.

Interesting position.

1 i think when adults murder or rape someone that they disorve to die, because they destroyd someones life. Accept when it's selfdefense 'cause i think that they don't wanna kill someone but they don't wanna die, so they don't have much choice, kill or be killed

2.I don't think they disorve dead, maybe send to a mental care,for a few years, that helps sometimes.

laughs at Dhampir and Deity*


you guys are too much

Ahhh yes, Dhampir.

::Announcer voice::

"15 yeard penalty, personal foul, slugging the Deity. You must surrender all grainy and/or gristly substances to the referees for inspection."

Ok, Iwasn't gonna say this...but too those of you, and I hate to say it, but I noticed that many of the people saying that "kids" shouldn't face the death penalty because they are "kids" under the age of 18, that they didn't know any better...I have just this to say....What about the "kids" in Columbine? Did they know better? Yes they did, try telling the ones who died, their friends and famlies that the shooters didn't know any better. and that's the the only example that can be given of "kids" killing...there are many more....saying they didn't know better, is way off track. Everyone (and I mean that in a general term) wants to blame society for what those "kids" did, that they were picked on, no love, neglected and so on, yes that maybe so...but there are other ways to handle such things then to go into school and shoot the place up, killing others....If a "kid" kills, or commits a crime in the same manner as an "adult", then they too should have to face the same punishments as an "adult"....

Please excuse me... but I had immediately assumed (which was wrong of me) that if you were to banish hardened criminals it would be to a predestined place like a colony. I never thought it would be just to throw them out of the borders of the USA.

To me, that is like saying to whichever country they would be banished too..Here is my problem, you deal with it.

All in all, I believe its the responsibility of each country to face up to their own problems and deal them accordingly, without making any contribution to the detriment of the rest of the world. Albeit it I do not support the Death Sentence.

lol at requiem, .. and sorry diety, don't want you gagging... mk bad... hands himself into the proper authorties and hopes he can avoid being given the Death Award...

In my post I type-o'd....

..."and that's the the only example that can be given of "kids" killing..."

I meant ..."and that's.. NOT.. the the only example that can be given of "kids" killing..."

ooh typed oohh.. the faires do that dance on my keyboard all the time too!! maybe we could start a club fer them heh

Sounds like a good name for a band 'The typo Faires'

oh but the leeches help to keep you goth pale deity......hehehe....
but in other news yes req....the problem of banishment will always be to where do you banish them.....and the persistent references to areas of the middle east doing it don't fly.....since when in the last thousand years have they had any sort of stability in what they do there politically speaking?and they also do have death penalties there....for things far more minor than those in western countries....

Or a gay bar?

wait .. death penalties in a gay bar? Dammit! I'm blonde-ish! Keep it on track lol

i'd rather be toasty dark than "goth pale" if it require leeches being thrown at me

* runs *

Responses to catch up on...

Dhampir,

The statistics you cite I am sure are quite valid. They gel with most of the stuff I read. But there are a couple of things to consider...

Lower US crime rates over the past few decades is attributed to greater police enforcement and more strict sentencing. Almost all drug offenses carry minimum sentence requirements that were put into effect in the late 1980s.

Homicide rates have not dropped as much as you'd think they would with a death penalty in place. Anti-death proponents use this as an argument that the death penalty is not a deterrent to homicide. This argument draws false conclusions from the statistical data.

If we started executing EVERYONE on death row, within days after initial sentencing, it would equate to about 300 executions per day. If we did this, had full-implementation of the death penalty, I'd predict the deterrent factor would more likely be seen.

I bring this up as a matter of statistical correctness, not in support of the death penalty.

Deportation applies to NON-us citizens, typically deported back to their country of citizenship.

Throwing our citizens out the door and letting them loose on the world (wherever they can get in) to continue their crimes is, at best, incredibly irresponsible. At worst, we become morally culpable, in part, for their continued crimes.

It is the same thing - "I don't give a damn where you go and kill, you just can't do it to Americans anymore."

It is expecting the rest of the world to be our refuse bin, and damn the consequences to anyone else, so long as we are snug.

Simply banishing them FROM is not good enough for a solution.

I insist there still has to be a viable, securable TO, in order to ensure other innocents do not fall prey to someone for whom we no longer wish to be responsible. I believe that establishing a valid TO is the only way that your suggestion of banishment would be an acceptable alternative for unrepentant/repetetive and/or violent criminals.

As soon as you dictate where a person must go, you are heading down the incarceration road. A penal colony is still incarceration.

It's not fair to say this proposal would 'let loose' criminals upon the world. The world is full of sovereign nations. They will dictate their own policy. The world's largest gripe against America is that we enforce our will upon the world. I wouldn't do that. Let the rest of the world do what they want.

Time for a new angle.

Let's review some of history's biggest pro-death penalty supporters: