Connecticut Governor Vetoes Bill That Would End Death Penalty

[Zap]

For me, I don't put that high a value on money.
"It's only money. I can make more." would be the thought that goes through my head instead of going to jail on principle.

Now, if you're talking about someone abusing one of my kids, physically or sexually, then I get a lot closer to going to jail.
I've thought about what I'd do if that were to happen and I still don't have an answer for that question.

[John Scott]

For me, I don't put that high a value on money.

I really doubt anybody puts a high value on money. On justice, yes; on money? No. Even the people who kill others to steal their money aren't after the money per se IMHO.

"It's only money. I can make more." would be the thought that goes through my head instead of going to jail on principle.

Money can always be made rather easily. Justice, not so much.

Now, if you're talking about someone abusing one of my kids, physically or sexually, then I get a lot closer to going to jail.

There's a killer in all of us. Just need the right situation to bring it out.

[krahmaan]

Originally Posted by John Scott

I probably would have been shot. I wouldn't have been the first time somebody pulled a gun on my (speaking of which, I didn't back down then and grabbed the gun only after the trigger was pulled, revealing a empty chamber - people really don't like to back down, do they?)

If you go through life considering all the ways you can fail, I seriously doubt you'd do anything. Any plan could fail for any number of reasons, generally speaking.

At the time I guess it would have been taking a bullet for all the right reasons? Temperament during confrontations at that age is more reckless. But even then, a bullet shot wouldn't have necessarily meant sure death.

Perhaps the situation was destiny that you were to be paid? You had earned it fairly -hadn't you? So even if you were shot, who's to say that you wouldn't have recovered what you were owed plus damages and hospital bills? I believe karma works funny in that way.

Life IS about choices and no one will handle them perfectly. Because every situation desires it's own unique balm. Trial and error is the bestway -I believe.

[Trapper]

Originally Posted by John Scott

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._homicide_rate

Japan, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates are notable users of the death penalty and come to mind when "exceptionally low murder rates" come to mind.

Different cultures are like comparing apples to oranges. Comparing states with the death penalty to states without paints a different picture.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/dete...eswithvwithout

[John Scott]

Different cultures are like comparing apples to oranges.

Different cultures are like comparing apples to oranges? I suppose you mean to say that comparing homicide rates in different cultures is like comparing apples to oranges. I would counter that humans possess basically the same rational and emotive capacities.

Comparing states with the death penalty to states without paints a different picture.

Not much of one.

If you think you can draw a conclusion from the stats on that page, go ahead and try.

[Trapper]

And your link shows that in the bottom ten countries listed, five have the death penalty and five don't. So if you think you can draw a conclusion from those stats, go ahead and try.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Trapper

And your link shows that in the bottom ten countries listed, five have the death penalty and five don't. So if you think you can draw a conclusion from those stats, go ahead and try.

Okay, I'm game. Here's the conclusion I'll draw: The countries with death penalties are more likely than the ones without to put murderers to death and thereby eliminate the chance of them re-offending.

[thegamerslink]

Can not argue that point :-)

[antirem]

No goverment should have the power to take away life.

[Muddy]

Originally Posted by antirem

No goverment should have the power to take away life.

On one hand I agree with you. In an imperfect society it really doesn't seem right that man should judge man when a life is involved. On the other hand, when society needs protecting, said judgment is better than nothing, as Mr. Scott points out.

[thegamerslink]

Originally Posted by antirem

No goverment should have the power to take away life.

In this country we live in a Republic, though it was principally based on the Individual, and ideologies were taken from people such as John Locke when designing our society. There are times when the actions of the whole represent the actions of the individual.

What in the world does that mean do you ask? What that means is that though it is society (government) that is imposing a death penalty for a Capitol offense such as murder, it is the individual(s) who were affected, or wronged by the offense that are being represented by the action. It is not allowable, though some argue it should be, for an individual to kill another in revenge. Meaning, if a person enters my house and kills my wife, or daughter, or son, etc... and escapes my house, I as an individual can not then track down that person and do to them as they have done to my family. So, our society(government), in the name of preventing chaos, performs that act in the name of the victims and their family.

As another view goes, the death penalty for those that have performed Capitol offenses and are beyond the question of innocence, and who are repeat offenders of the Capital offense, or lack any possible reform must not be allowed to threaten innocent people in a society. The only way to ensure this beyond possibility is to enact the death penalty. To do otherwise is saving the possibility that they will be allowed to harm others and society again.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by antirem

No goverment should have the power to take away life.

That's funny. Imagine fighting WW2 without the power to take away life.

Leaflet the Germans, that's what we'll do. We'll reason with them, overpower them with our superior logic.