What is your stance on the death penalty and why?
D
Death penalty is humane, so yes.
Every prisoner should have the option to sign up for the death penalty.
Every prisoner should have the option to sign up for the death penalty.
No.
I don't support life in prison without the possibility of parole either. Both are cruel and inhumane.
I don't support life in prison without the possibility of parole either. Both are cruel and inhumane.
I think people should have a choice between life in prison and death by firing squad.
What if he tortured and murdered your family?
D
Yes to death
if a person kills a whole house of ppl i dont see why they should live. Context matters obviously
on other hand i think a solution for a lot is to send them in army. Drop them off overseas. If they die who cares but if they defeat the “terrorists” then better for us. And if they defect just bomb them like the rest
if a person kills a whole house of ppl i dont see why they should live. Context matters obviously
on other hand i think a solution for a lot is to send them in army. Drop them off overseas. If they die who cares but if they defeat the “terrorists” then better for us. And if they defect just bomb them like the rest
Bad, death is better then rotting in a Third world prison
Conceptually yes, and I also support public corporal punishment.
I think that would make me biased, no? Would it not be better for me to analyze the fairness of the law if I was a neutral party?
any blunt anti-crime measure is very good for my country, this shit is ridiculous
Which country are you from?
Brazil
Part of the fairness of the law is taking into consideration how the family of the victim feels
On a other side they consider us terrorists so would they kill us?
Well, I don't think that anyone's feelings should override fundamental rights.
This is esp. prevalent when it comes to femoids and rape -- more often than not, femoids and their simps will place their feelings first and due process second.
I am all for it
But only in extreme cases
Like very sadistic crimes
But only in extreme cases
Like very sadistic crimes
D
More males commit violent crimes => more males get convicted on fried on an electric chair => less men to compete with and less low inhib psychos 
The only problem is that Chads usually get away from death row, and those who are convicted to death are inkwell-tier sadists or else
The only problem is that Chads usually get away from death row, and those who are convicted to death are inkwell-tier sadists or else
Rights are feelings.
If you insist on drawing the conclusion that your right to a fair trial can be overriden by nothing more the outrage of a femoid who for no reason feels slighted by you, by all means
What about molesting a child? It doesn’t do them physical harm but it definitely effects their feelings.
But say the family of a murder victim, they would want justice for what the killer did because it can impact their life. It can cause depression, suicide, loss of financial support. And if someone tortured and killed your family, you would want them locked away forever or killed. You feelings of what the killer did should be taken into consideration for justice because what the killer did effects your life too
of course，it's crazy for some crime ridden countries as Latin America and south Africa to abolish death penalty
phillipines president death squad for criminals is based
anyone oppose death penalty is hypocrisy and cucked
phillipines president death squad for criminals is based
anyone oppose death penalty is hypocrisy and cucked
Last edited:
I support death penalty
if it's used against @mental_out
if it's used against @mental_out
Based tbh
I think death penalty should be used if a woman cheats she has shown she is a danger to the family unit and as a whole the community and bouncing from cock to cock is a danger to morals and society
I just realized my comment was dumb because we are essentially just using different language so never mind
How does what I said factor into molesting a child?
Remember, sentencing decisions set precedents for future judgments. The law should not make drastic upward or downward departures from sentencing guidelines without good reason; that one victim's family feels a stronger degree of grief than another victim's family (an incredibly subjective criterion) is not. Doing so would be an injustice.
The main problem with allowing victims' concerns to take precedence over any other variable in sentencing is that it perpetuates systemic bias.
Say a popular, middle-class blonde Stacy is hit and killed by a drunk wageslaving currymanlet. She has a wonderful, loving family, a sobbing Chad boyfriend, dozens of friends, coworkers, simps, former classmates, et cetera who show up at her funeral and the manlet's trial. At sentencing, they make eloquent victim impact statements. But imagine the roles are reversed and it's the Stacy behind the wheel, she's drunk and hits and kills a poor currymanlet. His parents are already dead, and as an incel no one really gives a fuck about him except for maybe his brother. His brother is also low SMV, is nervous, isn't great with words, so he doesn't have a great performance on the stand.
Should a person get a harsher penalty for the negligent homicide of a Stacy than for a currymanlet, simply because there is a greater outpour of despair over her death? I don't agree. By doing so that would bias the system even more than it already is -- in favour of the pale, the wealthy, the beautiful, the intelligent, the well-educated, the well-connected, at the expense of others. The judiciary should strive to treat everyone as equally as they possibly can, and doing so flies in the face of that.
It's fascinating how you evaluate the death penalty by asking me to consider a specific emotional perspective -- that of someone close to a murder victim. But I would suggest a fair system ought to be evaluated from what John Rawls would describe as "the veil of ignorance" (i.e. I have no idea who I will be born as, or whose position I will be in, but I have to set parameters for my ideal society). I would imagine that I would prefer to live in a society where the judiciary is fair and independent, where defendants are accorded due process and civil liberties, where criminal sentencing is reasoned and proportionate; as opposed to a system dominated by crude populism.
Last edited:
My point was that the emotional damage from a crime is something that should be taken into consideration. You said someone’s feelings shouldn’t override someone’s fundamental rights but molesting a child does tons of emotional damage and that’s why it’s one of the most hated crimes. So someone’s feelings should be considered in legal justice
This started because you said life imprisonment or death penalty is inhumane, and then i asked how you would feel about it if someone tortured and killed your family. Would you still think it’s inhumane if someone got life imprisonment or death penalty for torturing and killing your family? You just said your feelings shouldn’t be taken into consideration for punishment. But answer my question, do you think it’s inhumane for someone to be locked away forever or killed after torturing and murdering your family? You don’t make the punishment, I just wanna know if you would still think it’s inhumane for them to be locked up forever or killed.
And yes, the curry and stacy should get the same punishment for the same crime regardless of the people who cared about their victims. Their punishment should be based on what the legal crime was But the emotional damage of what they did is a factor in why their life imprisonment or death penalty is reasonable/not inhumane. So their death penalty or life sentence is doing a justice for the victims family
Death penalty for
criminals
S
I'm mostly against it, but I don't care about it that much tbh.
Commentary:
Gigabased
Exactly. He speaks of "cruel and not humane"... yet what if the crime is exactly that? Life without parole can in some instances even be worse than the death penalty. Something like solitary confinement or in "gen pop" if he gets beat up by other inmates.
You do know that life for Nikolas C will be worse in prison than the death penalty would have been? He'll be fresh meat for other inmates, and you know how some of them are....... many act in a homosexual way...... so life for him will be worse than the Death penalty.........
No but I support torture
Death penalty is better than rotting in prison and make it to where more criminals die so it doesnt populate the prisons with inmates that could be violent or crazy and casuse more problems to socity, so the world can be a little better.
Last edited:
Similar threads
La Longue Fourchett
Users who are viewing this thread
