Jump to content

Supreme Court imposes cruelty on families


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The majority of Canadians in all provinces except Quebec would support capital punishment for murder.  Quebec is the only province where a minority would not support capital punishment.  Why is that?   Quebec is mostly nominal Roman Catholic and has a different ideology.  It is likely Canada abolished capital punishment because of politicians from Quebec, not the rest of Canada.  Once again they dominate Canada and most PMs come from Quebec.  The only logical reason they would support Trudeau is because he is a son of Quebec.

Because quebecers know how fast a gov't can become corrupt and they're not nearly dumb enough to give a gov't power of life and death over them as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

Canada then join the likes of China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq. No thanks.

The problem isn't the lack of capital punishment. If life was actually life, it would be one and done for the families. Instead we drag them through a never ending process of parole hearings. 

Why do you think people like Clifford Olson who killed all kinds of kids or the guy that killed a dozen people should not get capital punishment?  Or the guy that shot two police officers or even one police officer in Ontario?  Do you seriously think no capital punishment is sending the right message to would-be murderers?  They know they will be coddled for the next 25 years at taxpayer's expense if they are caught and then maybe get out on parole.  Some message!

Nobody said you would have to flip the switch.  There are countless people who would do the job.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I lived in the area when Olsen was on the loose and had young kids at the time. Do you really think the death penalty would have been any kind of deterrent to someone like him? There is no evidence the death penalty is a deterrent. 

Texas puts more people to death than any other state yet it ranks right in the middle at 25th when it comes to intentional homicide rates.

If you look at homicide rates for states with and without the death penalty, they are all over the map. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Do you really think the death penalty would have been any kind of deterrent to someone like him?

 

First we are talking about first degree murder.   · 1st-degree murder Definition: A homicide that is both planned and deliberate.

The main reason for the death penalty should not be as a deterrent, although it might be a deterrent in some cases.  We don't know about all potential murders that would have been avoided because of the death penalty because if there was no murder, then there may be no charges laid.

The primary reason for the death penalty as I see it is it satisfies justice.   If one plans and deliberately takes another person's life, he gives up the right to his own life.   "6  Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. "  Genesis 9:6 KJV 

"3  For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4  For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."  Romans 13: 3, 4 KJV

 God is the final authority on right and wrong, and what is justice, not man.  The value of human life is infinite and must be viewed as sacred.  Man is corrupt and depraved and is therefore by himself unable to know or understand justice as God sees it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, blackbird said:

 

The primary reason for the death penalty as I see it is it satisfies justice.   If one plans and deliberately takes another person's life, he gives up the right to his own life.  

SUre - it satisfies justice.  IF - and it's a BIG if - if the person they kill is the right one

And you can NEVER KNOW THAT. The state has falsely accused SO MANY people it's not funny - deliberately screwed with evidence, HID evidence proving innocence,  etc.  There are MANY cases.  VERY many.

In fact the last man executed in Canada was later found to be innocent.

There is NO Justice in a system that kills innocent people. None. So if even ONE person is killed who was innocent then the system is unjust.

So it is MUCH better to "kill" them with old age.  Death penalty should mean "you stay in jail till you die, no faint hope or anything else, and no contact with the outside world other than your lawyer and we'll leave the tv on."

THat way - if evidence does appear to show he was innocent as it did in milgaards case then at least we can undo some of the harm done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

SUre - it satisfies justice.  IF - and it's a BIG if - if the person they kill is the right one

And you can NEVER KNOW THAT. The state has falsely accused SO MANY people it's not funny - deliberately screwed with evidence, HID evidence proving innocence,  etc.  There are MANY cases.  VERY many.

In fact the last man executed in Canada was later found to be innocent.

There is NO Justice in a system that kills innocent people. None. So if even ONE person is killed who was innocent then the system is unjust.

So it is MUCH better to "kill" them with old age.  Death penalty should mean "you stay in jail till you die, no faint hope or anything else, and no contact with the outside world other than your lawyer and we'll leave the tv on."

THat way - if evidence does appear to show he was innocent as it did in milgaards case then at least we can undo some of the harm done.

I believe the justice system has improved much the last number of years with the use of DNA evidence and scientific methods.  Then there are also many cases where there eye witnesses.  What about that?   There might be overwhelming evidence he is the one.  There are many variables.  I doubt there is any reason why there would be mistakes.  There could be systems devised to virtually eliminate any possibility of error.  You also have appeal procedures.  Things could be done to make sure there are no mistakes in finding guilt.  Also, there could be capital punishment for only cases that are very strong with no likelihood of error.  Every case is different.  

I don't believe horrific murderers should escape capital punishment if the evidence is unquestionable and perhaps eye witnesses.   If a convicted criminal can produce some serious and credible reasons why his trial was doubtful, then he could be dealt with accordingly with a new trial.  There are things that could be done.  Just giving every murderer a free pass with a 25 year sentence is not justice.

Also all murder cases should have a jury trial.  Never just by a judge.  I don't know what system they use for murder trials.  Juries are instructed that if there is any doubt at all, they are to find the person not guilty.

We can recall where some innocent people were convicted, but the system could be changed to ensure that doesn't happen again.

What about mass murderers where there were a number of witnesses?  Examples like the shooting of multiple people in a mosque as the Quebec City shootings where there were a number of eye witnesses?  Why should someone like that escape capital punishment?

Then there is the guy that drove a van down a street in Toronto and killed a lot of people, seriously injured many others, and was seen by many witnesses.  Why should someone like that escape capital punishment?  With the eye witnesses there is no question who did it.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

I believe the justice system has improved much the last number of years with the use of DNA evidence and scientific methods.

Nope. there are now a number of cases where the 'experts' gave inaccurate dna information because the police were "sure they have the right person and need some help".  And even when they don't the dna evidence can point to the wrong person:

https://daily.jstor.org/forensic-dna-evidence-can-lead-wrongful-convictions/

Tech may have changed, but humans haven't.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 

 

  Then there are also many cases where there eye witnesses.  What about that?   

It is widely recognized that eye-witness evidence is inherently unreliable. This has been shown in research after research. It's actually the LEAST compelling evidence as a rule.

Not to mention someone can lie for their own reasons.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

There might be overwhelming evidence he is the one. 

ALL evidence is collected and presented by the state, and is therefore subject to tamper, misinterpretation or out right fraud in some cases.  And what about mitigating evidence that they bury? We've seen that too.  His dna may be found at the scene, but evidence that he'd visited there before is suppressed.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 

There are many variables.  I doubt there is any reason why there would be mistakes. 

Let me keep this short - there is absolutely going to be mistakes, mistakes happen in boht canada and the us to this very day, there is NO system that can possibly be created that is guaranteed mistake free.

Period. Anything else is just lying to yourself.  Try me if you like with a 'system' and i'll explain how easy it is to bypass.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 

I don't believe horrific murderers should escape capital punishment if the evidence is unquestionable and perhaps eye witnesses. 

there's no such thing as unquestionable and eye witnesses are USUALLY (not sometimes - almost always) incorrect in many details, and they can also deliberately lie.

Do you believe innocent people should be killed? How does that make you different than the murderer?

Not to mention the murderer then gets away with it.  Nobody's going to 'reinvestigate' a crime where the "bad guy" is already dead. But cases ARE opened when the person is alive and new evidence shows up

The rest is more of the same.

If you allow capital punishment, 3 things happen and we've see it in the states.

1 - more bad guys will get off. Because they get automatic appeals and the bar is set so high for proof people who would have been found guilty actually get off in many cases.

2 - We WILL absolutely kill innocent people. THat's a guarantee.

3 - Costs go up because of teh extra trials and other costs, vs simply paying for his room and food for the rest of his life. On average it's more epensive to kill them than keep them.

Having "full" life sentences takes care of that. If some evidence comes forward later then the person is still alive and can be compensated and freed. 

Look at how justin trudeau handled the truckers - DO NOT GIVE THE STATE POWER OF LIFE AND DEATH OVER YOU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Nope. there are now a number of cases where the 'experts' gave inaccurate dna information because the police were "sure they have the right person and need some help".  And even when they don't the dna evidence can point to the wrong person:

https://daily.jstor.org/forensic-dna-evidence-can-lead-wrongful-convictions/

Tech may have changed, but humans haven't.

It is widely recognized that eye-witness evidence is inherently unreliable. This has been shown in research after research. It's actually the LEAST compelling evidence as a rule.

Not to mention someone can lie for their own reasons.

ALL evidence is collected and presented by the state, and is therefore subject to tamper, misinterpretation or out right fraud in some cases.  And what about mitigating evidence that they bury? We've seen that too.  His dna may be found at the scene, but evidence that he'd visited there before is suppressed.

Let me keep this short - there is absolutely going to be mistakes, mistakes happen in boht canada and the us to this very day, there is NO system that can possibly be created that is guaranteed mistake free.

Period. Anything else is just lying to yourself.  Try me if you like with a 'system' and i'll explain how easy it is to bypass.

there's no such thing as unquestionable and eye witnesses are USUALLY (not sometimes - almost always) incorrect in many details, and they can also deliberately lie.

Do you believe innocent people should be killed? How does that make you different than the murderer?

Not to mention the murderer then gets away with it.  Nobody's going to 'reinvestigate' a crime where the "bad guy" is already dead. But cases ARE opened when the person is alive and new evidence shows up

The rest is more of the same.

If you allow capital punishment, 3 things happen and we've see it in the states.

1 - more bad guys will get off. Because they get automatic appeals and the bar is set so high for proof people who would have been found guilty actually get off in many cases.

2 - We WILL absolutely kill innocent people. THat's a guarantee.

3 - Costs go up because of teh extra trials and other costs, vs simply paying for his room and food for the rest of his life. On average it's more epensive to kill them than keep them.

Having "full" life sentences takes care of that. If some evidence comes forward later then the person is still alive and can be compensated and freed. 

Look at how justin trudeau handled the truckers - DO NOT GIVE THE STATE POWER OF LIFE AND DEATH OVER YOU.

I believe there could be certain cases such as the two I mentioned where there were a number of eye witnesses:  The mosque attack and the van attack on many people along the street.  There may have been many eye witnesses.  Perhaps where there are a number of witnesses as in those kind of cases, there would be no chance of a mistake.

It costs I believe over a hundred thousand a year to keep someone in prison in Canada.  Very doubtful that capital punishment would be more expensive.

Mass shootings where there are many witnesses is another case where there would be no doubt.

The system would have to be re-designed so that is was absolutely error proof.  That would require a lot of research and work and new laws.  I doubt it will ever happen in Canada.

This has nothing to do with Trudeau.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I believe Blah blah wishful thinking blah blah

There is NO CHANCE. THere is ZERO method that could prevent it.  I've explained that eye witnesses are the least reliable. So it's dishonest of you to keep bringing them up. And even YOU realize people can lie never mind being mistaken.

There will be 'mistakes'. There always has been  and always will be. At the end of the day every system is still run by humans,

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

It costs I believe over a hundred thousand a year to keep someone in prison in Canada.  Very doubtful that capital punishment would be more expensive.

Not quite that much, but it does cost.  Last time i saw hard numbers it was 79,200 but that must be 15 years ago. (that's for max of course, some jails are cheaper but lets assume max). So - inflation etc etc a figure of 100 per year wouldn't be outrageous

So - how much does it cost to kill someone, Well obviously it depends on how your system is set up but with the automatic appeals and protections to prevent innocent deaths as much as possible, it can run several million PER YEAR just to have the court and legal resources in place to do it.

And then each case can run you a few million on top of that.

These are us numbers of course.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs/summary-of-states-death-penalty

It is brutally more expensive to kill people than lock them up for life.

 

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Mass shootings where there are many witnesses is another case where there would be no doubt.

THERE IS ALWAYS DOUBT. It is SO EASY to screw with people's memories - you have no idea.  Here have a read

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Eyewitness_Testimony/uBlAU24-qsoC?hl=en&gbpv=1

and again - not hard to bribe or threaten someone into saying they saw something.

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The system would have to be re-designed so that is was absolutely error proof. 

THere is no such system period.

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

 

This has nothing to do with Trudeau.

Of course it does.  Did you see how he tried to interfere in investigations previously? Snc lavlin AND the rcmp investigation?  You think there will NEVER be another prime minister to do that?

So the point is elected officials CAN and WILL do things for political reasons including interfere with investgations. This has HAPPENED before.  You've seen it with your own eyes in your lifetime now.

There is no such thing as a system created by man that can't be messed with by man. And as we've seen there are prime ministers who WILL do that - you can bet there's premiers and other elected officials who will too

Not to mention the police and others,

I will not pointlessly trade the lives of the innocent for 'vengance' on the guilty when there's an easy alternative which is every bit as punishing.  Why give them a quick death anyway when you can force them to think about what they've done for the rest of their lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It is brutally more expensive to kill people than lock them up for life.

I don't believe it would be more expensive to enforce capital punishment than life in prison.  No reason why it should cost a lot of money.

I also don't believe that there are the number of mistakes in Canada as you seem to claim.

Perhaps the system will need to be revamped and a better system put in place before the capital punishment is brought in, but I think that is the only thing that might provide some deterrence.  Canadians are sick of seeing the daily killings going on and nothing being done to try to stop it.

Far more innocent people are being killed, including policemen, than would ever be mistakenly killed by capital punishment.  Actually more lives may be saved if it can be also used as a deterrent for would-be murderers.

But like I said I would be glad to see the system revised to make sure that there are no false guilty verdicts for murder cases.  I am sure there must be ways it could be improved.

I do not believe in giving 25 year sentences to murderers, especially cases of multiple murders.  

It sends the wrong message to society and does nothing to deter murderers.

Abolition of capital punishment was not done because mistakes have been made;  it was abolished because of liberal, left soft-on-crime ideology.  They have no concept of justice.  They have often let dangerous offenders out that go on to kill other people.  This should never happen.  Capital punishment would help eliminate that problem.  The person would not be around to be let out to victimize other people as they are doing now.

"In 2021, police services from across Canada reported 788 homicides, 29 more than in 2020."

That works out to more than two homicides per day on average.

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

I don't believe it would be more expensive to enforce capital punishment than life in prison.  No reason why it should cost a lot of money.

Of course there is. You obviously didn't read ANY of the information i posted which had links to individual studies.

If you want to know why go read the links, but there is ZERO doubt it's more expensive due to the adddition of safety features to try to keep killing innocent people to a minimum.  Something you said you yourself thought would have to be in place and would require 'lots of thought' - well that translates into up front costs never mind the actual extra costs.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

I also don't believe that there are the number of mistakes in Canada as you seem to claim.

Thats a matter of record, so you're just lying to yourself now.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Perhaps the system will need to be revamped and a better system put in place before the capital punishment is brought in, but I think that is the only thing that might provide some deterrence.  Canadians are sick of seeing the daily killings going on and nothing being done to try to stop it.

THere is no such system.  And trying would cost shit tonnes of money. And fail.

I agree people are sick of seeing people get out. That's why i say lock them up for life and throw away the key and let them die in jail.  If it turns out there's new evidence that they didn't do it - great. If not - they spend their entire lives in lonley isolation with no hope of it getting better forever,

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Far more innocent people are being killed, including policemen, than would ever be mistakenly killed by capital punishment. 

Well that's a lie.  If they're locked up for life or killed its' the same thing. They're not out there hurting others are they. There's no difference.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Actually more lives may be saved if it can be also used as a deterrent for would-be murderers.

Locking them up for life or killing would have the same  deterrent effect. Fact is a lot of them probably wouldn't care if they get killed or not. Texas violent crime rates aren't significantly lower than states without capital punishment.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 

But like I said I would be glad to see the system revised to make sure that there are no false guilty verdicts for murder cases.  I am sure there must be ways it could be improved.

Can't be done.  Explain to me what that would look like. You still have humans running it ,

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

I do not believe in giving 25 year sentences to murderers, especially cases of multiple murders.  

Sure - lock 'em up for life.

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

 

Abolition of capital punishment was not done because mistakes have been made;  it was abolished because of liberal, left soft-on-crime ideology. 

So what? It was still a good decision and 3 out of the 5 regular term  gov'ts since then prove we really shouldn't give the state that power.

 

THere is no practical solution where giving the state the power of death is a postive thing.  ANd if you're so eager to kill innocent people you can put one of your family up first and we'll see if that changes your mind,

You're living in a fantasy and just ignoring any fact that doesn't agree with your preferred postion.  I would HAPPILY put a bullet in the brain of a child rapist myself and sleep like a baby that night - but you can't give that power to the state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Because quebecers know how fast a gov't can become corrupt and they're not nearly dumb enough to give a gov't power of life and death over them as a result.

If Quebecers know (and care) about political corruption how come almost all the major political corruption in the last fifty years has emerged from Quebec?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

If Quebecers know (and care) about political corruption how come almost all the major political corruption in the last fifty years has emerged from Quebec?

I never said they care.  As near as i can tell they think it's a requirement for a good politician.

But all the more reason they'd still be leery about giving that person the ability to kill them :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

It's called "lawyers'. 

Well yes. And because you have to allow every appeal automatically you're talking about lawyers for a lot more trails. And you're probably paying for his and it won't be some local crown defender. And you're paying for extra judges so you have enough to deal with this crap and still deal with the other business.

Plus you're still paying to incarcerate and feed them while this process goes on, and in the states it's an average of 264 months for this process to happen, which is 22 years. 16 - 22 years between conviction and execution  is pretty normal.

https://knowledgeburrow.com/how-long-do-death-penalty-cases-last/

And like i said its more likely they'll be found innocent because of the higher bar of proof so you have to add the costs of going through a significant portion of that process only to have them walk away to the total cost of having the death penalty.

And they STILL make mistakes with all those protections in place.  Not many but i don't think it's ok to kill even one person who was innocent.

Better to lock them up for life, no chance of parole, minimal contact with the outside world Let them stew for decades over what they've done.

Edited by CdnFox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Better to lock them up for life, no chance of parole, minimal contact with the outside world Let them stew for decades over what they've done.

The fact is it just doesn't work that way.   We see how the Supreme Court ruled that murderers who are sentenced to life only means 25 years and then they must be given the chance to apply for parole and drag the victim's family through the whole horror show again every few years.  The Supreme Court ruled everyone must have a "faint hope" which is soft-on-crime ideology of liberals.  That is one problem with this whole thing.  We have also seen the parole board release dangerous offenders simply because they are aboriginal and last September a guy stabbed eleven or twelve people to death in Saskatchewan. 

We see how the liberal government is constantly changing and tweeking the laws in line with their liberal soft-on-crime ideology.  This creates more threats and danger from convicted murderers.  They want to release aboriginals and blacks into society because of their higher numbers in prison.

The truth is when you lock people up for life you create a new set of problems.

1.  High cost over the length of time, possibly over a million dollars for the taxpayer to pay.  Why should the taxpayers have to pay for a murderer to live?

2.  You create a danger that a convicted murderer will be released on parole and murder someone else in future.  Nobody can predict what such a person will do.

3.  Capital punishment for murder is ordered by God in Genesis in the Bible, which is written by men who were inspired by God. See Genesis 9:6 KJV  This is not human wisdom.  This comes from God.  The other principle taught in Scripture is a fact can be established by several witnesses.  Your claim that witnesses will lie is overblown and you would have to give some proof and show why.  Courts are ready to hear all of the evidence and reasons why a particular witness is not trustworthy or why the witness is credible.  Yes, humans are fallible, but this is the only known system we have on earth to protect society from evil people such as murderers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, blackbird said:

 

 God is the final authority on right and wrong, and what is justice, not man.  The value of human life is infinite and must be viewed as sacred.  Man is corrupt and depraved and is therefore by himself unable to know or understand justice as God sees it. 

 

Yet you would play god and take lives because you can, even though you admit you are corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The fact is it just doesn't work that way.   We see how the Supreme Court ruled that murderers who are sentenced to life only means 25 years and then they must be given the chance to apply for parole and drag the victim's family through the whole horror show again every few years. 

Their argument is that locking them up for life is cruel and unusual. That's just locking them up. What do you think their ruling on capital punishment is going to be?

the answer to that is the notwithstanding clause.

9 minutes ago, blackbird said:

We see how the liberal government is constantly changing and tweeking the laws in line with their liberal soft-on-crime ideology.  This creates more threats and danger from convicted murderers. 

Sure, liberal gov'ts are a bad thing, Nothing we can do about that - seeing as the time between conviction and execution is about 16 years guaranteed you'll have a liberal gov't in power wanting to change the law at some point before someone is executed.

10 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The truth is when you lock people up for life you create a new set of problems.

No, that's just your imagination working overtime to try to preserve what you WANT to be true.

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

1.  High cost over the length of time, possibly over a million dollars for the taxpayer to pay.  Why should the taxpayers have to pay for a murderer to live?

Nope. It costs WAAAAAAY more money, as in millions and millions more, to kill them. Keeping them alive is cheap. As i've already proven.

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

2.  You create a danger that a convicted murderer will be released on parole and murder someone else in future.  Nobody can predict what such a person will do.

Nope. Given the length of time that it takes for a murderer to be executed there's really no differnce. Also - there's a lot more compassion for people getting killed, so it's far more likely the public will support changes to avoid killing people than it is for life in prison. Life in prison was actually popular.

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

3.  Capital punishment for murder is ordered by God in Genesis in the Bible,

nobody cares about your imaginary friend. This is a discussion about logic and reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Yet you would play god and take lives because you can, even though you admit you are corrupt.

No, the legal system would be the one that decides the innocence or guilt of a murderer and pronounce the sentence.  Mankind is not perfect since the Fall of Man.  But we must do the best we can with what God has given us in terms of a justice system to protect society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, blackbird said:

No, the legal system would be the one that decides the innocence or guilt of a murderer and pronounce the sentence.  Mankind is not perfect since the Fall of Man.  But we must do the best we can with what God has given us in terms of a justice system to protect society.

Stop hiding behind your god and take responsibility for your own actions.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

seeing as the time between conviction and execution is about 16 years guaranteed

What proof of that 16 years do you have?   That could be in the U.S. not Canada.  You mentioned the U.S. before.  We are talking about Canada.  

There is no reason why the laws cannot be changed to make the time short.  Of course there must be enough time allowed for an appeal, but the system can be set up so things happen expeditiously.  No need to take 16 years.

57 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

nobody cares about your imaginary friend. This is a discussion about logic and reason.

You just defined yourself right there and cast doubt on any argument you might have or made.

"1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. 2  The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. 3  They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one."  Psalm 14: 1-3 KJV

Therein lies the real reason we do not have capital punishment for murderers...  heathenism or an anti-God attitude that is destroying society and western civilization.   The foundation of a civilized society has been our Christian heritage.  That is what brought human rights, democracy, and a semblance of a justice system that gives consideration to the rights of the accused.  These things do not exist in non-Christian countries or heathen nations.  Read the King James Bible, Gospel of John and come to the knowledge of God and His Son Jesus before it is too late.

You are speaking entirely as a natural man and spoke against the one thing that is the source of true wisdom, that is, God.

"

True wisdom, like God’s grace, is alien to the natural man.

Wisdom is, in fact, a divine gift that is granted by God whenever any believer asks. This is the clear teaching of James:"

The True Meaning of Wisdom - What It Is and How to Get It (biblestudytools.com)

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What proof of that 16 years do you have?

The... one....i.... already....posted...the.... link... for......

You don't read anything do you. You just blather along.

54 minutes ago, blackbird said:

There is no reason why the laws cannot be changed to make the time short.

Yes there is - you wind up killing more people who were innocent. It takes that long because of the checks and balances designed to minimize that.

Quote

You just defined yourself right there and cast doubt on any argument you might have or made.

If you think logic and reason are defined only by people's belief in god and YOUR god specifically then you have neither.

Your arrogance is matched only by your illiteracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

If you think logic and reason are defined only by people's belief in god

No.  Wisdom comes from God himself.  Faith in itself does not necessarily equate to wisdom, although it is a sign a person is on the right track to grow in wisdom.  The wisdom come from almighty God through his written revelation as revealed by the Holy Spirit working in an individual.  A good example of God's wisdom which Solomon had is described in 1 Kings ch3 in the Bible:

"16  Then came there two women, that were harlots, unto the king, and stood before him. 17  And the one woman said, O my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house. 18  And it came to pass the third day after that I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also: and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house. 19  And this woman’s child died in the night; because she overlaid it. 20  And she arose at midnight, and took my son from beside me, while thine handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom. 21  And when I rose in the morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead: but when I had considered it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, which I did bear. 22  And the other woman said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And this said, No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they spake before the king. 23  Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living. 24  And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king. 25  And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other. 26  Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it. {yearned: Heb. were hot} 27  Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof. 28  And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment. {in him: Heb. in the midst of him} "   1 King 3:16-28 KJV

King Solomon had received wisdom of God.

________________

When society functions, there are accidents sometimes and cannot be avoided.  A legal system is not perfect.  But that does not mean that people who deserve capital punishment for murder should escape it.  That is a denial of justice.

Society is full of examples of things we do to function where there accidents from time to time, but we don't stop doing things because someone might get hurt or be killed by accident.

An example is the health care system.  People die in surgery or as a result of it form time to time.  We don't stop operating on people because there is a chance someone might die.

There are innocent people killed on the highways all the time but we don't stop people from driving because there might be an accident and an innocent person gets killed.

We don't stop flying aircraft because an aircraft crashes once in while.

By the same reasoning, we should not stop giving capital punishment because there could be an accident sometime.  That destroys justice.  We should however do everything humanly possible to avoid making a mistake.  
 

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,698
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    IPEM Group of Institutions
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ethan Wylde earned a badge
      First Post
    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...