The Death Penalty

It's complete certainty that they did all that awful stuff to him and that is what is the point. Why they did it is not the main point. The main point is that they did it.

And if a mentally challenged person killed someone, would you feel the same way? Why they did it is the MOST important part of any case. Understanding the criminal is necessary to sentencing.

__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

Completely different. These kids weren't mentally challenged.

And even still, some people labeled "Mentally challenged" should get the death penalty. Not all, but some. See Andrea Yates.

I should have made my screenname "Hammurabi"

It's not completely different. For those people there's a reason why they did it or why they didn't understand. The same thing can be applied to, for lack of a better word, normal people. Normal people can have reasons, as well. That's why the death sentence should not be done on a whim.

I don't want to here this BS about being mentally challenged. There are some who are truly mentally challenged and then there are the people who do something twisted and people say "Oh, well they must be mentally sick to do something like that"

The latter deserve no mercy. Sorry, but that's the way I see it. The people in group 1 certainly do deserve different punishments, but those in the second group are just twisted people, not 'sick' people.

For instance, Chris Burke is mentally challenged. Andrea Yates, is not. Needs to be executed.

BobbyB, I'm not saying everyone is mentally challenged. That's clearly not the case. The point I'm making is you're making exceptions for people that have reasons. Then you're turning right around and saying other people can't have any reason what so ever, mental or emotional. You're contradicting yourself.

Not even. I'm saying some sets of mental problems (Like retardation) are viable reasons while others aren't.

Other things like "I didn't mean to kill him, just hurt him" or "God told me to do it" or even "But I'm just a kid" are never valid excuses.

Guys like Darrell Ferguson need to fry. I don't care if he's borderline retarded.

If one reason is good, then another one should be just as good. I'm personally not a favor of "God made me do it" and think the person should be fried just for saying it but, that doesn't make my reasons right. If I had a better understanding of the person, I can make the decision of whether they really do have problems or are just faking it to get out. If you take the time to do that, you'll see that not everyone should get the death plenty.

When you have a mental capacity that makes it almost impossible to discern right from wrong, then yes...you have an excuse.

But if you are able to discern right from wrong and still make the wrong decision, than you have no more reasons. Bottomline for me.

There are plenty of mentally challenged that know the difference from right and wrong. But by your views, we'd kill them anyways. Besides, right and wrong is not black and white.

And that, right there, is exactly why we are having this argument.

Stripped down to the core, this argument is about that. Because I believe that everything is black and white. I only deal in absolutes.

I'm sorry you feel that way. No offense, but that just shows how immature you are. I am glad, however, that the majority of people don't feel the same.

I disagree.

I think just about everything has two side to it and that's right and wrong.

Right and wrong is not subjective, IMO. Murder is wrong. I don't think that's up for debate. Rape is wrong. I don't think that's up for debate, either.

The world is full of gray. Ask any of the countless adults on this forum and most of them will tell you the same thing. That it's not always clear cut and dry.

The death penalty is cold blooded murder.

__________________
http://www.last.fm/user/diezelpower/

The death penalty is justice for those who can't avenge themselves.

Isn't a wasted life surrounded by grey walls justice enough for killing someone else? All those years to think about what you've done and what you're missing out on as a result of your actions?

And to me, executing someone doesn't sound like justice, it sounds like revenge.

__________________
"When I was younger, I always wanted to be somebody. Now that I'm older, I realise I should've been more specific."

There's a reason why we have laws in place. There's a reason why we have the death penalty. No one wants to die.

I guarantee you, if you take away the death penalty, murder rates will go up.

Just like they did in Europe? Next please...

As far as I'm aware the state of Texas has one of, if not the highest rate of state executions in the US. George Bush himself signed around 100 death warrants during his time as governor (*).

And yet...between 1982 and 1991, crime rates within Texas rose by 24%, compared to the national crime rate of 5%. And violent crime in Texas rose by nearly 46% (**).

Judging by that evidence, I'm certainly not convinced on the effectiveness of the death penalty.



* http://nodeathpenalty.org/content/pa...&content_id=21
** http://nodeathpenalty.org/downloads/...easons2001.pdf