Hey thanks for the welcome. :P I kinda just jumped right in before introducing myself.


As for your question…Thanks for asking. I love talking about my opinions, a guilty pleasure love to hear myself talk. hahaha

You asked me if I think a murder "should seek the death penalty." I am guessing you meant to ask me if I thought a murderer should be sentences to the death penalty. Since I am not sure I will respond to both questions.

1. I don't think any murderer would seek the death penalty unless that person wanted to die which is unlikely.

2. I do not believe in the death penalty. I do believe though that a brutal murderer deserves death, but this "deserving" does not in any way justify the act of execution especially in light of so many arguments against its consistent administration towards minorities and people of low socioeconomic status, it fallibility as proved in the nature of our system, and its fundamental logical flaw.

For some just killing a killer, giving someone what they deserve is a good enough reason to have capital punishment. For me, well I see the punishment as much more complicated than that.

Very good response. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on certain matters and you did a good job backing that up.

What matters are people not entitled to there own opinion?

btw I am glad I have earned your approval towards my argument THIS time

I'm sorry, but I'm a bit confused as to what you mean...haha I had quite a lot of Southern Comfort tonight, so if you could help me out a bit I would appreciate it

hahaha I'm sure we will agree on many other things

HAHA wow so articulate AND drunk. I dont want to argue with you when you are sober. What nights do you usually drink? I will make sure only to post on those nights

About the confusing comment. You said befor that "all people are entitled to their own opinions on SOME things." So I was wondering what things people DON'T have a right to an opinion on. I admit...I was being tounge and cheek

haha Sorry about that..I think all I really have to say is that I'm a college student living the life of a college student

I'm sorry for saying people are entitled to their own opinions on certain matters..I meant to say that people are entitled to their own opinions, period.

I'm a college student myself.

If you don't mind me asking, which school do you currently attend?? I'm currently a first semester Junior at the University of Massachusetts Lowell.

If I am bullheaded then so be it. A criminal is someone who commits crimes. Crimes are willful violations of the law. Prisons were established to punish criminals. Today, they wish to rehabilitate. Well with a recivitism rate near 70% they seem not to be doing such a good job.

They say you can judge a society by the way it treats its prisoners. What does it say about a society when its prisoners will rape and beat and torture fellow prisoners who rape and sexually abuse children?? It seems to me that the prisoners do a much more effective job of dealing with sexual predators against children then does society.

The judge was enlightened. Sixty days and the man would have been released putting the security of other children into jeopardy. Since the recivitism rate of sexual predators is around 90% it would seem that there is no real cure for them or any effective rehabilitation. So what is the answer, lifetime in prison, castration, or what? The real crime is that this judge still sits on the bench. Especially considering during the case he made the comment that he does not believe in punishment. Clearly, he does not have the mental capabilities of performing his job.

dmk

In fact from 1967 until 1977 the death penalty was not employed. The 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia held that the death penalty was unconstitutional. In the 1976 decision in Gregg v. Georgia reinstated the death penalty under the new modifications for the law.

And while you are correct that morally we may be justified in abolishing death penalty cases, and that we are the only Western society that still employs its use, it is permissable under the Constitution. Our founders for some reason found it acceptable to keep Capital Punishment but outlaw cruel and unusual punishment. To make this distinction means that the Founders say a difference between the two.

While I accept the right of the people and the individual states to make the determination on the death penalty, I believe that the federal court system has overstep its bounds in interfering. The Constitution made a distinction between Capital Punishment and cruel and unusual punishment, however, the courts have failed to do so. Considering that hanging was the method of execution at the time of the enactment of the Constitution, therefore, the Court has overstepped its bounds in ruling that method cruel and unusual.

The states and the people of the states should determine whether or not the death penalty is an acceptable form of punishment. The Federal Courts should only ensure that the use of the death penalty is equitable for the crime committed. The Court was perhaps correct in ruling that the death penalty was unconstitutional in its application for the crime of rape, and should ensure that the punishment fits the crime. However, the court should not involve itself in cases that the majority of the people of the states that employ the death penalty for specific crimes including murder. The court should ensure that the states employ the death penalty in similar cases throughout the country in those states that continue its use.

dmk