Should women get the death penalty?

[d000hg]

An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth
Matthew 5:38


HTH

Um, you do realise that Jesus was saying the exact opposite? You're deliberately mis-quoting.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

that's a daft argument

It might seem so but that's the kind of logic that appears with "modern morality". Humans are animals, yet we obviously have to live by some humane standards - but who sets those standards? To me a mass murderer like Saddam has killed 100,000s of people, death is not a punishment, we are just putting him down as that is the only way to deal with such crimes. Similarly there are crimes which would require the death penalty - walking into a school and killing children for example.

I can't understand how giving an appropriate punishment (torture would be "revenge" if that is what we were after) is seen as murder. Otherwise putting somebody in a prison could be seen as some kind of torture as well.

All I am saying there must be a frame of reference for all, otherwise it is just opinion and nothing more.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

No it isn't. Murder is a word with a specific definition, it does not mean "deliberately taking someone else's life".
Killing an enemy soldier in battle is another case where pre-meditated deliberate killing is NOT murder.

You have come out with all the goods today dude.

[xoggoth]

Although some things treated as manslaughter maybe should be treated as murder. If you are firing a gun randomly out a window or hit someone with an axe that you took to a confrontation for example, actual intention seems academic.

[d000hg]

Although some things treated as manslaughter maybe should be treated as murder. If you are firing a gun randomly out a window or hit someone with an axe that you took to a confrontation for example, actual intention seems academic.

The line between malice and stupidity can be rather blurred, it seems.

[Ticktock]

As discussed in a feature on the BBC news website today, murder is also defined differently in different countries.

Apparently, in Germany murder is not defined by being a pre-meditated killing. There must also be an element of "sneakiness" - the victim not knowing they were likely to be killed.
The example given was a husband beating his wife over a number of years, before beating her to death would likely be charged with manslaughter, as she should have expected that he may finally kill her.
A wife being beaten by her husband over a number of years, who then stabs him in his sleep would likely be charged with murder, as he did not suspect that he was in danger from her.
Apparently it's an old Nazi law still in force, based on the concept that treachery in your actions made them worse than doing something barefaced.

[eek]

Isn't given the death penalty to women for just being female a bit extreme....

[vwdan]

The very ones you can't off because they become martyrs & encourage the other nutters.

I was chatting with someone about this the other day - I'll be most satisfied once those pair reach the end of the appeal line and realise that they're now locked up forever. No more publicity, no more airtime, no chance to be a martyr (Which was clearly their intention with their attack on the Police) and all the time in the world to consider their horrid little lives.

Executing them just gives them the platform they want, proves nothing and will do nothing whatsoever to deter the last lot. In terms of punishment, it seems to me that they'll be far less happy stuck in a cell.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

No it isn't. Murder is a word with a specific definition, it does not mean "deliberately taking someone else's life".
Killing an enemy soldier in battle is another case where pre-meditated deliberate killing is NOT murder.

Subject to three exceptions (see Voluntary Manslaughter below) the crime of murder is committed, where a person:

of sound mind and discretion (i.e. sane);
unlawfully kills (i.e. not self-defence or other justified killing);
any reasonable creature (human being);
in being (born alive and breathing through its own lungs - Rance v Mid-Downs Health Authority (1991) 1 All ER 801 and AG Ref No 3 of 1994 (1997) 3 All ER 936;
under the Queen's Peace;
with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH)

The death penalty would be carried out by someone of sound mind and discretion who had the intent to kill, it would be under the Queen's peace and the person would be a human being and breathing - the only thing that would stop it being murder under the legal definition would be that, should we chose to change the law, it would be justified by the State.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

Subject to three exceptions (see Voluntary Manslaughter below) the crime of murder is committed, where a person:

of sound mind and discretion (i.e. sane);
unlawfully kills (i.e. not self-defence or other justified killing);
any reasonable creature (human being);
in being (born alive and breathing through its own lungs - Rance v Mid-Downs Health Authority (1991) 1 All ER 801 and AG Ref No 3 of 1994 (1997) 3 All ER 936;
under the Queen's Peace;
with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH)

The death penalty would be carried out by someone of sound mind and discretion who had the intent to kill, it would be under the Queen's peace and the person would be a human being and breathing - the only thing that would stop it being murder under the legal definition would be that, should we chose to change the law, it would be justified by the State.

So this is just "our" definition of murder. That is subject to continuous change anyway.