Adriel Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Hi, guys Sorry. The question might be disturbing for some. But I'm sorry. Tomorrow I'll be in a MUN Conference and the problem that will be discussed tomorrow is about arbitrary, summary and extrajudicial execution. And even worse... I represent a country that everyone hates... the DPRK. So no matter what, I have to support my country and hence support execution. The question is... What should I say to support execution? Why do you think it should be allowed? For your help, I say thank you. I'm sorry, Adriel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerd.muller Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Do you really think, that Forum is the right place to discuss about such a difficult problem? In my opinion this is a way to political and personal for TPR!!! Gerd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disney Dood Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Only for murder. Eye for an eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speeddeamon128 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I'm for it as long as a person new they were murdering someone & wanted to. If it was an accident I would say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paintballer Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I believe execution should only be allowed due to a criminal offense that results in the death of a fellow human being, as said above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceace12 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Agree with the previous post.....Also, if they are 100% guilty and admitted it. Don't have them sit on death row for 20 years, do it quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfBeastSucks Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 My personal opinion is that the death penalty is barbaric and stupid. The only argument I can really think you could say in support of it is the eye for an eye crap, though that is a mix of church and state, which is a whole different issue completely. I'd be able to help you a lot more if you had the option of saying why the death penalty is wrong and shouldn't be allowed, but good luck at the conference anyway. Sorry I couldn't really offer any help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pufferfish Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I say that if the crime is bad enough, let them hang. I don't want to be paying for the health and care of a murderer or rapist, and I certainly don't want them back out on the streets. I'm sorry but if you murder someone, I'm not giving my taxes for you to rest peacefully in our hotel-like prisons for the rest of your life being sheltered and fed daily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 In the past, political threads and TPR haven't mixed very well. If this conversation remains civil, so be it. If not, the thread will be locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disney Dood Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 My personal opinion is that the death penalty is barbaric and stupid. You know what else is barbaric and stupid? Murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astroworldfan1 Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 I think it's right for those who have commited the crime. I'm against it when innocent people are put to death. -Tatum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfBeastSucks Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 My personal opinion is that the death penalty is barbaric and stupid. You know what else is barbaric and stupid? Murder. If you want to talk about it, you can PM or email me. I'm not going to talk about it/fight with you about it here, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 ^This is exactly what I'm talking about. Watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalepi_Konei Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 If it was an accident I would say no. Yes, but that is very controversial, where does the line for "accidents" end and purpose begin. If a person is drunk and driving a car, doesn't know what he's doing because he's intoxicated, hits another car kills the driver, but he magically survives. Is that an accident, or something else, he didn't know what he was doing, but he was full aware that he was getting drunk and then he drove. That's just my thoughts though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paintballer Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Only for murder. Eye for an eye. An Eye for an Eye makes the whole world blind - Mahatma Ghandi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darklingscribe Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Execution is a tough topic to discuss. In a few cases I do believe it is the right thing to do. To the best of my knowledge the only crimes that can bring the death penalty are First Degree Murder and Treason. Treason being ranked as the worst crime on the books it is possible to commit. Execution for treason is rare because of all the mixed feelings surrounding the execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg on June 19th 1953. Though not technically treason they were charged with conspiracy to commit espionage during the communist scare of the early 50s. For First Degree Murder I do believe that execution is sometimes warranted. If the convicted criminal shows no sign or willingness of reform and poses a life threatening danger even to his fellow inmates and guards. Where this gets mired in confusion is the question of is such a person of sound mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebl Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Personally, I feel that capital punishment is neither cruel and unusual, nor is it unconstitutional. It is a fair punishment for first degree murder. However, realistically, the costs involved to the state are enormous. It is less expensive to house a criminal for life, believe it or not. States could save a ton of money and put it to much better use by sentencing a person found guilty of first degree murder to life imprisonment without any possibility of parole. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swimace Posted February 14, 2009 Share Posted February 14, 2009 Hi, guys Sorry. The question might be disturbing for some. But I'm sorry. Tomorrow I'll be in a MUN Conference and the problem that will be discussed tomorrow is about arbitrary, summary and extrajudicial execution. And even worse... I represent a country that everyone hates... the DPRK. So no matter what, I have to support my country and hence support execution. The question is... What should I say to support execution? Why do you think it should be allowed? For your help, I say thank you. I'm sorry, Adriel I've done high level college MUN conferences before, and to be honest if you want to be any good at debate you shouldn't base your arguments off of TPR forum members. As the representative from the DPRK you're job isn't to simply argue for the death penalty based on what TPR members would say or what you would say, you're job is to say exactly what a representative from the DPRK would say. You need to be able to confidently say, "The DPRK believes that ______ and here is why.". Asking a group of random coaster enthusiasts their opinion is setting yourself up to get slammed by stronger delegates. The way to prepare for a MUN competition is to go through the real UN's archives and find 1)what your country's representatives have said about it in speeches, 2) has your country signed anything relating to the subject, and 3) who they signed it along with. If you don't know these things you're running the risk of looking stupid when someone says "representative from the DPRK, could you explain why you're saying this when your country is a signatory on something that contradicts what you're saying? Has the DPRK suddenly changed its position?". In short: everybody in here who is saying "I think _______" really has no use to you. Also, not everybody is going to hate you. Just because your country isn't popular in the United States because of issues of security doesn't mean that your country isn't going to be able to work with other delegates. Steps to a MUN conference: 1)Walk around and meet everybody, especially spend time making sure your allies know who you are. 2)Feel out who has done their research and who hasn't. As a delegate who would be well researched going into a conference, I would 1) try to sway people who seem to be on the fence and 2) try to convince anyone who's on the fence that the opposing countries are wrong. Simply put, if you come across in an MUN conference the way you do in this thread then all of the good players are going to be doing whatever they can to manipulate you. Sorry, it's a debate competition and that's the way it goes. 3)Make sure you are on the speaker's list at ALL times. Even if you don't have anything important to say, just go up and say something that sounds pretty. You need everyone in your committee to be able to recognize you as being involved in the debate. The more you stand out the more people will want you to be a sponsor with them. 4) You're the DPRK. Seriously, you need to be an asshole. When you're in session it's not personal, it's a competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kennyweird Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I do not feel that execution is a viable or acceptable form of punishment for a few reasons. First, as EBL said, since the execution process often involves dozens of appeals, it ultimately ends up costing more than simply imprisoning the guilty party. Second, it does not punish the guilty party so much as it provides the victim and/or relatives with a way of indulging their primitive thirst for revenge, and I feel that as humans we should hold ourselves to higher standards than revenge and vindication. Besides, the law should be concerned about protecting society from criminals (which imprisonment is entirely capable of doing), not providing the victims with retribution. Third, it is inevitable that somehow an innocent person will be accidentally executed, and unlike imprisonment, the accused is not able to present new evidence that may lead to a reversal of the sentence. The only situation I can think of were the death penalty may be acceptable is if you have a crazed person who cannot be brought under control. In this case, however, it would be used simply to keep the other inmates safe and not to punish the offender, similar to how an animal shelter may euthanize a rabid dog to prevent it from harming the other animals and staff. Other than that, I feel there is no reasonable justification for the death penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 However, realistically, the costs involved to the state are enormous. It is less expensive to house a criminal for life, believe it or not. Maybe injections are more expensive, as its been years since I've had to do any research on the subject, but I do recall the amount in the late 90s to be about $20K a year to house an inmate. I'm thinking no way would a firing squad, some guns and bullets cost that much, especially once you start talking about guys who will be spending 40, 50 or even more years behind bars. Or just hang em, rope is even cheaper and we have lots of trees. I'm all for whatever is cheaper on the taxpayers. For those of you saying its unfair to those wrongfully convicted, if I was sent to jail for life, I'd probably rather die than wait 20 years in jail until I could successfully appeal (if that would even be possible) I hope none of you ever has to do through the pain of having someone in your family killed, I haven't. But I know people who have and I personally would want the murderer to be killed as well. That's just how I feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrygator Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I think what EBL is refering to is the legal costs on the Government to have someone executed, not the cost of bullets and a noose. Darkling Scribe - you mention the reasons the death penalty can be enacted in the US, in certain countries the crimes vary. I'm for the death penalty, for certain murder cases. However, there has to be no doubt about the guilt. People talk about not wanting to kill innocent people, remember the victim of the crime may not have been guilty of any crime themselves. When it comes to the mention barbaric behavior, the crime is almost always more barbaric than the punishment. Actually, the state of the prison system is more babrbaric than execution, but too bad. Many of these people should not be back on the street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebl Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 "I think what EBL is refering to is the legal costs on the Government to have someone executed, not the cost of bullets and a noose." (larrygator) Correct. And besides, rope ain't that expensive at Home Depot. The way I see it, while some people are certainly deserving of their date with Old Sparky, I'd rather see the money go toward education or something worthwhile. At one time, I believed that the death penalty was a deterrent. While it may have been at one time, I no longer believe that to be the case. Executions just take too long to happen. It's not like it was in the Old West where the judge sentenced an offender to hang in three days or so. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top Thrill Dragster Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I support the Death Penalty for the following crimes. Child Rape Treason Murder in 1st degree (pre meditated) The only way I would ever not support the death penalty is to make sure that life in prison is HARD, miserable time. No TV No interaction with other prisoners No News Paper No Books No hot meals No job No letters from family No Pillows No Phone calls No Personal Property 24 1/2 hour lock down. limited no Contact visits. And Zero chance of prole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebl Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 ^ Don't forget, no Internet. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emily>piers Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 This is always going to be a contentious issue and will always provoke a response. I can understand arguments for both sides of the debate, however, you can not have a blanket policy for capital punishment. Every case should be judged on it's individual merit or lack thereof and proportionality used when deciding the punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now