Originally posted by Zipdot
Yeah, but these incidents are not deliberated by the state for a number of years before the state in its wisdom sees fit to commit to an act of
My point exactly, death happens, and not everyone gets the benefit of having their peers decide when and how it should happen, and/or if it is
The offhand slaughter of an innocent after a completely unjust prosecution and conviction doesn't NEED to be "blown out of proportion." The case
speaks for itself.
First of all, slaughter is hardly the appropriate word for a controlled execution.
n 1: the killing of animals (as for food) 2: a sound defeat [syn: thrashing, walloping, debacle, drubbing, trouncing, whipping] 3: the savage and
excessive killing of many people [syn: massacre, mass murder, carnage, butchery] v 1: kill (animals) usually for food consumption; "They slaughtered
their only goat to survive the winter" [syn: butcher] 2: kill a large number of people indiscriminately; "The Hutus massacred the Tutsis in Rwanda"
[syn: massacre, mow down]
Secondly, the article does not say that the youth was innocent. It says that he MAY have been innocent, and then points to several reasons why that
Thirdly, no it doesn't need to be blown out of proportion, but it is. Your post betrays your emotional involvement from its start.
Originally posted by Informatu
When a boy is drafted into the military only to be killed while in transport to the combat zone, is he not also an "innocent"? Yet his death is a
direct result of procuring the freedom and justice that the citizens of the state require.
The two cases are incomparable, obviously. The state deliberated on the fate of this innocent young teenager and eventually decided to
purposely kill him.
Obviously? The state also deliberates on whether to go to war, and sometimes purposely decide to send purposefully drafted youth to the front lines,
where they may be killed, purposely.
For starters, ever since Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 in 1977, the "death penalty" has not been applied in rape cases because this punishment was
found to be unconstitutional in that the punishment did not fit the crime.
Secondly, I know some very rational people who disagree with the death penalty for various reasons.
I'm afraid my own post was unclear in the way I wrote rapist/killers. I meant those two as combined, not an either or. I will try to be more clear in
Originally posted by Informatu
However, if your argument is based on religious or just plain moral reprehensiveness of public execution, then that is your view, and I respect
As opposed to what? You say that someone who thinks an obvious offender shouldn't be put to death is irrational, and then you add the moral
and religious qualifiers.
I don't say that I agree with their view, I said that I respect it. It is a respectable statement to say that the death-penalty does not jibe with
your religious or moral worldview. My point is that using the ACCIDENTAL execution of an innocent as the argument for banning its practice is
nonsense. Perhaps we should also ban air travel since planes crash occaisionally?
Your Saudi Arabian execution is a strawman argument. We do not execute "heretics" or "loose women" here in the US of A. The means of execution has
little to do with the argument for or against capital punishment.
Is it civilized to lock people away for 30-40 years with no hope of ever living a decent life? How do you deal with uncivilized and brutal acts of
crime? PS you may want to look up murder. Lawful execution is not murder by definition.
Yes, death by traveling is an acceptable risk. And for many people, the chance that an innocent person may be executed is an acceptable risk, if it
means that we are also allowed to rid society of its most horrible and violent criminals.
Do you not see the hypocrisy in asking mercy for those who give none?
I also hope, for my sake, that I am never wrongly accused of murder. However, I consider that another "acceptable risk," since I am not known to
frequent the wrong place, at the wrong time, and accidentally slip into victims pools of blood, and whoops, have no alibi.
As for the American war in Iraq, I think we can leave that discussion off of this thread. You may think you know what I would say about that matter,
but you are probably wrong. You should know better than to try baiting poeple however.