QueenPrincess Legendary
Active member
So that's the only way to get someone to spill information?
Just because you would do that doesnt mean others would
[Discussion] The Death Penatly
- Thread starter CrimsonReaper
- Start date
Just because you would do that doesnt mean others would
Tantalus Thief
Active member
pro. Only if the person is really terrible like Ted Bundy and if there is undeniable proof the person did it. IMO people like that don't deserve to have tax payer's money to keep them alive when ordinary law-abiding people actually have to work to keep themselves and their families alive. But, I think people who have done terrible but not as bad crimes should be put in jail for redemption and mental healing so they don't just go back into a life of crime.
CrimsonReaper
Active member
Awards
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
I used to be against it. I thought of it as "Killing people who killed people because killing people is bad." But I've come to realize it isn't so black and white. In my opinion, the government and the killer are both murderers. The difference between the two is why the murders were committed.
Im for killing someone in self defense but im against the courts killing people. Its proven that people can't keep their governments in check and all are guilty of corruption to some degree. That alone is reason enough for me not to want to give them the power to take the lives of their ppl through a corrupt system.
Funky Tiger
Active member
Awards
im pro. a few sri lankan militants killed the prime minister of my country 24 goddamn years ago and people are still debating whether they should be set free or hung to death; the sentence is almost over.
Scooby Doo
Active member
Awards
I used to be indifferent, legally there are arguments both pro and con. In my country the Constitutional Court ruled that the death penalty is unconstitutional, and anyway it's against EU commitments, and I could internalize their reasoning, but now I'm leaning towards its application in certain cases, align with a different line of reasoning adoptation of which was not really a problem ,because, as I said, I was indifferent originally anyway. (But I can still see and accept if and why a country chooses to not apply it).
Uzumaki Macho
Active member
Why not aggressive illegal immigrants? Why does it need to be only aggressive illegal Muslim immigrants? Your islamophobia is showing.
Islamophobe and racist are words used by people that have no solid arguments against dissent towards violent barbaric people that only come to check in westerner's taxpayers money through wellfare and harrass our women. The only reason I mention Islam is because due to their faith and culture, which is viewed as a militant law by them, they disregard the western progressive society. The facts will shush you up, don't worry about nonsense like 'islamophobia'.
Uzumaki Macho
Active member
Doesn't matter if their culture allows it or not. If two illegal immigrants commit the same act of aggression, then their punishments should be the same, regardless if one of their cultures promotes acts of aggression.
Impartial
I agree with both opposing views.
I mean yea if someone raped, beat, and murdered my family, i'd want them dead. But, at the same time, personally i think life in max security/solitary is a worse punishment so... either way.
I agree with both opposing views.
I mean yea if someone raped, beat, and murdered my family, i'd want them dead. But, at the same time, personally i think life in max security/solitary is a worse punishment so... either way.
Funky Tiger
Active member
Awards
but holland is neither the wealthiest nor the safest place around m8
studies show that 65% of the people who hate belguim hate it because they share a border with the dutch -- true story. sorry pp-sama.
And how do you think Holland's level of safety declined?.. Yeah.
As for Belgium; that study doesn't really say anything. What's your point? I'm not talking about one country either and another simpleton rides your post as if you actually have a point xd k then
