• -delete-


  • I think its too humane. If somoine lets say goes to a kindergaren rapes all the kids and then drowns them. We shouldnt even kill min considering he was in his right mind and knew what he was doing. I would lock that fcker up alone till he dies you could consider that a death penalty or not. This would actualy stop poeple from doing it becouse most poelple who would do those thing dont realy want to live probably.


  • @jensens said in Do you believe the death penalty is fair?:

    I think its too humane. If somone lets say goes to a kindergaren rapes all the kids and then drowns them. We shouldnt even kill hin considering he was in his right mind and knew what he was doing.

    I disagree, if someone did that and then people found out that he did those things because he had a brain tumour that made him go crazy people wouldn't get mad at him but instead just hope that he gets better in the mental asylum where he was put to not harm other people, why? Because his actions were clearly caused by the tumour and he didn't chose to have that. But how is that any different from his actions being predetermined by his genetics, environment and upbringing(which all people's actions are)? Him not having chosen those either the reaction should be the same, put him in prison so he doesn't harm anyone then hope he gets rehabilitated

    I would lock that fcker up alone till he dies you could consider that a death penalty or not.

    Technically it is, now you have to realise that you are adding unnecessary suffering, to a person, who's actions were technically not just of his doing but a long chain of cause and effect. In my opinion just causing unnecessary suffering is immoral wouldn't you think?

    This would actualy stop poeple from doing it becouse most poelple who would do those thing dont realy want to live probably.

    I'm sure there are better to discourage people who are planning on doing such things than needlessly killing someone, therapy would be good, euthanasia can become legal and for people who don't want to live that can become an option only allowed to them if their psychological conditions(that cause them to suffer) were proven to be permanent...


  • -delete-


  • @thestrangest yhea but there are also people who are so broken that they can just never be fixed. what would you do then if you let them go they will do it again and youre back where you started. if you put them in a psyke wark its basicly a death penalty then.


  • @jensens said in Do you believe the death penalty is fair?:

    @thestrangest yhea but there are also people who are so broken that they can just never be fixed.

    So you kill them? Why not kill all mentally ill people in asylums who are staying there forever having their families come visit them once a month?

    what would you do then if you let them go they will do it again and youre back where you started

    That's why there is something called.... the life sentence for people who are deemed unfit for rehabilitation

    if you put them in a psychiatric ward its basicly a death penalty then.

    No it's a life sentence, you aren't shortening their life span


  • @thestrangest in your previeus post you said locking people up forever was techicaly a death penalty.


  • @jensens you said they'd starve to death, or did i not read that correctly?


  • @jensens oh you just were not clear


  • @thestrangest o i am sorry i did not mean starve to death. there are poelple that see that as a death penalty locking somoine up till they die i dont realy think it is.


  • @jensens well most people who murder, do it to a specific person for a specific reason so unless they just kill who ever, they should have access to other people in prison so their life span will not get shorter. But otherwise yeah that was just a misunderstanding


  • @jensens you also said psyke wark instead of psychiatric ward along with lots of other errors, you can't blame me for the misunderstanding lol, sorry.


  • @thestrangest yeah i want realy talking about people that kill with a reason. altho the reason never justifies the action i was talking about people that just kill becous they can and want. sorry for the bad english autocorrect is killing me i speak dutch normaly. could we talk more in chat i like your point of view.


  • @jensens there is no difference between the 2, the result is the same and the penalty should be the same except for the "to put isolated cell or not? That is the question" part


  • @thestrangest i do think there is a differance between with and withour a reason. if hypotheticaly somone kills his daughter and gets free becouse of an error in court and the father kills the guy who killed his daughter or just somoine who killed this guys daughter just becous he felth like it.


  • @jensens said in Do you believe the death penalty is fair?:

    @thestrangest i do think there is a differance between with and without a reason. if hypotheticaly somone kills his daughter, gets freed because of an error in court and the father kills the guy who killed his daughter or just somone who killed this guys daughter just because he felt like it.

    What are you even trying to say do?


  • @jensens the father killed a guy that was trying to kill the guy that killed his daughter?


  • @thestrangest no ,so this guy let call him peter kills a girl lets cal her abby ( peter kills abby just becouse she happend to be near hil when he decided he wanted to kill somoine) and peter goes to court to be punished ofr killing abby. but somoine made an errer while handeling the case he goes free (happens in belgium a lot) so the father of abby called roger decides he can not deal with peter just walking away and not getting punished so roger goes out to kill peter.


  • @jensens said in Do you believe the death penalty is fair?:

    @thestrangest no ,so this guy lets call him peter kills a girl lets call her Abby ( peter kills Abby just because she happend to be near him when he decided he wanted to kill someone) and Peter goes to court to be punished for killing Abby. but someone made an error while handeling the case and he goes free (happens in belgium a lot) so the father of Abby called Roger decides he can not deal with Peter just walking away and not getting punished so roger goes out to kill Peter.

    And he kills Peter... yeah that's wrong but i guess since it is unlikely that he'll kill someone else the penalty shouldn't be that severe, like between 1 and 5 years in Jail or however much it is necessary for people to understand that they should leave these kinds of things to the law


  • @thestrangest yhea but thats the problem the law failed. so why would he think after 5 years i sould have left it to the law hen the law just let him go becouse the date on one of the documents was wrong.