Search results for query: *

Fleiur implied that we just execute them immediately after they've been convicted; completely bypassing the appeals process. True, they did later amend with this post: But it doesn't make any sense as a clarification, because by suggesting the bullets it implies that we should execute them on...

What made you think it was? I've been arguing against the idea that the death penalty should be used wantonly, as Fleiur suggested, the whole time.

"It is of more importance to the community that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt should be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished....when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the...

Those appeals happen because of the chance that the person could still be innocent; they let them have so many appeals because there has to be absolutely zero doubt that they're guilty. Imagine if you've been accused of something particularly heinous, and that you were ultimately convicted...

It depends; how much is your own life worth to you? Because once that precedent is set, that we just execute people on the spot because someone thinks they deserve to die, then those bullets will eventually be used on you.

For the same reason they have to pay far more to execute them; because things like that are what our tax dollars are for, and our only other option is to let them loose in our streets.

For several reasons. Firstly, I believe killing is wrong; even if that person is a monster. Secondly, there's always that tiny chance they're innocent; and if we execute them for something they didn't do, we can't undo that. Lastly, from a practical perspective, the death penalty is simply more...

I'd prefer to give them life in prison; but that's just me.

That's fair; though I'd like to think it would be difficult to find someone who would argue in favor of forcing someone into becoming a prostitute, or anything for that matter. The most basic right we have is the right to choose for ourselves how to live our lives.

Yes well, you're not going to have much luck convincing someone that their moral framework is a lie; anymore than they'd have convincing you that yours is. Human history is replete with examples of where that argument goes when nobody is willing to back down, and it usually ends with a lot of...

In what way? Al Capone's entire criminal career was built off of prohibition; this is not in dispute. The fact that he didn't magically disappear when prohibition ended just shows that putting the genie back in the bottle is not a simple endeavor.