Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Stay to the reso, and stay OUT if you don't get it. Use good grammar, good form, and all that. Ready? Resolved: That a Life Sentence of Jailtime in the United States be replaced with Capital Punishment.Mod's Note: Each of these is different, and putting them in one topic would simply not work. If you feel that General is too crowded, I would suggest creating a Debate forum. I've already written the rules and entrance exam with the help of Crab Helmet and Static. *cough*. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Static Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Going to bed :/ Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Damn you. Someone else will see it, I hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabHelmet Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 A life sentence is equivalent to capital punishment in the sense that the victim's free life is permanently over. Either way, the person dies in prison; a life sentence is less merciful and wastes society's resources on sustaining a criminal with no future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 A life sentence is equivalent to capital punishment in the sense that the victim's free life is permanently over. Either way' date=' the person dies in prison; a life sentence is less merciful and wastes society's resources on sustaining a criminal with no future.[/quote'] But the prisoners do non-paying labor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesusofChaos™ Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 i live in england and we have no capital punishment. Also here life does not means life in prison. They are usually out in 25 years or so. This allows them to reoffend. For serious crimes capital punishment should be used and if verdict is beyond doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Stay to the reso' date=' and stay OUT if you don't get it. Use good grammar, good form, and all that.[/b'] READ, DAMMIT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NP Sage Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Life in prison is more expensive. The only reason CP is so expensive is because we allow appeals. Allow 1 maybe 2. You were found guilty by a jury of your peers. Besides with technology fewer and fewer errors are made. Life in prison means more crowding. It means we pay for their heat and water. We pay for their clothes and food. $1000s of dollars in taxpayers money going to people who can't contribute back. The cost of execution can be lowered too. Cost of the last meal $20. Cost of the doctor $50. Cost of drugs $100. Save money. Buy a used gun or get a military used one. $50. Cost of ammo 100 shots. $20 bucks. put to death 100 prisoners for $70 bucks or less. No doctor is needed. Work off the theory no face on head, no life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 A life sentence is equivalent to capital punishment in the sense that the victim's free life is permanently over. Either way' date=' the person dies in prison; a life sentence is less merciful and wastes society's resources on sustaining a criminal with no future.[/quote'] But the prisoners do non-paying labor. The jobs that prisoners do could easily be given to other people who need a job. And their continued existence is still costing the tax-payers. I say kill them, and kill them quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal, he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal' date=' he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return.[/quote'] Isn't that the savagery we strive to be above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal' date=' he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return.[/quote'] Isn't that the savagery we strive to be above? Savagery should be met in kind. Once criminals realize that there are dire consequences to their actions, they will stop doing illegal things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NP Sage Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 In the words of Ron White If you kill somebody...........we will kill you back. last 30 secondshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tst8sIfrNvg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal' date=' he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return.[/quote'] Isn't that the savagery we strive to be above? Savagery should be met in kind. Once criminals realize that there are dire consequences to their actions, they will stop doing illegal things. That's the equivalent of telling stupid people that if they aren't smart, they're going to get even more stupid. -_- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal' date=' he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return.[/quote'] Isn't that the savagery we strive to be above? Savagery should be met in kind. Once criminals realize that there are dire consequences to their actions, they will stop doing illegal things. That's the equivalent of telling stupid people that if they aren't smart, they're going to get even more stupid. -_- Are you arguing that criminals don't have free will over their illegal actions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NP Sage Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 No were saying that nether contributes to society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal' date=' he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return.[/quote'] Isn't that the savagery we strive to be above? Savagery should be met in kind. Once criminals realize that there are dire consequences to their actions, they will stop doing illegal things. That's the equivalent of telling stupid people that if they aren't smart, they're going to get even more stupid. -_- Are you arguing that criminals don't have free will over their illegal actions? No, I'm trying to show you that what you're proposing is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 But what justifies the "Eye for an eye" method? What doesn't? If a thief wishes to steal' date=' he forfeits his right to have a hand to steal with. If he continues, we cut off his feet, and so on and so forth. Same deal with murder. If one kills, one must expect to be killed in return.[/quote'] Isn't that the savagery we strive to be above? Savagery should be met in kind. Once criminals realize that there are dire consequences to their actions, they will stop doing illegal things. That's the equivalent of telling stupid people that if they aren't smart, they're going to get even more stupid. -_- Are you arguing that criminals don't have free will over their illegal actions? No, I'm trying to show you that what you're proposing is wrong. Well, you are doing a poor job. Try to pick an example that fits better next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Read it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Read it again. Why? You didn't change your rebuttal, so reading it again would accomplish nothing. What you were saying was that criminals can't help being criminals, just how stupid people can't help being stupid, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
II DEFiiNED II Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Debating is for little girls that cant end an argument because they are immature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Debating is for little girls that cant end an argument because they are immature. That's the ****ing best you can do? Weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
II DEFiiNED II Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Debating is for little girls that cant end an argument because they are immature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco Straybyrn Posted April 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Debating is for little girls that cant end an argument because they are immature. Mod reference quote. And Chaos Pudding' date=' my point is that by showing criminals they'll get in trouble, they'll just get better. It's not worth it. Would you rather catch the killer and have him be in jail, or have him be loose? EDIT: [spoiler=Sig for mod reference'] [align=center]Draco Straybyrn/Darkthorne/Matt Enloe is a little girl. If you think so, put this in your sig. ( Watch out, he will probably steal my idea just like he did for my previous sig, and my club ) monstermaster52 (8:05:48 PM): Hey look, it's you on the left..JK Rewrite (8:06:31 PM): Hey look, it's you sucking a **** like a little girl!monstermaster52 signed off at 8:09:03 PM. I think I made him cry ^[/align] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.