Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 03:27 pm

Quote:

Quote by: ericsp23

So if it is later discovered that someone who was executed was, in fact, innocent of the crime he was convicted of, would you advocate the execution of his executioner and anyone else involved in his conviction?
After all you do concede that the killing of an innocent person is murder, so anyone involved in that murder would be subject to the same "eye for an eye" justice.

I should've said: murder is killing an innocent person without a justifiable reason.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 03:28 pm

Quote:

Quote by: IndieC

So, what you are saying is that you are in favour of unjust punishments, from what i gather.

I've already said that I'm in favor of "an eye for an eye" as a basis for punishment. If you think this is unjust then that's your opinion.

ericsp23 · Apr 14, 2005, 03:49 pm

So you think it is justifiable to kill an innocent person who is wrongly accused of a crime?

Gorgo · Apr 14, 2005, 04:03 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

I've already said that I'm in favor of "an eye for an eye" as a basis for punishment. If you think this is unjust then that's your opinion.

Why do you think punishment is necessary?

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 04:33 pm

Quote:

Quote by: ericsp23

So you think it is justifiable to kill an innocent person who is wrongly accused of a crime?

To the person who pulled the lever or pushed the button to kill the guy it was. He/she was just doing a job and for all he/she knew, the guy was a murderer.

I'm sure he/she wouldn't have done it if they knew that the person was innocent.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 04:35 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Gorgo

Why do you think punishment is necessary?

Because I believe that two wrongs make a right.

Gorgo · Apr 14, 2005, 04:49 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

Because I believe that two wrongs make a right.

Oh, a mathematician.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 05:14 pm

Why don't you tell us what's you're really thinking?

ericsp23 · Apr 14, 2005, 05:20 pm

Quote:

To the person who pulled the lever or pushed the button to kill the guy it was. He/she was just doing a job and for all he/she knew, the guy was a murderer.

Okay, lets forget about the executioner. What about overzealous prosecutors who are more interested in another notch in their belt than they are in seeing that justice is served?

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 06:02 pm

They didn't murder anyone, though. They didn't push any buttons and they didn't thrust any knives.

Mia · Apr 14, 2005, 06:19 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

Again, the "sources" you've posted are from pro rights groups that frankly don't even care to hide their bias.

I'll be happy to join if you ever get any actual sources.

That's not the way it works. If the numbers posted (from 4 sources now) are false, then prove it. If you can't, then quit arguing it.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 06:54 pm

I'm not saying they're wrong, just that they're not credible.

They might indeed turn out to be right, but I won't acknowledge any of the their facts unless they're also in a credible source.

IndieC · Apr 14, 2005, 07:10 pm

You know guys, people have been debating about this topic for decades, and quite simply, it comes down to different peoples' opinions, and there is nothing anyone can do to change those. Some people think it is immoral, while others think it is justifiable, due to the fact that they believe in "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth".

By the way, you still haven't defended yourself on that point tman_ndsu08. You happen to have the same thinking as a mass murderer who attacked your country only three and a half years ago, someone who is a terrorist, which your country so desperately hates. How on earth can you defend such a position? I would like you to explain this more precisely if you could, because to me, it just seems wrong, and I don't see how anyone in their right minds, short, of course, of wanting to spark a debate just for the sake of debating, in which case I congratulate you, you have done an excellent job, could actually endorse that kind of belief, given that they know someone as horrible as Osama Bin Laden believes exactly the same thing, and, what's more, gives himself the authority to carry out acts to bring his justice about.

ericsp23 · Apr 14, 2005, 07:29 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

They didn't murder anyone, though. They didn't push any buttons and they didn't thrust any knives.

So intent means nothing then? The intent is to cause the death of a person who the prosecutor knows is or may be innocent. Only a completely amoral person would shield the prosecutor from any guilt in a case like this just because he didn't actually carry out the sentence.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 07:29 pm

Osama Bin Laden belives that Muslims should murder Americans in such a way that they also take their own life.

I don't want anyone to murder anyone. But if someone does murder someone else, they should also die.

A fundamental difference.

IndieC · Apr 14, 2005, 07:58 pm

So what you are saying, is that Bin Laden should hunt down the people who actualy killed those "innocents" i mentionned a while ago, and kill them, and that that, in fact, would be justifiable. From what i gather, not only justifiable, but legal.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 08:47 pm

The Muslims all kill themselves in the act of killing innocent people.

I'm not sure who you're referring to when you say "hunt them down".

G. Adams · Apr 14, 2005, 09:39 pm

Quote:

Quote by: tman_ndsu08

I don't want anyone to murder anyone. But if someone does murder someone else, they should also die.

Imagine you got into a fight with someone over a woman. You kill the guy in the fight. Now, using your logic, the dead mans brother believes you should die, so he kills you. Ahh but now he's killed you, your sister is pissed. She kills him. Damn, his mother is fucked off, he kills her.

Do you see where this is going? It never ends.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 10:12 pm

Or, back in reality, the guy who I just killed's brother calls the police, they arrest me, I have a trial, am proven guilty, sentenced to death, and executed.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 14, 2005, 10:13 pm

Quote:

Quote by: ericsp23

So intent means nothing then? The intent is to cause the death of a person who the prosecutor knows is or may be innocent. Only a completely amoral person would shield the prosecutor from any guilt in a case like this just because he didn't actually carry out the sentence.

The only intent the presecuter has is to prove the defendant is guilty based on the evidence in front of him/her. He/she doesn't have any intent to kill them.

Apr 14, 2005, 03:49 pm	#63 (permalink) (top)
ericsp23 Pragmatic liberal Posts: 421	So you think it is justifiable to kill an innocent person who is wrongly accused of a crime? Economic Left/Right -5.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarion -4.41

Apr 14, 2005, 05:14 pm	#68 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	Why don't you tell us what's you're really thinking?

Apr 14, 2005, 06:02 pm	#70 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	They didn't murder anyone, though. They didn't push any buttons and they didn't thrust any knives.

Apr 14, 2005, 06:54 pm	#72 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	I'm not saying they're wrong, just that they're not credible. They might indeed turn out to be right, but I won't acknowledge any of the their facts unless they're also in a credible source.

Apr 14, 2005, 07:10 pm	#73 (permalink) (top)
IndieC Igneous Magma Location: UK Posts: 303	You know guys, people have been debating about this topic for decades, and quite simply, it comes down to different peoples' opinions, and there is nothing anyone can do to change those. Some people think it is immoral, while others think it is justifiable, due to the fact that they believe in "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth". By the way, you still haven't defended yourself on that point tman_ndsu08. You happen to have the same thinking as a mass murderer who attacked your country only three and a half years ago, someone who is a terrorist, which your country so desperately hates. How on earth can you defend such a position? I would like you to explain this more precisely if you could, because to me, it just seems wrong, and I don't see how anyone in their right minds, short, of course, of wanting to spark a debate just for the sake of debating, in which case I congratulate you, you have done an excellent job, could actually endorse that kind of belief, given that they know someone as horrible as Osama Bin Laden believes exactly the same thing, and, what's more, gives himself the authority to carry out acts to bring his justice about.

Apr 14, 2005, 07:29 pm	#75 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	Osama Bin Laden belives that Muslims should murder Americans in such a way that they also take their own life. I don't want anyone to murder anyone. But if someone does murder someone else, they should also die. A fundamental difference.

Apr 14, 2005, 07:58 pm	#76 (permalink) (top)
IndieC Igneous Magma Location: UK Posts: 303	So what you are saying, is that Bin Laden should hunt down the people who actualy killed those "innocents" i mentionned a while ago, and kill them, and that that, in fact, would be justifiable. From what i gather, not only justifiable, but legal.

Apr 14, 2005, 08:47 pm	#77 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	The Muslims all kill themselves in the act of killing innocent people. I'm not sure who you're referring to when you say "hunt them down".

Apr 14, 2005, 10:12 pm	#79 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	Or, back in reality, the guy who I just killed's brother calls the police, they arrest me, I have a trial, am proven guilty, sentenced to death, and executed.