Get your best keyboards ready

Tefal · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:22

Darkst4r said:
And the other option is waste millions on rehabilitation as well as incarceration which makes your original point of execution being the more expensive option incorrect.

it's been proven time and again execution (well execution in any sane and reasonable legal system) is more expensive than life incarceration in the same legal system.

Vonhelmet · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:23

Darkst4r said:
And the other option is waste millions on rehabilitation as well as incarceration which makes your original point of execution being the more expensive option incorrect.

You're still using a false dichotomy.

And it has been shown numerous times that the death penalty is more expensive, so I'm really not sure what you're driving at.

Although, maybe you're right. Crims often own nasty dogs. He might own dogs with could bite people and run up huge hospital bills. They'll also poo on the pavement and he won't clean it up, so then the council will pay a fortune cleaning up after him.

Berserker · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:24

Beerbaron said:
just feed him Berserker's keyboard, thats a fate worse than death

That would deprive me of it. Unacceptable.

OK, OK, enough about the keyboard already. I think I got the message. Or at least the wire wool I just used on it did.

platinum87 · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:28

von its pretty easy for you to pick apart darkstars argument but why dont you say how things should be done according to your views

Darkst4r · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:33

vonhelmet said:
You're still using a false dichotomy.

And it has been shown numerous times that the death penalty is more expensive, so I'm really not sure what you're driving at.

Although, maybe you're right. Crims often own nasty dogs. He might own dogs with could bite people and run up huge hospital bills. They'll also poo on the pavement and he won't clean it up, so then the council will pay a fortune cleaning up after him.

I'm not going to argue anymore , it's getting boring. Obviously our views on how to treat such animalistic offenders differ enormously. I see no problem with the death penalty if the there is proof beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty of the crime. The world is over populated and impoverished enough already without having to sustain scumbags like this. I apologise for any rash or offensive remarks I may have made but this is a subject that has pretty much made my blood boil.

RDM · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:34

platinum87 said:
von its pretty easy for you to pick apart darkstars argument but why dont you say how things should be done according to your views

Lock him up for life? Cheaper than killing him and same end result as far as reoffending?

Vonhelmet · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:38

RDM said:
Lock him up for life? Cheaper than killing him and same end result as far as reoffending?

Cheers for stepping in while I was otherwise engaged

Vonhelmet · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:40

Darkst4r said:
I'm not going to argue anymore , it's getting boring. Obviously our views on how to treat such animalistic offenders differ enormously. I see no problem with the death penalty if the there is proof beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty of the crime. The world is over populated and impoverished enough already without having to sustain scumbags like this. I apologise for any rash or offensive remarks I may have made but this is a subject that has pretty much made my blood boil.

So if it's not about cost, I assume it's either for punishment or for vengeance. Your attitude suggests the latter.

platinum87 · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:42

vonhelmet said:
And it has been shown numerous times that the death penalty is more expensive, so I'm really not sure what you're driving at.

prisons should produce money, with a change in laws prisons would change as well so talk of £££ is not needed in this argument

Darkst4r said:
this is a subject that has pretty much made my blood boil.

this is where you going wrong

Tefal · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:42

vonhelmet said:
Cheers for stepping in while I was otherwise engaged

We've told you before about you fiddling with that goat!! :mad:

Darkst4r · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:43

vonhelmet said:
So if it's not about cost, I assume it's either for punishment or for vengeance. Your attitude suggests the latter.

Both I suppose. I also think the family of victims of such crimes should have a say in the course in which the punishment takes.

Dark_Angel · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:46

Actually NM. Delete.

platinum87 · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:50

RDM said:
Lock him up for life? Cheaper than killing him and same end result as far as reoffending?

The problem is (and lets not get into another debate about this) but prisons are flawed, they should produce money, not spend it. Death penalty obviously should be for some cases, but when they are proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt and their crime is past a certain line, killing them should be pretty quick and really not cost anything..

Therefore with changes your statement would be wrong and therefore you cant argue it, sure its true right now but it can be changed, so basically im expecting an argument which is based around ethics ?

Hell !!! If you want to stick to your argument, im sure there are rich people all over the world who would come forward and pay all costs for killing him if you give them the option

Darkst4r · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:52

platinum87 said:
The problem is (and lets not get into another debate about this) but prisons are flawed, they should produce money, not spend it. Death penalty obviously should be for some cases, but when they are proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt and their crime is past a certain line, killing them should be pretty quick and really not cost anything..

Therefore with changes your statement would be wrong and therefore you cant argue it, sure its true right now but it can be changed, so basically im expecting an argument which is based around ethics ?

Hell !!! If you want to stick to your argument, im sure there are rich people all over the world who would come forward and pay all costs for killing him if you give them the option

I could chip in about £14.00 , a slightly chewed biro , a half used box of paper clips and a coffee revel covered in fluff.

RDM · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:53

platinum87 said:
The problem is (and lets not get into another debate about this) but prisons are flawed, they should produce money, not spend it.

How exactly should they produce money?

platinum87 said:
Death penalty obviously should be for some cases, but when they are proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt and their crime is past a certain line, killing them should be pretty quick and really not cost anything..

I know I am wasting my time and you aren't really going to understand this (or pretend not to so that your internet psycho routine continues, I have stopped caring either way) but the ONLY way that executing someone can be cheaper is if you do away with all those appeals and the like that make sure you execute a guilty man. Plenty of people have been sent to prison beyond all reasonable doubt and later proven to be innocent.

platinum87 said:
Therefore with changes your statement would be wrong and therefore you cant argue it, sure its true right now but it can be changed, so basically im expecting an argument which is based around ethics ?

Hell !!! If you want to stick to your argument, im sure there are rich people all over the world who would come forward and pay all costs for killing him if you give them the option

Why would you expect an argument around ethics? I thought you didn't have any?

Dark_Angel · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:56

I suppose they would produce money by having the prisoners do basic work within the prisons. That could be exported cheap.

For example sewing work, or whatever?

dirtydog · 13 Oct 2009 at 14:57

RDM you have misquoted me - I didn't say that. Could you edit please

edit - TVM

RDM · 13 Oct 2009 at 15:00

dirtydog said:
RDM you have misquoted me - I didn't say that. Could you edit please

Sorry, name was still on the clipboard from the thread in SC.

RDM · 13 Oct 2009 at 15:01

Dark_Angel said:
I suppose they would produce money by having the prisoners do basic work within the prisons. That could be exported cheap.

For example sewing work, or whatever?

In that case keeping someone alive would be cheaper than killing them. They can't really work if they are dead. Not to mention that I am not sure what you could produce that you could sell at a rate that would cover the costs of the prison and staff...

platinum87 · 13 Oct 2009 at 15:02

RDM said:
How exactly should they produce money?

forced labour? or put Michael O'Leary in charge of all UK prisons

RDM said:
I know I am wasting my time and you aren't really going to understand this (or pretend not to so that your internet psycho routine continues, I have stopped caring either way) but the ONLY way that executing someone can be cheaper is if you do away with all those appeals and the like that make sure you execute a guilty man. Plenty of people have been sent to prison beyond all reasonable doubt and later proven to be innocent.

Assuming prisons do produce money, rest of natural life in prison would be fine

I do understand what you are saying perfectly, i would say collateral damage but that would just be evil.

So assuming it doesnt cost the government to maintain prisons there is no need for the death penalty

RDM said:
Why would you expect an argument around ethics? I thought you didn't have any?

No but i thought you did.