I don’t favor capital punishment for 3 reasons; 1. “Thou shalt not kill” - is pretty definitive and there’s not a lot of ambiguity in the statement. Capital punishment is premeditated killing by the state. 2. If the person is guilty, I think death actually lets them off to easy. Pieces of crap like this don’t value other lives, why assume they value theirs. They have already made a conscious or unconscious decision to be killed and they aren’t working toward retirement. Killing them may make us feel better, but if they prefer it to alternate punishment methods it’s not going to be the deterrent we hope for. Guys like this should get ‘Max Solitary Life’. Put them in an 8 X 8 cinder block room with a toilet/sink corner and nothing else. No TV, no books, no human contact – nothing but time. Once a week they get to go outside and look at the sky so they remember what they’ve lost. Then they go back and stare cinder block – and it’s for the rest of their life. Think in terms of Papillion. I think all of these types of people (extreme rapists) would at some point prefer death. Make sure they have no tools for suicide. 3. If the person is not guilty – we all get a mulligan. ADDED EDIT AFTER READING MY POST FYI TO READERS – For those who don’t know, I have three daughters. My heart tells me I want to pound this guy into an unrecognizable pile of flesh, bone and blood. But my head tells me what I said above is the right way to go.
Miscreants who rape babies are not human. Therefore, they do not get the protection of the 6th commandment.
IMO The author of the 6th commandment, and his Son, may have a different take on that. And if I would have listed the points of my post in order of importance to me I would have listed #2 first. I'm not trying to show I have some kind of ‘pure forgiving heart’, not at all. I really think we are doing these guys a favor by killing them. Make them face the long psychological death rather than the quick physical death.
These people deserve to sit alone and think about what they have done for the rest of their lives. The problem is there will be a bleeding heart type that will work tirelessly to get them either out or in better conditions.
And the same types work tirelessly to stop executions. We should create a system based on what we think is right - then tirelessly work to protect it as others work to change it. We should not go in a direction we don't believe in just to avoid confrontation with the other side. When we do that we will eventually get tired of defending something we don't totally believe in - and then they will win.
It's not definitive at all. After all, what did Moses do when he came down from Mount Sinai with the Ten Commandments and found the Israelites worshipping an idol? He had 3,000 of them killed! "Thou shalt not kill", the most overt mistranslation in the Old testament. Ancient Hebrew only had about 8,000 words as opposed to modern English with over 120,000 words. It was difficult to express nuances without placing a word in context, especially in an oral tradition. They just didn't have the words for executions, battle deaths, suicides, homicides, fratricides, etc. But clearly the commandment was intended to mean "thou shalt not murder". The original Hebrew of the sixth commandment is lo tirtsach. Tirtsach can mean to break in pieces, kill or murder. Lo is the Hebrew negative. In fact, in the first five books of the bible, death by stoning is prescribed for breaking any of the first 7 commandments except possibly the second. Surely the commandment did not include killing by execution. David and Solomon were beloved of God yet they slew "thousands and ten-thousands" in battle. Surely the commandment did not include killing in battle. "Thou shalt not murder", while not traditional in the King James Version, is actually the proper translation of the Sixth Commandment. It just did not survive multiple translations from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English unscathed.
The actions of Moses and others are not the commandment - they are actions of people. The fact that we continued to have slavery after the Bill of Rights was passed did not make the text of the Bill of Rights wrong; the text of the law made the actions wrong. The Bible goes on a bit further after the Pentateuch - including the wisdom and prophet sections of the Old Testament. And then of course there is the New Testament. Not going into all of that. But aside from all of that, I agree with you that "Thou shalt not murder" is likely the proper translation. I just consider state sanctioned, planed, non-self defense required, killing to be rationalized murder. I accept that many if not most people disagree, but that’s what I believe and that’s what’s behind point #1 of my 3. Point 2 was the main point. We are letting them off easy by killing them.
You've got a point, but I'd like to think it would be burning in hell once the execution is complete, so that's not really getting off easy. Not only that, anyone disgusting enough to do what that thing did would probably only get off on sitting in a cell re-living it over and over again for years on end.
I understand. My mother felt the same way. But I feel that if you take another's life you forfeit your own. What annoys me is the "Pro-Life" side of the abortion debate feels that a first trimester abortion is an execution, but most have no qualms whatsoever about executing a human in his 125th trimester. Is "life" sacred or is it not? This is why I hate lethal injections. Executions should be horrible if they are to be a deterrent. The gallows has always been effective. It will cost about $50,000 to execute a murderer. It will cost $50,000 a year for the rest of their lives to keep them locked up. How does this benefit society? If they are unfit to live among humans ever again, then they are unfit to live at all, in my book.
Couple things here amigo, Why does it cost so much to kill one of these idiots? I mean really? If 50k is the going rate I'm in the wrong damn business. I can off these bastards at a much lower cost to the gubment. I should have a new boat by next summer I am a pro-lifer and while I can certainly understand the cause for concern in your argument, my response is basically the same as something you said in an earlier post. "Once they take a life they forfeit their own". HUGE difference in the life of an unborn baby and the life of a punk that is past the point of knowing better that decides to perpetrate such dastardly acts upon other innocent members of society. So in a nutshell yes, life is in fact sacred and should be protected. If that includes taking it from those that have no respect for it nor innocence then so be it. Off with their heads and I won't feel an ounce of remorse for it. Thats the truth truth!
