That might make the family more evil than the criminal in certain cases. How could the Germans and Japanese forgive our bombs- because we forgave them? Would you cut off the hands of those who steal food to feed their family? Theft has many levels.
On May 19, 9:13 pm, the taoist shaman <[email protected]> wrote: > chuck , for one thing the family might get some restitution , by > eather letting the killer rot in prison , or choosing an imaginative > exicution , and shurely such terms would be a detureant , cut off > hands for theft , less people would steal. > > > > Chuck Bowling wrote: > > I have to disagree. There is really no point in torturing a person who's > > fate is already determined. I don't have anything against revenge but why > > bother with someone who is going to die anyway? > > > As to letting the victim's family decide if a killer should live or die, > > once the convict has been determined to be a menace to society the death > > penalty isn't really about punishment. It's about protecting society. The > > family shouldn't have a say so in whether society should be protected or > > not. > > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:24 PM, the taoist shaman > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > i think the victoms family should decide wether or not killer is put > > > to death , and if so , the method of exicution , take itchy and > > > scratchy from the simpsons for example , itchy covers scratchy in BBQ > > > sauce , and opens a box of flesh eating ants ! > > > > Chuck Bowling wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:23 AM, [email protected] < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Why should we not? > > > > > Why should we not what? > > > > > > Should we instead make our selfs guilty of the same behaviour that > > > > > seems universal reprehensabile? Should we then sink to that level > > > > > ourselves? Two wrongs don't make a right and all that. > > > > > My original point was that life is cheap. We don't kill because it's > > > right > > > > or wrong. We kill for expediency. > > > > > > The point is to maintian that moral superiority. If a man steals from > > > > > me, can I then steal from him? Wouldn't that make me also a theif? > > > > > Personally I don't claim any kind of superiority - moral or otherwise. > > > > If > > > > somebody steals from me I'll try to steal back my property and possibly > > > > anything else that happens to be lying around. I may even give the guy a > > > > punch in the nose on the way out the door. If you want to call me a > > > > thief > > > > for it go ahead. > > > > > > revenge killings as we know only lead to further revenge killings. We > > > > > have here in the UK a growing youth gang problem, with kids killing > > > > > other kids for slights imagined or otherwise, and then in turn the > > > > > other gang of kids killing members of the ther other gang. Is that > > > > > right, it is the correct behaviour? > > > > > This just leads into the whole argument - is war right or wrong. Is it > > > wrong > > > > for a street gang to retaliate when it's territory is breached by a > > > > rival > > > > gang? If no then why is it right for nations to do the same thing? > > > > > > Killing a killer makes no logical sense. > > > > > I disagree. Killing a killer has value. > > > > > It removes a threat from society. > > > > It frees up resources needed to protect the society from that killer. > > > > It provides a deterrent against other killings.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
