Why is it not the most civil thing to do? Please nobody quote the bible, that's a bunch of bullshit. Morality and religion are not the same. And in the U.S. There's a separation between church and state

it is is civil insofar it was done in accordance to the laws of this country and due process as laid out was follows, it is humane insofar that it will be done in a manner that causes as little pain as possible.

But more importantly it is justice, and no where ANYWHERE is it written that Justice needs to conform to the contrived moral framework subscribed to by JECE, Thucy, Catholic church etc.

Once again, I believe the death penalty should be abolished because of the danger that an innocent or unworthy victim will be killed by the state, this guy is neither innocent or unworthy. The 12 people on the jury respect the sanctity of life with the completely acceptable caveat that if you take a life you forfeit the right to yours. To chide them is as arrogant as the ass holes who do it on here (Thucy JECE) clearly are.

Why is this that hard? He got what he deserves based on the laws that are currently in place. For all you kids out there, you have rules at school. Your parents have rules at home, and you are required to follow them. If not, there are repercussions. It's the same thing here.

As I stated before, you don't have to like it, and if you want to do something about it, exert your first amendment rights and try to change it. Otherwise this is a stupid conversation and we should just have empathy for the victims.

Was it a stupid conversation to argue against slavery when that was legal? Saying the law is the law as justification for the laws' execution is just as lazy as calling killing in the name of justice "barbaric" without giving the act of killing serious thought. Human societies with their higher level of thought compared with other animals have come to understand the importance and sanctity of life, so we enact societies and laws to protect it and deter the taking of human lives. When someone comes along that openly and blatantly disregards the importance of the lives of others, punishment obviously needs to be levied, lest you risk the laws protecting life to be disregarded by the masses.

But consider what it really means to say that someone forfeits their own right to life if they don't respect the right to life of others. What motivates that thought? It's fear. Fear that someone who doesn't respect life poses a direct threat to my own existence. It's a legitimate fear. But we are so quick to transform that fear into vengeful justice because the feelings of revenge are powerful ones that can overshadow our fear. But they hardly erase the fear, they just let it fester. We don't want to see others that don't respect life as being humans with their own right to life because that's too hard to grapple with. I promise you that every child in the world starts off understanding the importance of all life. No one sees their first murder/death and smiles. Societies train us to understand that killing in the name of justice, for country, in war, and in many other ways is not only acceptable, but necessary, in order to protect yourself and the lives of those you hold close. The only way to fully achieve that is to dehumanize those other people and call them the enemy, even though their motivations in life stem from very similar base human desires. We are one and the same on the most base level. We are all human and wanting of life and love, even if some of us lose our way as society guides us to transform our want of love into a need to hate in order to control our fears. It's too hard and scary to try to see someone that wants you dead as just another human being with the same basic wants in life, that somewhere along the way they became fearful and grew a desire to harm others to respond to that fear. It's scary because then we start to understand them, and understanding someone you vengefully want dead is terrifying.

We want to protect the sancity of life, but can we really do that if we are ready to throw out that desire because of fear? The answer is no.

"What motivates that thought? It's fear."

No, it's justice. Just yet another entry of opinion steeped in contrived psychobabble from the idiots on this board and still not a single real argument to be seen.

ssorenn: +1'd your last post by mistake.

You fail to understand that Tsarnaev is also a victim, especially if executed. Everyone deserves empathy, no matter how heinous their crimes.

Everyone is a victim in some way, he is not being executed for being a victim, he is executed for taking an action that killed three people. He can have all the empathy he wants, his action warrants his death.

appalled at how spineless JECE is.

And someone's understanding of justice isn't opinion steeped in contrived psychobabble in and of itself? Being just and fair is riddled with opinion.

Personally I don't understand how punishment can be just if it fails to hunt down the true motivation for the action being judged, and just looks at the action itself.

@y2. I said these are the current laws, arguing here lends to nothing but speculation, and shows only the desire to argue ,and not change anything. Every US citizen has access to a comgressmen, use it. No one here is going to changes anyone's mind, and if you think you can, you're dumber than a box of rocks. Either be proactive on your feelings, or continue to argue and nothing gets done

@JECE, Tsarnaev is not a victim, and if you really want to categorize him as one, he is a victim of his own choosing. I don't bleed for that.

I'm dumb for wanting to share my opinion on a forum of intelligent people I generally respect? I'm sorry you think that.

"And someone's understanding of justice isn't opinion steeped in contrived psychobabble in and of itself? Being just and fair is riddled with opinion."

And isn't being moral and merciful just as riddled with opinion? Yet you guys have absolutely no qualms claiming the moral high ground and lobbing grenades at those seen beneath you.

"Personally I don't understand how punishment can be just if it fails to hunt down the true motivation for the action being judged, and just looks at the action itself."

I personally don't understand the relation of the motivation to anything

Your not dumb, I said if you think anyone's opinion here will change, than maybe look in the mirror. Being here for the last year and a half, it's quits apparent that no matter what the issue discussed, the same people are on the same sides as always , NO? What does discussing this do here, does it provide empathy for the victims? NO. Are we trying to find empathy for someone who chose to harm innocent people? YES. That's absurd.

Isn't a motive the most relevant aspect to judging the severity of an action in a court of law?

Ok maybe you all are just way more stubborn than I am. Personally I've had my opinions challenged and rethought multiple times in my almost 3 years on this site/forum.

Courts of law, even though flawed are still the law. If you don't like it, try to change it.

And as I told Thucy , if this is not what you like, your free to leave.

I'd rather debate with my fellow countrymen and help us all to better understand why we think and do things the way we do. I may not agree with everything that happens in America, but I'm not giving up on this nation anytime soon.

"Isn't a motive the most relevant aspect to judging the severity of an action in a court of law?"

why on earth does that mean that the motive needs to be addressed for justice?

what are you suggesting, that if I go and find someone and kill him, it's completely fine to punish me while ignoring the fact that he physically and verbally threatened my entire family the previous day and promised to hunt them down and murder them if I didn't pay him some sort of ransom?

"I am proving nothing other than someone who deliberately takes anothers life deliberately forfeits their own."

I reckon somebody's going to have to off the jury and the executioner then. The cycle continues....

Did you just say someone should kill the jury?

"as I told Thucy , if this is not what you like, your free to leave."

I am, and im also free to remain here and keep the pressure up on your fucking ass and other troglodytes until your evil wishes are no longer enacted in our society. You could always kill me to get me to shut up though, especially if you seem I'm enough of a threat to your violent ideology. I suppose you're also free to do that.

Ssoren, read in context you dumbshit. You ought to be smart enough to get the answer to your dumb ass question.

Thucy your not smokin the Orange kush, you're most likely a meth head. Your like a
Pimple on the ass of a donkey. Promote your Bible Belt bullshit. See where it gets you. People like you are worth the air you breathe. Enjoy. I wouldn't waste my time or energy on you.

Bible belt ideology? Lmao do you live under a rock?

I am however glad that you have put your thoughts in writing just in case something does happen to members of that jury

And Thucy, why are you talking about pressure and my ass? Is there something you would like to tell us. This is a happy and safe place. Please feel free.

Alright ssoren I'll spell it out for your ape brain:

I was mocking Santa's reasoning that a deliberate killing should be met with killing, since of corse execution is itself deliberate killing. I did so by taking his reasoning to its logical conclusion and facetiously suggesting that those directly responsible for Tsarnaev's death, the jury and the executioner, should themselves be executed.

My position on the matter is adequately published here (all killing is wrong including execution), such that your inability to see that fairly obvious nuance makes you look like a nine year old.