The state should not have the right to take a life.

[Swede]

It's not justice. It's revenge at it's most primal.

[savemefromdumbya]

1. Jesus didn't do that sort of thing

these so called christian states?

[Deja Q]

4. Jesus died to make * and the corporate elite wealthy.

[Bluebear]

2. I must agree.

And the families who lost loved ones have to go through years and years of appeals etc. until "justice" is served, but there is no closure. They still have lost a precious loved one. Personally I think death is the easy way out for some murderers and a lifetime behind bars and a permanent loss of liberty is by far more punishing.

[Deja Q]

3. Or the Feds. Or another country. Or a gaggle of dust mites.

Haven't you noticed? They'll do what they want.

No more divisive stuff please; there are issues far more pressing to those who want to live. And because we didn't callously and viciously kill in the first place, we are more likely TO survive.

[Deja Q]

5. Good lord, this is a duplicate!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5561669&mesg_id=5561669

How didn't I see the original before?

Yours is better, though - it's pithy and about as much time as anyone should be putting into this case at this point.

[Swede]

7. Revenge is not worthy of a civilized nation.

Next we chop of thieves hands.

[Book Lover]

6. Agreed - no gov't should have that much power ceded to it

Does the state rape rapists? Does the state steal from thieves? Why then is killing (some) killers just? Why would any thinking person give any government that much power?

[Swede]

9. Who watches the watchers?

Would a weak capital case with GWG as govenor of Texas not terrify any thinking person?

[Fescue4u]

8. Perhaps it shouldnt. But since the beginning of government

It has always had that right.

[Swede]

10. 90 percent of todays's contries have ceded that right.

China,Iran and the USA have have not.

[Fescue4u]

11. IF you are referring to the Death Penality, you are correct of course

But of course all countries reserve the right to go to war, or allow their police to kill citizens during the course of enforcing the law. Most countries also recognize that their citizens have the right to kill in self defense as well.

Whats the difference between finding a citizen guilty of a crime and executing him, vs shooting an innocent citizen because the police thought he/she was a threat?

Obviously Im discussing the right of the state to kill in a larger context than you were originally suggesting.

Im all for a peaceful society where governments don't kill their citizens, and where citizens and man in general don't harm each other. I think we all are. Sadly I think we are a very long way from that society anywhere on the globe.

For the record, I relunctantly support the DP. I also support the right of all people to defend themselves. I wish it wasnt necessary for man to kill, but it seems that in many ways we are still in a "kill or be killed" society.

Is there any country that bans all form of man killing man? Im not aware of one.

[Walt Starr]

12. Wrong, the State MUST have the right to take a life

How else is the State to defend the people if it cannot make war.

Perfect example of why the State MUST have the right to take lives is World War II.