The death penalty.

[Shneckie]

What does it matter if he decides to rape or rape and kill on incentive? He shouldn't be doing either of them. The law doesn't exist to save lives, it exists to punish the guilty.

The law exists to create order and safety within society. The notion that it exists to punish the guilty is illogical given that laws need to exist for one to be guilty.

[Col. Tartleton]

You can't weasel your way out of this. You just stated that "the law doesn't exist to save people", which is obviously complete nonsense.

The law sets boundaries. Crossing the boundaries results in punishments. The purpose of laws is to punish people who do not follow them. You assume the Law is magically just and capable of preventing crimes from happening.

The law exists to punish those who would harm people. The law does not prevent the crimes from coming to pass.


How does the law save people? If someone murders someone did the law protect the victim? No. The law seeks to inflict retributive vengeance from an unbiased third party.

If I steal money did the law prevent me from stealing money? No. The law told me not to do something. That doesn't protect people, it sets boundaries.

[Shneckie]

The law sets boundaries. Crossing the boundaries results in punishments. The purpose of laws is to punish people who do not follow them. You assume the Law is magically just and capable of preventing crimes from happening.

The law exists to punish those who would harm people. The law does not prevent the crimes from coming to pass.


How does the law save people? If someone murders someone did the law protect the victim? No. The law seeks to inflict retributive vengeance from an unbiased third party.

If I steal money did the law prevent me from stealing money? No. The law told me not to do something. That doesn't protect people, it sets boundaries.

Again, how does that even make sense? Your essentially saying that laws exist because people do not follow laws. What on earth? You need to have laws in the first place for people to follow them.

You keep blending law with punishment. Punishment is the effect of law, whereas law is the cause. They are two separate entities. Order and safety are also effects of law. Without law, we would have anarchy and thus more people are killed, raped, robbed ect. There is no disputing that fact. With law, we have a relatively ordered and civilised society. Therefore the law does protect people.

[Col. Tartleton]

The law is whatever people want. If we made it a law that you had to wear a hat or you could be killed it would be a legitimate law. I don't think that protects anyone.

[Ciabhán]

The law is whatever people want. If we made it a law that you had to wear a hat or you could be killed it would be a legitimate law. I don't think that protects anyone.

This.

'Civilised' law is nothing more than than the opinion of the majority of the minority who vote.

Natural law might be a bit 'barbaric' to you but to me allowing a baby raping ******* to continue to breath is far worse.

If it's the idea of being responsible for the death of another mostly useless primate that bothers you I'd be happy to take the blame. BTDT, stopped feeling guilty about it decades ago.

[Ancient Aliens]

...the death of another mostly useless primate...

I want to emphasize this part here. We are incredibly useless individually; we are only as great as the sum of our parts. If it benefits the sum, then it needs to be done, regardless of how it effects us on an individual level. So what benefits the sum? Technological growth, stability, and overall happiness. Does executing those who commit heinous crimes (that would doom them to a lifetime in taxpayer-funded confinement regardless) help technological growth, stability, and/or overall happiness? Yes. So it needs to be done.

I like to visualize the history of the human race as a tower, and each human being as a rather useless, singular brick. We don't know why we are building the tower, nor what we sort of tower we are building, nor the objective of the tower, nor if the tower is even real or of consequence. The only thing we do know is that we have to build this tower, and, as we all know, a single brick can undermine the most resilient of towers.

[Kabeloko]

What kinds of offenses should they assign the death penalty for? If at all. I believe that they should assign it very carefully and only for sexual or violent crimes or espionage.

none

[karahan]

none

I think the same way you do, but there are times when i hear/read about all these pedo rapists, how they destroy the lives of children, who in most cases trusted them, seeing that its mostly done by someone the child knows, I just think Death is to good for them. but that might be me being emotional I don't know

[gaiusjulii]

rapist, peadophilia, and drug dealers should all be shot in the belly and left to die very painfully IMO.

however on more realistic point the death penalty is to good for them in our soft liberal minded society so I say bring back hard labour have them smashing rocks for the rest or their miserable lives I'll pay extra taxes for that happily, or option 3 is the running man option lol