Shale wrote:

Seeing as how this thread has already been hijacked with a discussion of how many angels can dance on the point of a needle, let me add:

Why the fuck didn't this almgighty god prevent the psychopaths from killing the ppl? Then there would be no need for forgiveness - or the death penalty.

It's called "free will", Shale--you can choose to murder, not to murder, to ask forgiveness and believe in God or not. Pick your own destiny, and sometimes evil and bad things are allowed by God to happen in order to bring about something greater, better, etc. And that's the basis of faith-- trusting that God is always in control no matter how hopeless the situation seems in our eyes, and that He can ultimately turn any situation around for the good--even murder and the death penalty.

Shale wrote:

Seeing as how this thread has already been hijacked with a discussion of how many angels can dance on the point of a needle, let me add:

Why the fuck didn't this almgighty god prevent the psychopaths from killing the ppl? Then there would be no need for forgiveness - or the death penalty.

If I recall correctly we are allowed to wallow in our "folly" as we have been given "free will". Well except for the "free will" to call bullshit on the whole thing. The punishment for that is eternal fire & damnation with gnashing teeth & all that.

I don't think we should be basing our government or prison system on what some invisible mysterious being may or may not want, think or do at some point in the future. That's called a theocracy.

We do the best we can with what we have. But we need to make improvements. I just don't think those improvements include a higher body count. We need literal sentences that are not negotiable through "good behavior" or overcrowding or any other absurd reason that doesn't involve real evidence of innocence. 25 to life shouldn't mean they might be out in 8. It should mean a minimum of 25 years & then a parole hearing. Life without parole means NO parole hearing. This is where I think the country has skidded off the road. The sentences don't really have any meaning. If they did, that might be a better deterrent. The death penalty is not a deterrent. It isn't even really "justice". It's revenge. The danger is not only taking that revenge out on a person who doesn't even deserve it but in becoming a country worse than the people we're executing.

speaking of parole tho... i think it is better to let them out a couple years early on parole and be able to check on them and monitor them. Once someone serves their complete sentence, they have free reign to do as they want (unless sex offenders). They have paid their debt. Being on parole allows someone to inspect them a little and see how they adjust.

Come ppl like Manson who were "raised" in prisons become so institutionalized that they cannot be assimilated back into society.

You do know that it costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them for their life?

Suzi wrote:

You do know that it costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them for their life?

I've seen "facts" on both sides of that argument.

Besides the obvious and real risk of executing someone who is not guilty of the crime, it's the totally arbitrary application of the death penalty that troubles me.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, fry them.

Some truly heinous crimes I can look away when it involves the death penalty....but for the most part, I don't agree with it and never will. It's barbaric.