Active shooter in NZ

[Gawdzilla Sama]

A "record sentence" would ipso facto include having to listen to ABBA.

[Duty]

NO. 
.
New Zealand abolished the death penalty for all crimes, including treason, in 1989.

That's a shame.

Because the appropriate response to uncivilised brutality is to be complicit in that MO.

[Fake Messiah]

Seems that Jerry Falwell Jr. would call this slaughter "a spiritual moment" and judging by reactions so would many evangelicals

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

He keeps a gun in his back pocket?  Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll sit wrong and blow his bollocks off.

Boru

[WinterHold]

What do you mean?

You should be. Just because one can point out drastic cases like spree killers and serial killers, still does not change the cost to tax payers long term.

The cost of appeals is far higher in death penalty cases than merely giving them life in prison with no parole. 

And the other problem with it, as with even other crime, is that someone who doesn't have deep pockets to defend themselves, are far more likely to be hurt by the justice system, than a wealthy person accused of the same if innocent. Once you end their life, you can't bring it back if it is later found out they are innocent. Many people have been let off death row too because evidence proved they didn't do it. 

The death penalty is not a deterrent, and really is nothing more than state sponsored revenge.

You do not protect the accused because you like what they are charged with, you protect the accused for the greater long term attitude that we should not become a mob rule society. 

In a perfect world you'd be right that someone should forfeit their life for mass murder or serial killers. But in the real world innocent people get accused, and those without money to defend themselves are far more likely to be over charged, and or plead out even if innocent, or get wrongfully convicted. 

And since I am a tax payer too, please don't speak for me. The death penalty just on cost alone, is enough for me. Killers can still be put in super max prisons and contained without the extra cost.

I totally support the death penalty since:
1-It ceases and stops reasons for revenge (the victim's family/people will have no justifiable reason to keep on killing to "avenge the fallen".
2-It is very just to treat an eye for an eye.
3-Society -with its rich and poor- will think twice -if not thrice- before the commit of murder
4-Instead of assuming scenarios, let's upgrade our crime detection methods and find new ways to identify the real killer.

Many crimes will cease to happen if the state imposed the rightful punishments for certain crimes. You can't just stack up inmates in prison or else you'll have a very powerful -and hidden- evil underground society.

On the long run, executing killers -after proper, extensive investigation- is better for your payed taxes.
Also; killing must be for killers only: no killing for treason -like some secular societies do- or killing for homosexuality -like some Muslim societies do-.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

What a wonderful, perfect, black and white world you wish to live in AtlassS33.

Just a point BUT why do you make the statement of "Stacking prisoners up forever" ?

My country used to havd a system called 'Convict labour'.

Prisoners of the system didn't just sit in jail.

They were used as a labour force.

Still.... being productive with people is better, I think, than being barbaric with people.

[fredd bear]

[EgoDeath]

The reason they deserve death

This racist piece of shit took the lives of 49 people and you're asking why he deserves to die?

Oh wow. Another testament to the fact that some conversations are not worth having here.

[fredd bear]

The reason they deserve death

This racist piece of shit took the lives of 49 people and you're asking why he deserves to die?

Oh wow. Another testament to the fact that some conversations are not worth having here.

 
@EgoDeath;

Your response is an ad hominem attack, not an argument. Only relevant if you want to retain your currently high level of credibility (at least with me) 

 I'm not in favour of the the death penalty except in extreme cases and where a 100% guarantee of a safe conviction can be given..I really do try to avoid a dogmatic position in philosophical  positions. 

 SO: From what I can see, there is no doubt this arsehole's guilt.

As far as individuals go,I can't think of a more extreme case.****

I'm forced to conclude that I would be satisfied if he were permanently removed from human society ,and the sooner the better.


**never in Australia or New Zealand before.  Even Australia's most notorious mass murderer, Martin Bryant, only killed 35 people. That guy is a mental defective, so I can't really complain about him just being locked up for life.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

1-It ceases and stops reasons for revenge (the victim's family/people will have no justifiable reason to keep on killing to "avenge the fallen".

But capital punishment itself is an act of revenge.  It must be, as it serves no other purpose.

 

2-It is very just to treat an eye for an eye.

Then why don't we punish thieves by stealing from them, or arsonists by setting their homes on fire?

 

3-Society -with its rich and poor- will think twice -if not thrice- before the commit of murder

Really?  They haven't done that so far.  If you have evidence that capital punishment is a deterrent, do please trot it out.

 

4-Instead of assuming scenarios, let's upgrade our crime detection methods and find new ways to identify the real killer.

Well, I'm all for catching the guilty, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
Boru