I like think we've progressed a bit since Hammurabi's Code. It's just a bit too extreme, a bit barbaric. For example, last week a child accidentally shot his 11 year old brother in the head. They were playing with a rifle, didn't realize it was loaded, and when he put it down he accidentally set it off. Does that kid deserve to be shot in the head with a rifle too? His life is pretty messed up now as it is.dakotak wrote:I believe in an eye of an eye. You beat the crud out of me and ill beat the crud out of you.You killed someone you should be killed in that manner you killed the person i.e you smashed some ones skull on the ground,it should be done to you. I also think it should be the same for people who abuse animals as well instead of just jail time.
Britain has tried that a few times. One criminal "colony" became the country of Australia. Another became the state of Georgia. So yeah, it worked. Kinda. Not sure it would work in the modern world, though.antonio3654 wrote: Personally, I think we should find a habitable island and stick them there with food and water, as well as a means of living (living quarters, livestock, food seeds, etc.). Maybe they would sort themselves out. And it would eliminate most of their rights and force them to concentrate on living, rather than crimes.
I became interested in this thread because it reminded me of the Casey Anthony trial. One of the reasons jurors didn't want to convict her was due to the slight possibility she might be innocent. She most probably isn't (completely) innocent, but if they messed up, they would have sentenced an innocent woman to death. They couldn't wouldn't do it.
A few years ago, I supported the death penalty, but since then I have come to reevaluate my opinion. Now, I'm just not sure. I dislike the death penalty because I don't think humans should be able to "play God," or decide the fates of others. Just as criminals are heinous for ending a person's life too soon, so I think that even criminals should be treated with some human dignity and respect. Their lives are still their own.
However, I think, possibly, the death sentence would be justified if the reason was to "protect the innocent" instead of simply looking to "avenge the victim." For example, if just the fact a person is alive could be a threat to society, or causes incessant fear to the same, or if that person's death could stop a larger crime group from taking action, and he/she truly cannot be stopped by any other means, including lifetime incarceration, then that person might be reasonably executed. Of course, those cases are supposed to be the utmost extreme in circumstances and wouldn't apply to "normal" crimes, such as a singular murder. The death penalty would, in theory, be used very sparingly.
Overall, I think the living should be considered before the dead in the case of the death penalty. yes, a victim deserves justice, but "justice" can be widely interpreted.
Please don't blast me for this OPINION. I have seen reasonable arguments from both sides, and I have said that I'm not completely sure one way or another. This subject is more gray than black and white, much like the law itself. Thank you.