i was looking at a website and i saw a question. would it be murder to kill someone who is on death row? If not, why is anything murder? i'm a bit of a pessimist and this just made me think, and i wanted to here all your opinions
Well murder is defined as a unlawful premeditated killing of one human by another.
So if this an unlawful killing happened, then yes.
By law, a sentence to death by X manner is lawful
Read this and then report back
http://www.owensworld.com/jokes/medical/suicide-or-murder-or-suicide
Quote from: Taysby on January 02, 2015, 12:38:28 AM
It's murder. There's always a chance he gets a pardon, so it's not a for sure thing.
[/quote
i dont think thats actually relevant.]
Quote from: cltrn81 on January 01, 2015, 10:59:27 PM
Read this and then report back
http://www.owensworld.com/jokes/medical/suicide-or-murder-or-suicide
wow, umm not sure where to start, im calling that suicide, but my point was that everone is on "death row" considering we will all die. but if someone just shortens our existence is that murdur. ex. if someone kills a man in death row, murdur or not
Quote from: MuggyWuggy on January 01, 2015, 10:32:27 PM
Well murder is defined as a unlawful premeditated killing of one human by another.
So if this an unlawful killing happened, then yes.
By law, a sentence to death by X manner is lawful
Agreed. Murder and killing have different definitions in english. Murder is unlawful, but the person performing lethal injection is normally being directed by the law to do so. Now if your just talking about shooting someone who is on death row, "cause there gonna be executed anyway" is definitely murder and unlawful.
Quote from: cltrn81 on January 01, 2015, 10:59:27 PM
Read this and then report back
http://www.owensworld.com/jokes/medical/suicide-or-murder-or-suicide
Wow, that's pretty wild dude!
Quote from: Rothsteine on January 02, 2015, 01:30:03 AM
Quote from: cltrn81 on January 01, 2015, 10:59:27 PM
Read this and then report back
http://www.owensworld.com/jokes/medical/suicide-or-murder-or-suicide
wow, umm not sure where to start, im calling that suicide, but my point was that everone is on "death row" considering we will all die. but if someone just shortens our existence is that murdur. ex. if someone kills a man in death row, murdur or not
If someone shortens our existence unlawfully - very important word you keep forgetting to use.
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
So much gray areas in this. Makes it too hard to really comment. Would really need to know the background. I could easyally spin a right or wrong situation.
Quote from: Cender on January 02, 2015, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
Murder= unlawful killing
Execution= sanctioned killing
You're still killing someone. You would still be a killer. Regardless if that killing was legal(execution, self defense) or illegal(murderin all degrees, manslaughter).
Quote from: Cender on January 02, 2015, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
The point of punishment is not reduction of killers in the world, it is to remove guilt via restitution and retribution. In murder case there can be no restitution as we cannot raise dead yet.
Quote from: Piotr on January 18, 2015, 04:46:49 AM
Quote from: Cender on January 02, 2015, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
The point of punishment is not reduction of killers in the world, it is to remove guilt via restitution and retribution. In murder case there can be no restitution as we cannot raise dead yet.
There is more than one "point" to punishment. One is certainly to deter others from doing it. How is guilt being removed? Even if you do your sentence, that doesnt mean your now innocent. Your still guilty of the crime, but that doesnt mean you cant positively contribute to society after the fact.
Quote from: particle on January 18, 2015, 10:27:33 AM
Quote from: Piotr on January 18, 2015, 04:46:49 AM
Quote from: Cender on January 02, 2015, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
The point of punishment is not reduction of killers in the world, it is to remove guilt via restitution and retribution. In murder case there can be no restitution as we cannot raise dead yet.
There is more than one "point" to punishment. One is certainly to deter others from doing it. How is guilt being removed? Even if you do your sentence, that doesnt mean your now innocent. Your still guilty of the crime, but that doesnt mean you cant positively contribute to society after the fact.
I would just drop the topic before this turns into another ban-a-thon.
^ if that's what every thread eventually has happen, then why even have a debate section for .politics.,etc? I see people debating a philosophical question, nothing more.
Quote from: Piotr on January 18, 2015, 04:46:49 AM
Quote from: Cender on January 02, 2015, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
The point of punishment is not reduction of killers in the world, it is to remove guilt via restitution and retribution. In murder case there can be no restitution as we cannot raise dead yet.
Yet.
Quote from: Taysby on January 25, 2015, 01:26:15 AM
The reason why (not arguing for or against here) is because they felt like killing someone, so they should get that same thing as punishment. The bible (which a large number of Americans believe in) as part of the law of Moses says that your punishment equal to what you commit. (Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth)
That is Hammurabi's Code (Babylonian King), and I would like to point out that the Bible is irrelevant to any discussion of law because of the separation of church and state (at least in the US), regardless of how many Americas believe in it.
Quote from: ConanEdo on January 25, 2015, 12:40:24 AM
Quote from: Piotr on January 18, 2015, 04:46:49 AM
Quote from: Cender on January 02, 2015, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 02, 2015, 12:01:04 PM
Killing a killer does nothing to reduce the amount of killers in the world- Winston Churchill. You're still killing someone regardless if it's sanctioned.
I'd argue that quote questions the merits of the law and does not impugn the individual upholding the law for following through with it.
The point of punishment is not reduction of killers in the world, it is to remove guilt via restitution and retribution. In murder case there can be no restitution as we cannot raise dead yet.
And this vengeance driven mentality is one of many reasons why the current system fails. What is to be gained for "retribution's" sake? It amazes me that people will say taking away one life somehow helps after another has been taken. If the person is a threat to society, then they should be removed and all attempts be made to rehabilitate. If not, work something out. The draconian laws of this country drive me insane.
If you kill my daughter I will kill you. Logical enough?
I want my murderers* to be killed as their punishment, please.
* defined as people who willingly plot and execute events leading to no other outcome than my death.
Fair enough?
Quote from: Taysby on January 25, 2015, 02:27:41 PM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on January 25, 2015, 01:55:03 AM
Quote from: Taysby on January 25, 2015, 01:26:15 AM
The reason why (not arguing for or against here) is because they felt like killing someone, so they should get that same thing as punishment. The bible (which a large number of Americans believe in) as part of the law of Moses says that your punishment equal to what you commit. (Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth)
That is Hammurabi's Code (Babylonian King), and I would like to point out that the Bible is irrelevant to any discussion of law because of the separation of church and state (at least in the US), regardless of how many Americas believe in it.
The point was that because Americans believe in it, their tendencies tend to mirror it.
Also, under the constitution, separation of church and state means that the government will not make a religion or declare one to be the national religion. Referencing the bible is just fine
Not really. You can't use the bible in a court of law as a reference. Or then use turn the other cheek
Quote from: Taysby on January 25, 2015, 08:46:02 PM
I didn't mean as far as interpreting law goes.
I meant that it's ok to reference it in making law and suck. That does not violate church and state.
And regardless, I was just trying to explain why the system is like it is.
Our legal system(for citizens of the United States) is based off of English Common law. Louisiana is the only exception because the French used Roman common law and it stuck after the Louisiana purchase.
You're wrong, but everyone in England was Christian at the time, so essentially you're kind of right.
Quote from: bravado883 on January 26, 2015, 01:22:05 PM
As I mentioned earlier, data and statistics on repeat offenders comparing death penalty and non-death penalty states indicate that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent.
I call a lie on this claim. Post scientifically valid links to your data or stop spreading the lie else you will be banned.
Quote from: bravado883 on January 27, 2015, 09:57:03 AM
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates
Don't threaten to ban when you don't have the information. Makes you seem kinda childish, in particular when I thought I was agreeing with you. People on here post things with no information to back it up all the time, but I say one thing that you don't agree with and you threaten a ban? How is that "logical" as you so often like to say? I don't lie about this stuff, but the few times I have posted links or information, NO ONE looks at it. I figured I'd save my self the time this time, but I guess not.
I disagree with you = ban is not the way to win an argument against me.
The statistics you post contain no valid scientific proof of the claim you made. You stated something which is logically not true and posted statistics to claim it to be true, which is not allowed and punishable by 10 days ban. Correlation is not causation. Post your crap on your Facebook not here, I'm not gonna be paying for SEO of pages containing statistics posed as science.
I also do not like your attitude, this is not your forum so behave like a guest not like you own the place. See you in 10 days.
This case is the same as AA's, any further posts in (Gathering -> Misc -> Discussion) claiming that "statistical data is proof in science", "correlation is causation" are going to have their poster subject to 10 days ban and their links will be replaced with closest links to http://wikipedia.org, where at least log remains as part of effort to expose lies. Mobs will be banned permanently.
Quote from: bravado883 on January 27, 2015, 10:16:13 AM
(...) This is a tough question; even criminal law or criminology scholars don't agree (although according to Amnesty International, 88% of criminologists believe capital punishment does NOT deter). I, however, tend to side with the information indicating a LACK of deterrent effect. But if you told me "no, it does deter," I think that's a valid point of view as well. We can disagree and still be respectful.
Logical proof by form of Induction*, part of mathematical logic persistent in reality of the world:
1. Ask yourself if you are more or less likely to commit Murder** if the punishment is death vs. life in prison.
2. Ask yourself if there are more people like you.
If at least 3 people exist who are less likely to commit murder if the punishment is death vs. life in prison, then death punishment is a deterrent. True or false?
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_induction
** a planned, conscious execution of events leading to no other outcome than death of other person
Alright.
That's enough.
One banning is enough.
Please let this topic die.
Quote from: the_intelligentleman on January 29, 2015, 08:01:57 AM
Alright.
That's enough.
One banning is enough.
Please let this topic die.
Or we allow open discussion and let the people do as they choose at their own risk. There are ethical guidelines to this forum, if you choose not to follow them, you risk getting banned. One person getting banned for 10 days is no reason to stop free speech.
Quote from: NovusOrbis on January 29, 2015, 09:49:13 AM
We allow open discussion and let the people do as they choose at their own risk. There are ethical guidelines to this forum, if you choose not to follow them, you risk getting banned. One person getting banned for 10 days is no reason to stop free speech.
Fixed it for you ;)
Or should I say, took it out of context? :P