SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Dayuhan who wrote (81587)6/13/2000 11:09:00 AM
From: Gordon A. Langston  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
It is tempting to argue this but the reality is we will not change each other's minds. I would prefer to acknowledge the difference and find a compromise. Victims and their families need some compassion from the justice system. If the murderer is housed and fed and sustained to the tune of $20-30,000 a year, I can see no reason for victims to not be compensated. It makes at least as much sense to judge a society by how it treats victims as it does to claim "enlightened self-interest" by abandoning the death penalty. When this justice happens, perhaps I will abandon my stance in favor of executions.

"I'll let you be in my dreams, if I can be in yours"

Talkin' World War III Blues by Bob Dylan



To: Dayuhan who wrote (81587)6/13/2000 12:59:00 PM
From: one_less  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
<<I do not believe in killing criminals, though it is easy to say that a given class of individuals has forfeited their right to live.>>

You contradict yourself. The second half of the statement says enough. You don't half to add anything about what you get out of it (ie. revenge). Revenge is not a justification for capital punishment, on that we agree.