runouw.com

Harmless wrote:Permanent damage, especially permanently shutting down any human's right to live, is certainly not okay.

and you have defeated your own argument

Killing another with intent is unforgivable. That's the one exception to ending a life that I can think of.

Harmless wrote:Killing another with intent is unforgivable. That's the one exception to ending a life that I can think of.

That leads us back to our earlier death penalty discussion. Maybe you're right, but such mindsets is what a humanitarian society is to be measured by.

Also murder =/= murder. Killing someone in an act of total despair (e.g. self-justice) is something wholy different than killing someone from right-wing attitudes.

The issue is, you have to ask yourself- once someone has murdered someone, is it okay to kill them back because they killed someone else? You immediately become a murderer if you kill someone, whether that's through unforgivable actions or on behalf of the authority. (referring to what Shroom said)

I know that the government over there do try to go to lengths to make the death as least directly from one person as possible, so technically you cannot pin the blame of any one person. E.g. if someone's death penalty was to be shot, you could pin the blame on the person whose bullet hit them. But they won't do that, instead, you'll get the lethal injection managed by a team of trained doctors, not just one person, and it's the substance that directly kills you, not the people. Or you'll be electrocuted, and it's the chair that kills you. (not that it really makes any difference, someone is still responsible for turning the power supply on.)

I feel like this kinda links back to what I said about euthanasia ages ago- as soon as someone is responsible for someone else's death, for professional reasons, so many things could go wrong. If just a tiny part of the process was to collapse, it could have a massive impact on the peoples' lives who were involved in making it happen.

So idk. In my opinion, killing a murderer doesn't really undo their actions at all. But I'm not really an 'eye for an eye' person (or not on this level).

In my opinion, murderers should, basically, be stopped from murdering - this doesn't mean I support the death penalty, it just means ♥♥♥♥ prisons and their rules need to step up a bit and get the message across. I mean, we've seen just how lenient the "life" sentence is - prison isn't there to be lenient.

And much like what has been said before (and what I briefly said earlier), I don't agree with the death penalty because

~MP3 Amplifier wrote:I'm not really an 'eye for an eye' person (or not on this level).

Harmless wrote:Killing another with intent is unforgivable. That's the one exception to ending a life that I can think of.

the death penalty is killing with intent

do you wish to simply say "killing with intent is unforgivable unless it's the death penalty" because that's the ♥♥♥♥, cheap way out

Supershroom wrote:

Harmless wrote:Killing another with intent is unforgivable. That's the one exception to ending a life that I can think of.

That leads us back to our earlier death penalty discussion. Maybe you're right, but such mindsets is what a humanitarian society is to be measured by.

Also murder =/= murder. Killing someone in an act of total despair (e.g. self-justice) is something wholy different than killing someone from right-wing attitudes.

Self defense is a different matter, really. If someone were to heavily injure or in a worse-case scenario, murder to save themselves from being killed, then that's self defense, not intently murdering.

*Emelia K. Fletcher wrote:

Harmless wrote:Killing another with intent is unforgivable. That's the one exception to ending a life that I can think of.

the death penalty is killing with intent

do you wish to simply say "killing with intent is unforgivable unless it's the death penalty" because that's the ♥♥♥♥, cheap way out

Then what do you suggest we do, let them just roam around and do whatever they want? So far Prisons do nothing but just stuff murderers in a cramped space, and after some years just let them out again (unless if it's the life sentence, which does not guarantee they stay inside there with positive results). What does this teach them?

Harmless wrote:Then what do you suggest we do, let them just roam around and do whatever they want? So far Prisons do nothing but just stuff murderers in a cramped space, and after some years just let them out again (unless if it's the life sentence, which does not guarantee they stay inside there with positive results). What does this teach them?

you seem to have trouble understanding that more than two things can be done in a given situation

I insist: Make them work! Have them sit on a stationary bike every day to produce electricity! Make them work in the mines or whatever!

Are you going to actually answer my question MK?