Dr Guillotine did not invented the guillotine. This was already used in some ancient cultures. He only proposed its use instead of hanging, beheading by ax or burning at the stake during the French Revolution. Also Guillotin died of natural causes not in the guillotine as the legend says.
"WTF are we doing?" Exactly, there's no way for sure to tell how these people feel when they're being "put to death" (maybe except for immense pain). In MY personal opinion I think that the Guillotine should be brought back. It's quick, there's no paralyzing injections, and you wouldn't be (possibly) hanging for days struggling for breath, OR being cooked alive! The other methods of 'Capital Punishment' seem sadistic if you ask me :S.
With much respect Penn (love you and Teller) its true that we are not perfect putting people to sleep. They may feel pain. Gee thats too bad. My heart bleeds for these killers. Anyone else not losing sleep?
Just shoot them in the head acouple times....Wayy less expensive....Cheap, and no more pricey appeals, or the possibility of them getting out of prison and committing another crime.
And its much quicker. Shit, just have all the death row inmates go into a chamber one at a time, pop em in the head and drop the body down a chute to a grinder, grind up the bodies and mix in some vitamins and feed it to pigs.
@iudiciumartchn hey that sounds alright to me, and i dont eat meat so its even better. The idea of the people suffering as they are executed seems to be bothering people and they call it cruel and in humain. but dont forget the sick bastard probly beat his own child to death, thats why he is being executed, I say let them suffer they diserve it peace
I don't dislike the death penalty for moral reasons, but when something's ineffective at preventing crime, expensive as hell, and can't be reversed in the case of a mistake, I don't see the logic in supporting it based on my opinion that some people deserve to die.
I agree with the bullet to the back of the head. Cheap, quick, painless. All of the different "humane" executions are just for the publics sake. I dont acually support the death penalty. It takes 2 to 3 million dollars to execute someone (the defense will make appeal after appeal) plus i have seen some of the most dumbass juries on the planet. There is no way i want my life to be in the hands of 20 people who might be dumbasses.
I don't support the death penalty for the same reason. Too fucking expensive. Even then with the bullet to the head, I don't trust the chance that I will manage to survive (a guy shot himself in the head five times and he lived)
I completely agree, arguing about it IS pointless, I just wanted to make that clear to anyone who decides to post rude or nasty comments after what I'm about to type. :)
@agricola How many people did he kill then? None you stupid piece of shit. You probably think he is a serial killer but you should get your facts straight sweetheart.
Don't comment unless you know what your talking about. You seem retarded if you do.
I'm not going to express my viewpoint on this issue...all I'm going to say is that if someone is being executed the best method is a firing squad. A quick shot into the forehead kills a person without them even feeling it.
I look at it strictly as a money issue... If there's absolute proof that someone did a murder, we should just rid them off rather than keep them alive on our dime in prison...
damn straight they do. most sentenced to death are the most ruthless muderers. there crimes are often very gruesome. so in my opinion they desereve to die. wether they sufferd is irrelivant . animals deserve better.
2. Up to 97% of murderers in America kills only ONCE! The main idea of capital punishment is to "prevent" further murders from happening, well, when 97% of the murderers only kill once then that means that the state kills a LOT more people, pointlessly, than the "second-time offenders" will ever do!
3. And we have rehab to make "people" out of criminals.
4. What about those whom are innocently sentenced to death?
Hence you want to punish the family? Well, what establishes families? Each family has its own SES or social-economic status that is determined by their education, income, and most importantly, their neighbourhoods. It is just simply unfair to pinpoint one individual or family. Society as a whole need to reach out to those in need since inequalities induce drastic consequences.
im sorry but shut the FUCK up...if someone kills any family member of mine. ill push the plunger on the potassium chloride MYSELF. if you where of sound mind and knew what you where doing, there is NO ONE TO BLAME BUT YOU. i don't care what your situation. explain the situation if you will of a man that raped and killed a little girl. give me one GOOD reason i should not curb stomp the sick bastard myself. i simply can agree. all on death row DESERVE TO DIE.
if you say you would kill in revenge, then it means you are not any better than the criminal himself, and following your logic you deserve the same thing. Also when you support death panelty, you are partialy responsible for everyone that got killed while being innocent ( it happens ).
@nataq01 "revenge" is as old as time and is a time honored tradition in most human cultures. it is a wiely accepted method of dealing with those who wrong you or your loved ones.
Perhaps, but my problem is with the legal system, its cheaper to put them in prison for life, then to pay for all the parole hearings, lawyers, juries, and judges the average death row inmate receives. Simply put, if its one bullet on the spot the person should be executed, if its through the legal system fuck it, its cheaper to feed the gruel for life and put them in a chamber.
Not entirely true, it's also how the child is raised and even in his genetics. Besides that, I think Hammurabi's code on murder should remain the same; an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.
Yes, let's compare the two individuals - a pacifist and an infamous criminal. I'd rather praise the humanity of the former than practice the beliefs of the latter.
So what would you do to a person who murdered someone? Life in prison? I personally don't think this is "humane" because you're prolonging with what I agree with and that's the death penalty. There they eat, sleep, and do other things that most people in the ghetto can't afford to do, so to them prison can may be a luxury so therefore murderers have no fear for it rather than most of the middle class. Sometimes justice isn't pretty, but those times you've just to take the blindfolds off.
I'm 100% for capitol punishment! If you take a life, then yours should be forfeit!!
I don't subscribe to barbaric methods of execution such as hanging, gas chamber, electric chair, et all. I say just give the dirtbag a cyanide capsule and cark him fast! if he won't take it, shoot it into the fucker!
It's been known for a long time the methods used for lethal injection are less humane than even many past ways, and there's a good chance many still have significant pain when they experience the lethal heart attack. But the public likes to believe with blissful ignorance what they want, and "horrible" pictures of people having their head cut off or shot by firing squad are traumatic, while an image of someone receiving a "nice, peaceful, sleepy medicine" + quietly dying in their sleep are not.
knock them out and suffocate them in cold water, easiest way to go besides a nuke vaporizing you in a spit second. once the water enters the lungs the fight for air stops and they just fade off into shock. cold water is said to make the brain relax in a sleep state, so the dreams are "peaceful".
I'm not sure what you guys are arguing about in relation to this video, but I will add that nsewx is wrong. I won't even go into everything else wrong with what you said (like that you don't enter REM sleep while dying). Considered to be one of the most humane methods by euthanasia and Right to Die societies is helium using a special mask or "Exit Bag." You die via asphyxia and hypoxia, but unlike drowning or traditional suffocation, there is little to no pain before losing consciousness.
The body is only programmed to fight against excessive levels of carbon dioxide, not too little oxygen. So Helium (or other inert gases) displaces the oxygen in the blood, and you don't struggle for air like you would if you placed a plastic bag over your head. Nembutal is/was also promoted but it's not available in most countries so isn't really practical. Of course, dying is rarely entirely painless, unless perhaps it's via a heroin overdose when already in a drug-induced coma.
the painless way is the quickest, a .308 bullet to the cerebellum drops you like a bag of rocks. but taking a pill, or a bag over your head will take awhile.
personally I don't care if prisoners suffer, i'm more concerned about people who are on their death beds in pain. water was just a cheap and effective way of doing it that's all.
It's cheaper to provide food, clothing, shelter, medical care, dental care, and guards, then it is to inject a ruthless murderer with 20 bucks worth of chemicals? I hardly think so!
What earthly reason is there to prolong the life of a monster who cannot be cured and will always be a brutal killer? And why should the tax payers foot the bill to keep such trash alive?
The fact that you hardly think doesn't change the reality of the situation. The legal costs associated with putting someone to death far exceed the cost of imprisoning them for life. Make the process cheaper and you end up killing even more innocent people than we already do. You want the money to go where it's most needed, abolish the death penalty and put the savings toward caring for victims.
Baloney! Food, shelter, dental and medical care, guards to supervise them, etc. etc. Kill these useless bastards! It's far cheaper and more just as well.
If you truly think that the death penalty is that great a solution for keeping "sick bastards" at bay, then I suggest you take a second look at crime in the U.S. It seems North-America is the only nation capable of producing serial killers...
Oh wait... Britian had one... over a hundrend years ago!
Israel, France, Netherlands... No death penalty. I don't see these so called "sick bastards" there.
Actually, Britain has had several serial killers. Jack the ripper was just the most well known. All the "ripper" type serial killers such as the Yorkshire Ripper, and most recently the Suffolk ripper, et al. In fact other serial killers such as; Fred & Rose West, Dennis Nilsen, Dr, Harold Shipman, Dr. Hawley Harvey Crippen, etc. ALL from the UK.
FBI studies say that there are approx. 300 serial killers roaming at large in North America at any given time. We can afford to kill a few of them.
first: none deserve death. Who are you, or who is anyone for that matter of fact, to deal out judgment as to who has the right to live and who does not.
Secondly, I PROMISE you that at least one of those 1000 killed, were wrongfully convicted. And you know what? even ONE is enough to make this practice a crime on humanity.
Who am I? You have that all wrong. You should ask who is the murderer to take innocent lives. If you take a life, then yours should be forfiet.
In cases where the proof isn't 100%, then I recommend life imprisonment. In cases where it is beyond a shadow of a doubt, then I recommend the death penalty.
Basically, if you don't want the state to take your life, then don't you take anyone elses.
The state? Please, think about your statement and take some responsibility. In the US (and almost anywhere else) prosecutors and judges are elected or appointed by elected officials. Politicians promise what we cheer for. You are not simply arguing that murder is acceptable, you are ensuring that you and me are murderers.
I am NOT arguing that murder is acceptable, quite the opposite. In point of fact, you're the one saying murder is acceptable because you refuse to eliminate horrific, sadistic murderers such as Charles Manson.
Such as the methods his cult used when acting on his orders, they carved pregnant Sharon Tate's baby out of her belly as she begged for it's life? And then slaughtered every innocent person in her home that night? Sorry, but if you're expecting sympathy for scum like that from me, you're barking up the wrong tree. Manson WAS sentenced to death, but it was repealed when the death penalty was abolished. He and his gang were supposed to pay for their sadistic murders, but a technicality saved them.
Yeah I don't think I care how some scumbag dies if he kills innocent people, a good number probably have done way worse to their victims and to me they deserve the same if not worse. Why do you care if some asshole is stuck paralyzed in pain that just stabbed and raped someone, they deserve it.
DNA can simply point to SOMEONE doing SOMETHING at SOME POINT and time. Just because someone had sex with a victim does not mean he raped her, or that he killed her.
Video Evidence. This is usually hard to argue against, but unfortunately, video is hard to verify. How do you know what you're seeing is really what you're seeing? (ironic that this is being said on a penn & teller video).
You raise a number of valid points. However, if it can be established that a murdered woman had a mans DNA under her nails from defending herself, I'd say that was fairly conclusive. Ditto for his sperm being inside her dead body. In Canada, there was the Paul Bernardo case, where he kidnapped, raped and murdered his victims. The rapes were on video tape but not the murders. His wife and accomplice testified against him and got a deal. But there was no question of his guilt..
Google "Paul Bernardo and Karla Holmoka." If there was ever a clear cut case of a depraved serial killer, he's it! He should have been executed and burned, and his ashes pissed on! Instead, he's rotting in a prison and sucking up tax dollars that would have been better spent on housing the homeless or feeding the poor! Why keep such filth alive? For what good, earthly reason? That motherfucker is never going to get out, so just fucking whack him!
I don't see how there was any evidence he killed anyone, seems to me it could have been either him or Holmoka. So again, not 100%. Women can kill too, you know.
Also, obviously this person has serious mental instabilities. He should be receiving serious psychiatric care. Not worttyh of death.
He raped and killed his wife's baby sister, as well as three innocent women. The proof was the video evidence of him raping and degrading the victims, and the eye witness accounts of their abductions. Their dismembered bodies turned up shortly therefeter. So who did it, the tooth fairy? His wife turned the rape videos over to the cops, and gave testimony against him, or she would have faced the same sentence. Instead she now walks free. They both should have been executed. Their victims were.
For the sake of argument, let's say it WAS Holmoka. Then Bernardo would still be an accomplice and should be charged with the murders anyway. However, based on the fact that the victims had been manually strangled and dismembered, (you must admit that such heavy work would be more suited to a man than a woman) it is definitely more likely that Bernardo committed the actual murders himself. Holmolka should have been done for them too, but as you say, she cut a sweetheart deal. I say execute him!
Obviously this argument boils down to one thing and one thing only.
Whether you think human life, EVERY human life, has value
But I will say this, think seriously about If whether or not you seriously believe that some lives are worth more than others, does that only hold true to criminals and non-criminals, or are there degrees of value within that.
Once you say some human lives are worth more than others, it's a slippery slope down into discrimination.
A soldier who fights to serve his country and defend his people is virtuous. Our soldiers who fight the war on terror are virtuous. They die each day so that self righteous fools like you can sit and write mindless pap that derides their heroism and sacrifice.
Nazis & terrorists are evil. They murdered millions and you defend them!
And if YOU seriously believe that the lives of evil, mass murdering monsters such as Bin laden or Hitler have worth, than YOU are the monster, sir. Not I.
They aren't? Really? Perhaps the British soldiers are defending you? The UK is rife with terrorism! No matter where you live in the free world, soldiers are dying to keep you safe, so shut YOUR trap, bub!
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki SAVED millions of other lives by ending WWll, and while unfortunate, it worked. It was also in retaliation to Pearl Harbor, which the Japanese bombed. Fair is fair. Killing IS wrong, but sometimes there is no alternative. Its called self defense, buddy!
our prime-minister (though lacking in any real mental capacity) sent soldiers to Afghanistan. Now, when the Taliban decide to come and attack Canada, then you can argue someone is fighting for my life.
Second, if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were retaliation, then your whole eye for an eye argument goes straight down the drain, more were killed there then in pearl harbor.
So what? I also live in Canada. Did you think we were immuine to the terrorist threat? All free countries are at risk. Besides, had you not heard that the Taliban put Canada on their list of top targets? And what about the terrorist who just got 14 years for trying to bomb the Parliament buildings?
Japan was bombed after the cowardly attack on Pearl Harbor. It ended WWll, and saved millions more lives. Retaliation = self defence and justice.
And yes, I agree with you that the PM is an idiot.
the only reason to use a death penalty is if your country is poverty striken. In that case its his life against someone else who may be starving or w/o shelter. Better to eliminate the criminals before citizens in an extreme situation.
Barring that, the cost isn't substantial, particularly in the US. 1000 state executions. you would save the same money in a day by decriminalizing marijuana.
Also there is a chance of wrongful conviction. Or even future rehab improvements.
Rehab? Don't make me laugh! Look up a particularly nasty bastard called "the Iceman." He was a brutal hitman who sadistically murdered a lot of innocent people for money. He took great joy in the fact that his face was the last one his victims ever saw. Do you think you could rehabilitate a ruthless motherfucker like him? Save your sympathy for the victims, and do away with these evil cocksuckers!
The only human method of execution I've been able to think up is this, death by explosives. Since high explosives detonate at velocities well past the speed of sound, and nerve impulses travel at well below those velocities, death by explosives would be, in practice, painless. The central nervous system would be entirely destroyed before any pain impulses could register.
I've yet to see a practical use for capital punishment, it it simply a means for state mandated veangence to make the vindictive public feel better. What the fuck does it solve? Nothing, it just continues the cycle of barbaric violence.
What "cycle" are you talking about? Someone kills a person, is convicted, and is executed. An execution doesn't make someone else suddenly go kill someone to make up for it. Execution frees up jail space from someone that would have otherwise spent life in prison, at GREAT cost. And yes, there is an eye-for-an-eye aspect to it, and it makes the family and friends of most victims feel that justice was served. So I see it as a win-win situation.
Also, the killer has a 0% chance of escaping jail.
Yes, perhaps "cycle" was the wrong word. And as far as someone spending life in prison "at GREAT cost", it costs more to have the state execute someone than it does to keep them alive in prison. I don't know how you see it as a win-win situation when a human being is losing their life when they could have been just as easily kept alive (at less cost to the tax-payer) and possibly reformed
"Someone kills a person, is convicted, and is executed." - SirReptitious
The "kills a person" assumption is questionable at best; people have been falsely convicted of murder before. Yeah, keeping people in jail is expensive (and even that can be fixed by sentencing them to hard labour) but so's the appeals process; unless you want to get rid of that too, making it even more likely for someone falsely convicted to be executed.
Or instead, you could lose the death penalty and lose the risk.
Recommended Reading: Wilkes, the Man and His Crimes. Prosecutors in some courts use the term Criminal Defense Lawyers, implying that lawyers who defend the accused are themselves criminals. Some judges don't allow that. Some do.
The people executed have the same chance to reform or rehabilitate as anyone else, which is one chance. Their chance is just a little shorter. We are all dead for an infinity of time.
You seem to be missing my point. Executing an imprisoned human being who has been completely seperated from society solves nothing. When a citezen decides to kill another person for whatever reason its called murder. When the state decides to kill someone its called justice.
"We are all dead for an infinity of time"
Irrelevant. What about the time we are alive? Is it okay for someone else to decide when that time should come to an end (in a situation that is not dire i.e. self defense)?
Agree that is is not permissable for someone else to end a life. So we agree on that. But what do you do when someone does what is not permissable? Do you say "Tch Tch? Or do you punish them, and eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or a life for a life?
Of course it's not permissable for someone to kill someone else. And, yes, of course you should punish the person that has murdered someone. But, no, I do not agree at all with the eye-for-an-eye, life-for-a-life mentality. It is a rediculous Draconian mentality feuled primarily by emotion and emotion should have no part in deciding what to do with another's life. If a person has even the slightest possibility to reform then why not try? (cont.)
(cont.) I mean it's not like they'll be going anywhere during their life-long prison sentence. Speaking of which, if they are put into prison, what would killing them solve? They're already seperated from everyone else, now they'r dead, What have you accomplished? In what way did you make things better?
Do you want to pay the bill to support murderers? Serial killers, hired hitmen? Brutal, sadistic monters? I sure don't! I say fuck em' all! If they can decide to kill another human, then somebody should kill them! Save your sympathy for the victims of these brutal murdering bastards, and pray that none of these assholes ever kills you or a loved one of yours. Such creatures cannot be cured, only eliminated. Who talks of rehabilitating a mad dog?
Draco, who sponsored the Draconian laws wanted the punishment to be more severe than the crime. Eye for an eye is actually merciful. I don't think that the reward for a particularly heinous crime would be three hots and a cot, and all the health care you can imagine forever, with internet access, TV and library privelidges. The only reason not to put people to death is because the Government can't be trusted.
Many criminals cannot be cured. Serial killers, for one. Why must society foot the bill to keep a monster alive? In those cases, and premeditated murders and cruel, torture killers, then they should be able to take what they dish out. And besides, when you brutally kill an inocent human, your life must be forfeit! If that isn't to your taste, then DON'T kill innocent people!
Botched electricutions, several hours of crusifiction, 5 day hangings, paralized but concious heart attack, 5% chance of living after gunshot to head or 10 seconds of life after decapitation? Sign me up for the Guillotine!
In the end all I would say is that our practice of putting a person to death should be to give them Sodium Piothental followed by a bullet to the head.
if an individual is in death row, they serve to be tortured. why the fuck do you think they ended up on deathrow? why are so many people such panzy ass sissies?
"Strumming my pain with his fingers / Singing my life with his words / Killing me softly with his song / Killing me softly with his song / Singing my whole life with his words / Killing me softly, with his sooooong".
If you reall REALLY have to execute someone and have good enough non-personal reasons, why not put a bullet in the back of the head? sure as hell is cheaper and more ethical than this crap.
You have a 5% chance to live from a gunshot to the head. So there is a 5% chance you are going to hit the ground alive with a bullet lodged in your head.
I'd want to die by firing squad. But I don't want that "hey fire a couple blanks" bs they do or whatever. I want them all to fire a bullet. I want 10 fucking pounds of lead in me.
Dr Guillotine did not invented the guillotine. This was already used in some ancient cultures. He only proposed its use instead of hanging, beheading by ax or burning at the stake during the French Revolution. Also Guillotin died of natural causes not in the guillotine as the legend says.
Quixotepr 2 months ago in playlist Penn and Teller
aaaaargh i really hate mime artists
cheyennebritbrat 6 months ago
What the fuck r we doing !!!!
Andybull1234 7 months ago
i cant believe how uneducated that woman is!!!!
saulmc303 7 months ago in playlist Penn and Teller bullshit
if you are going to have humans put down for horrendous murders it seems equal, not right.
CocoandVelvet 7 months ago
Can you imagine dating this chick....i bet she'd be into some freaky shit, lol
goodvibesallround 8 months ago
why don't you let me just blow their heads off at minimum wage?
aquafishsoup 9 months ago
I WANT TO GO !!! ♥_♥
suicidalbitchh 9 months ago
"killed softly with his song" :)
pixarpianofreak 9 months ago
"WTF are we doing?" Exactly, there's no way for sure to tell how these people feel when they're being "put to death" (maybe except for immense pain). In MY personal opinion I think that the Guillotine should be brought back. It's quick, there's no paralyzing injections, and you wouldn't be (possibly) hanging for days struggling for breath, OR being cooked alive! The other methods of 'Capital Punishment' seem sadistic if you ask me :S.
HalloweenChickie 9 months ago
@Assyrianmaster No.. you blind one person, the he blinds you.. then thats that... there is no continuation.
drsta84 10 months ago
is this the guy who did the whole " I Live In A Van DOWN BY THE RIVER! " ?
srong12 11 months ago
@srong12 haha no, Your thinking of Chris Farley.
bdeverick95 7 months ago
What the FUCK are we doing? THE KILLER LINE all the time
Itzmyrave 11 months ago 10
i like how she rubs her hand over the part that the persons face melted off onto the shirt...ya know, it's all good
low72 1 year ago 2
snapped the heavy mofos heads right off huh? lol
chrisdom2010 1 year ago
With much respect Penn (love you and Teller) its true that we are not perfect putting people to sleep. They may feel pain. Gee thats too bad. My heart bleeds for these killers. Anyone else not losing sleep?
CatpurrRobertaBobbi 1 year ago
We need more death!
benfirst 1 year ago
HAhAHA!!! I LOVE THE MIME AT THE END!!!!
LAUGHED SO MUCH!!!
Garfulon 1 year ago
Just shoot them in the head acouple times....Wayy less expensive....Cheap, and no more pricey appeals, or the possibility of them getting out of prison and committing another crime.
flippitydoo 1 year ago
@flippitydoo Yeah. Just like the nazis. Bet your a fan off the gas chamber too.
firekind1980 1 year ago
@flippitydoo
And its much quicker. Shit, just have all the death row inmates go into a chamber one at a time, pop em in the head and drop the body down a chute to a grinder, grind up the bodies and mix in some vitamins and feed it to pigs.
iudiciumartchn 1 year ago
@iudiciumartchn hey that sounds alright to me, and i dont eat meat so its even better. The idea of the people suffering as they are executed seems to be bothering people and they call it cruel and in humain. but dont forget the sick bastard probly beat his own child to death, thats why he is being executed, I say let them suffer they diserve it peace
5150gamer 1 year ago
please answer as quick as possible
if potassium sulfide is a crystal then crused into a powder and sold what would be added to make it into the liquid that is put into the person
hulk239239 1 year ago
ill never do any crimes im freaking scared
Canadiankids16 1 year ago
holy mother fuckin fucker fuck fuck that guys fuckin face is fuckin fucked mellted to the fuckin shirt fuck holy fuck
Canadiankids16 1 year ago
I don't dislike the death penalty for moral reasons, but when something's ineffective at preventing crime, expensive as hell, and can't be reversed in the case of a mistake, I don't see the logic in supporting it based on my opinion that some people deserve to die.
olddeuteronomy 2 years ago
Just out of curiosity, could someone please clarify what he says killed those "other 15 people" at the beginning? (killed softly with...)
randman83 2 years ago
@randman83 His song
Xylokaine 2 years ago
I agree with the bullet to the back of the head. Cheap, quick, painless. All of the different "humane" executions are just for the publics sake. I dont acually support the death penalty. It takes 2 to 3 million dollars to execute someone (the defense will make appeal after appeal) plus i have seen some of the most dumbass juries on the planet. There is no way i want my life to be in the hands of 20 people who might be dumbasses.
fieldman07 2 years ago 3
I don't support the death penalty for the same reason. Too fucking expensive. Even then with the bullet to the head, I don't trust the chance that I will manage to survive (a guy shot himself in the head five times and he lived)
TheElectricDreamer93 2 years ago 2
@TheElectricDreamer93 maybee a shotgun to the head? lol
fieldman07 2 years ago
@fieldman07 - ooh bloody lol
TheElectricDreamer93 2 years ago
The death penalty is very controvertial and arguing about it is pointless. It won't change the views of others so don't hate...please
jamesunderpar 2 years ago 10
@jamesunderpar Escapist
randman83 2 years ago
@ randman83 yes, yes i am
jamesunderpar 2 years ago
@jamesunderpar
I completely agree, arguing about it IS pointless, I just wanted to make that clear to anyone who decides to post rude or nasty comments after what I'm about to type. :)
HalloweenChickie 9 months ago
charles manson is a serial killer? since when?
firekind1980 2 years ago
@firekind1980 are you dense?
agricola 1 year ago
@agricola How many people did he kill then? None you stupid piece of shit. You probably think he is a serial killer but you should get your facts straight sweetheart.
Don't comment unless you know what your talking about. You seem retarded if you do.
firekind1980 1 year ago
I'm not going to express my viewpoint on this issue...all I'm going to say is that if someone is being executed the best method is a firing squad. A quick shot into the forehead kills a person without them even feeling it.
andyrooney11 2 years ago 2
I look at it strictly as a money issue... If there's absolute proof that someone did a murder, we should just rid them off rather than keep them alive on our dime in prison...
TimNRA757 2 years ago
well if they can kill people "who deserve it", why cant i?
shit, i'll do it for free...
and i bet i see alot more sick shit on the streets in one day than these fuckin pigs cud ever see in a week
Nihility420 2 years ago
Just...stop killing please.
lostangel912 2 years ago
I like the last bit "what the FUCK are we doing?"
Astro29 2 years ago 38
@Astro29 lol does NOT meet the standard for killing animals
kingsalamander123 6 months ago
New propsition: have all executions performed by a mime, the subject will be begging for death within a minute.
danielsimonon 2 years ago 4
they deserve it
hamakavulla1 2 years ago 3
damn straight they do. most sentenced to death are the most ruthless muderers. there crimes are often very gruesome. so in my opinion they desereve to die. wether they sufferd is irrelivant . animals deserve better.
roxas12590 2 years ago 2
1. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
2. Up to 97% of murderers in America kills only ONCE! The main idea of capital punishment is to "prevent" further murders from happening, well, when 97% of the murderers only kill once then that means that the state kills a LOT more people, pointlessly, than the "second-time offenders" will ever do!
3. And we have rehab to make "people" out of criminals.
4. What about those whom are innocently sentenced to death?
5. We ARE animals. -.-
Hjernespreng 2 years ago
Only half blind
montaisgod 2 years ago
No one deserves to die...it's society's fault they've done what they have! =(
lostangel912 2 years ago
I doubt it.
Laevi1337 2 years ago
How come? You think a baby is able to kill? One is the way s/he is due to his/her environment and education.
lostangel912 2 years ago
I'd blame the family then. Not society....
Laevi1337 2 years ago
Hence you want to punish the family? Well, what establishes families? Each family has its own SES or social-economic status that is determined by their education, income, and most importantly, their neighbourhoods. It is just simply unfair to pinpoint one individual or family. Society as a whole need to reach out to those in need since inequalities induce drastic consequences.
lostangel912 2 years ago
im sorry but shut the FUCK up...if someone kills any family member of mine. ill push the plunger on the potassium chloride MYSELF. if you where of sound mind and knew what you where doing, there is NO ONE TO BLAME BUT YOU. i don't care what your situation. explain the situation if you will of a man that raped and killed a little girl. give me one GOOD reason i should not curb stomp the sick bastard myself. i simply can agree. all on death row DESERVE TO DIE.
roxas12590 2 years ago
1. It's immoral
2. It may be worse to stay alive in prison
FatherTime89 2 years ago 2
if you say you would kill in revenge, then it means you are not any better than the criminal himself, and following your logic you deserve the same thing. Also when you support death panelty, you are partialy responsible for everyone that got killed while being innocent ( it happens ).
nataq01 2 years ago
@nataq01 "revenge" is as old as time and is a time honored tradition in most human cultures. it is a wiely accepted method of dealing with those who wrong you or your loved ones.
agricola 1 year ago
@agricola so what? How does that make it good in any way?
nataq01 1 year ago
Perhaps, but my problem is with the legal system, its cheaper to put them in prison for life, then to pay for all the parole hearings, lawyers, juries, and judges the average death row inmate receives. Simply put, if its one bullet on the spot the person should be executed, if its through the legal system fuck it, its cheaper to feed the gruel for life and put them in a chamber.
Daharen 2 years ago
It's actually the person's fault for killing/raping people.
People are mistreated all the time, most of them don't go on a rampage like the fucking idiots that shoot up schools.
Those kinds of people can't handle life, and they shouldn't be allowed to live.
R0aringC0w 2 years ago
Not entirely true, it's also how the child is raised and even in his genetics. Besides that, I think Hammurabi's code on murder should remain the same; an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.
gamewarrior2216 2 years ago
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind - Gandhi
lostangel912 2 years ago
"You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone. Al Capone
gamewarrior2216 2 years ago 4
Yes, let's compare the two individuals - a pacifist and an infamous criminal. I'd rather praise the humanity of the former than practice the beliefs of the latter.
lostangel912 2 years ago
So what would you do to a person who murdered someone? Life in prison? I personally don't think this is "humane" because you're prolonging with what I agree with and that's the death penalty. There they eat, sleep, and do other things that most people in the ghetto can't afford to do, so to them prison can may be a luxury so therefore murderers have no fear for it rather than most of the middle class. Sometimes justice isn't pretty, but those times you've just to take the blindfolds off.
gamewarrior2216 2 years ago
True, I like George Carlin's belief on punishment.
IRJ53I 2 years ago
Last I check society doesn't make you're choices for you.
They do what they have done because they choose to, saying"SOCIETY IS TO BLAME" is letting them be excluded from their actions.
Pyroblazer 2 years ago
@lostangel912 you are an idiot. its their own fault they do what they do, they are inately twisted.
agricola 1 year ago
Virus007911 VS moonman540 <-- lol
why are you 2 arguing on a pen and teller video? O.o
ccdrev99 2 years ago 2
I'm 100% for capitol punishment! If you take a life, then yours should be forfeit!!
I don't subscribe to barbaric methods of execution such as hanging, gas chamber, electric chair, et all. I say just give the dirtbag a cyanide capsule and cark him fast! if he won't take it, shoot it into the fucker!
virus007911 2 years ago
It's been known for a long time the methods used for lethal injection are less humane than even many past ways, and there's a good chance many still have significant pain when they experience the lethal heart attack. But the public likes to believe with blissful ignorance what they want, and "horrible" pictures of people having their head cut off or shot by firing squad are traumatic, while an image of someone receiving a "nice, peaceful, sleepy medicine" + quietly dying in their sleep are not.
LibertyCrusader 2 years ago
come on, America! texas cant do it all by themselves!
ALMYCorporations 2 years ago
knock them out and suffocate them in cold water, easiest way to go besides a nuke vaporizing you in a spit second. once the water enters the lungs the fight for air stops and they just fade off into shock. cold water is said to make the brain relax in a sleep state, so the dreams are "peaceful".
nsewx 2 years ago
I'm not sure what you guys are arguing about in relation to this video, but I will add that nsewx is wrong. I won't even go into everything else wrong with what you said (like that you don't enter REM sleep while dying). Considered to be one of the most humane methods by euthanasia and Right to Die societies is helium using a special mask or "Exit Bag." You die via asphyxia and hypoxia, but unlike drowning or traditional suffocation, there is little to no pain before losing consciousness.
LibertyCrusader 2 years ago
The body is only programmed to fight against excessive levels of carbon dioxide, not too little oxygen. So Helium (or other inert gases) displaces the oxygen in the blood, and you don't struggle for air like you would if you placed a plastic bag over your head. Nembutal is/was also promoted but it's not available in most countries so isn't really practical. Of course, dying is rarely entirely painless, unless perhaps it's via a heroin overdose when already in a drug-induced coma.
LibertyCrusader 2 years ago
the painless way is the quickest, a .308 bullet to the cerebellum drops you like a bag of rocks. but taking a pill, or a bag over your head will take awhile.
personally I don't care if prisoners suffer, i'm more concerned about people who are on their death beds in pain. water was just a cheap and effective way of doing it that's all.
nsewx 2 years ago
Comment removed
nsewx 2 years ago
There isn't a such thing as an innocent person, and if taxpayer money goes toward execution then we're all just killers now aren't we?
TheK00laid47 2 years ago 2
BTW, Penn says since 1976, there have been more than 1000, executions in the US.
Would you care to guess how many innocent people have been brutally murdered in the US since 1976? Over 30 years ago?
Once a murderer has killed in cold blood, he will likely kill again. Capital punishment ensures that the recidivism rate doesn't increase.
virus007911 2 years ago
Except that life imprisonment is just as good for the recidivism rate and doesn't involve having the state murder innocent people. It's also cheaper.
MillsApparatus 2 years ago
It's cheaper to provide food, clothing, shelter, medical care, dental care, and guards, then it is to inject a ruthless murderer with 20 bucks worth of chemicals? I hardly think so!
What earthly reason is there to prolong the life of a monster who cannot be cured and will always be a brutal killer? And why should the tax payers foot the bill to keep such trash alive?
virus007911 2 years ago
The fact that you hardly think doesn't change the reality of the situation. The legal costs associated with putting someone to death far exceed the cost of imprisoning them for life. Make the process cheaper and you end up killing even more innocent people than we already do. You want the money to go where it's most needed, abolish the death penalty and put the savings toward caring for victims.
MillsApparatus 2 years ago
Baloney! Food, shelter, dental and medical care, guards to supervise them, etc. etc. Kill these useless bastards! It's far cheaper and more just as well.
virus007911 2 years ago
If you truly think that the death penalty is that great a solution for keeping "sick bastards" at bay, then I suggest you take a second look at crime in the U.S. It seems North-America is the only nation capable of producing serial killers...
Oh wait... Britian had one... over a hundrend years ago!
Israel, France, Netherlands... No death penalty. I don't see these so called "sick bastards" there.
Moonman540 2 years ago
Actually, Britain has had several serial killers. Jack the ripper was just the most well known. All the "ripper" type serial killers such as the Yorkshire Ripper, and most recently the Suffolk ripper, et al. In fact other serial killers such as; Fred & Rose West, Dennis Nilsen, Dr, Harold Shipman, Dr. Hawley Harvey Crippen, etc. ALL from the UK.
FBI studies say that there are approx. 300 serial killers roaming at large in North America at any given time. We can afford to kill a few of them.
virus007911 2 years ago
first: none deserve death. Who are you, or who is anyone for that matter of fact, to deal out judgment as to who has the right to live and who does not.
Secondly, I PROMISE you that at least one of those 1000 killed, were wrongfully convicted. And you know what? even ONE is enough to make this practice a crime on humanity.
Moonman540 2 years ago
Who am I? You have that all wrong. You should ask who is the murderer to take innocent lives. If you take a life, then yours should be forfiet.
In cases where the proof isn't 100%, then I recommend life imprisonment. In cases where it is beyond a shadow of a doubt, then I recommend the death penalty.
Basically, if you don't want the state to take your life, then don't you take anyone elses.
virus007911 2 years ago
The state? Please, think about your statement and take some responsibility. In the US (and almost anywhere else) prosecutors and judges are elected or appointed by elected officials. Politicians promise what we cheer for. You are not simply arguing that murder is acceptable, you are ensuring that you and me are murderers.
lurkist 2 years ago
I am NOT arguing that murder is acceptable, quite the opposite. In point of fact, you're the one saying murder is acceptable because you refuse to eliminate horrific, sadistic murderers such as Charles Manson.
virus007911 2 years ago
I get it. It's not murder if it's committee approved.
Oh, and we have kept Manson from killing again without having to resort to horrific and sadistic methods.
lurkist 2 years ago
Such as the methods his cult used when acting on his orders, they carved pregnant Sharon Tate's baby out of her belly as she begged for it's life? And then slaughtered every innocent person in her home that night? Sorry, but if you're expecting sympathy for scum like that from me, you're barking up the wrong tree. Manson WAS sentenced to death, but it was repealed when the death penalty was abolished. He and his gang were supposed to pay for their sadistic murders, but a technicality saved them.
virus007911 2 years ago
Yeah I don't think I care how some scumbag dies if he kills innocent people, a good number probably have done way worse to their victims and to me they deserve the same if not worse. Why do you care if some asshole is stuck paralyzed in pain that just stabbed and raped someone, they deserve it.
InvalidUniverse 2 years ago
Exactly, and every murdering bastard they execute is one less murdering douche bag in the world, And that is a good thing!
virus007911 2 years ago
Also,
proof is never 100%.
And you're a dolt if you try to argue this.
Moonman540 2 years ago
How about eye witnesses? video evidence? DNA?
ALL 100%
And YOU'RE a dolt if you never heard of empirical evidence.
virus007911 2 years ago
actually, none of those are 100%.
Witnesses can lie, first of all.
DNA can simply point to SOMEONE doing SOMETHING at SOME POINT and time. Just because someone had sex with a victim does not mean he raped her, or that he killed her.
Video Evidence. This is usually hard to argue against, but unfortunately, video is hard to verify. How do you know what you're seeing is really what you're seeing? (ironic that this is being said on a penn & teller video).
Moonman540 2 years ago
You raise a number of valid points. However, if it can be established that a murdered woman had a mans DNA under her nails from defending herself, I'd say that was fairly conclusive. Ditto for his sperm being inside her dead body. In Canada, there was the Paul Bernardo case, where he kidnapped, raped and murdered his victims. The rapes were on video tape but not the murders. His wife and accomplice testified against him and got a deal. But there was no question of his guilt..
virus007911 2 years ago
So then how do you know it was not his accomplice who did it?
As for your DNA under a woman's nails?
That could be the result of a fight,
or, of let's say... less conventional sex.
Moonman540 2 years ago
Google "Paul Bernardo and Karla Holmoka." If there was ever a clear cut case of a depraved serial killer, he's it! He should have been executed and burned, and his ashes pissed on! Instead, he's rotting in a prison and sucking up tax dollars that would have been better spent on housing the homeless or feeding the poor! Why keep such filth alive? For what good, earthly reason? That motherfucker is never going to get out, so just fucking whack him!
virus007911 2 years ago
Okay, I know you're not gonna believe me, but I'll say this again.
It still costs more for the state to kill a man than it does to imprison him.
Now I'll look up the paul bernardo case.
Moonman540 2 years ago
I just looked the Bernardo case up.
I don't see how there was any evidence he killed anyone, seems to me it could have been either him or Holmoka. So again, not 100%. Women can kill too, you know.
Also, obviously this person has serious mental instabilities. He should be receiving serious psychiatric care. Not worttyh of death.
Moonman540 2 years ago
He raped and killed his wife's baby sister, as well as three innocent women. The proof was the video evidence of him raping and degrading the victims, and the eye witness accounts of their abductions. Their dismembered bodies turned up shortly therefeter. So who did it, the tooth fairy? His wife turned the rape videos over to the cops, and gave testimony against him, or she would have faced the same sentence. Instead she now walks free. They both should have been executed. Their victims were.
virus007911 2 years ago
You're not listening to me. I agree with you that he raped the victims.
But there was no evidence as to who killed the victims.
It could have been Bernardo OR Holmoka...
Holmoka testified against him, so her sentence was lessened, that doesn't mean she spoke the truth.
Moonman540 2 years ago
For the sake of argument, let's say it WAS Holmoka. Then Bernardo would still be an accomplice and should be charged with the murders anyway. However, based on the fact that the victims had been manually strangled and dismembered, (you must admit that such heavy work would be more suited to a man than a woman) it is definitely more likely that Bernardo committed the actual murders himself. Holmolka should have been done for them too, but as you say, she cut a sweetheart deal. I say execute him!
virus007911 2 years ago
uh this is pointless.
Obviously this argument boils down to one thing and one thing only.
Whether you think human life, EVERY human life, has value
But I will say this, think seriously about If whether or not you seriously believe that some lives are worth more than others, does that only hold true to criminals and non-criminals, or are there degrees of value within that.
Once you say some human lives are worth more than others, it's a slippery slope down into discrimination.
Moonman540 2 years ago
The fact is, that not every human life has value.
Does Osama Bin Laden's life have value? Did Hitler's? What about The BTK killer? Come on!
The only "degree of value" I refer to here, is that of decent, innocent citizens lives weighed against those of sadistic, murdering bastards!
For example; Do I think a school teacher's life is worth more than a mob hitman's? Yes i do!
But I also think a homeless person's life is worth more than a serial killer's life.
There are monsters among us.
virus007911 2 years ago
Yes, I do believe Osama Bin Laden's and Hitler's life both carry value. And I say this as a grandson of a holocaust survivor.
And in that case,
Does a soldier's life have less value because they kill? And do the soldiers of one side have more value to their life then others?
If you seriously believe this, then I can tell you right now that there are monsters among us. And you Sir or Madame, are one of the prime examples.
Moonman540 2 years ago 3
A soldier who fights to serve his country and defend his people is virtuous. Our soldiers who fight the war on terror are virtuous. They die each day so that self righteous fools like you can sit and write mindless pap that derides their heroism and sacrifice.
Nazis & terrorists are evil. They murdered millions and you defend them!
And if YOU seriously believe that the lives of evil, mass murdering monsters such as Bin laden or Hitler have worth, than YOU are the monster, sir. Not I.
virus007911 2 years ago
Right.... well, I take it you are speaking of American soldiers, in which case, shut your trap, they aren't defending me.
And buddy-boy, the nuclear bombs that Oppenheimer and his friends in the U.S. government plopped down on Japan killed millions as well.
I agree with you that murder is evil (be it criminal murder or state-approved murder).
And because of this, I don't believe in the death penalty.
Life is life, murder is murder.
Moonman540 2 years ago 4
They aren't? Really? Perhaps the British soldiers are defending you? The UK is rife with terrorism! No matter where you live in the free world, soldiers are dying to keep you safe, so shut YOUR trap, bub!
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki SAVED millions of other lives by ending WWll, and while unfortunate, it worked. It was also in retaliation to Pearl Harbor, which the Japanese bombed. Fair is fair. Killing IS wrong, but sometimes there is no alternative. Its called self defense, buddy!
virus007911 2 years ago
Okay firstly,
I live in CANADA,
our prime-minister (though lacking in any real mental capacity) sent soldiers to Afghanistan. Now, when the Taliban decide to come and attack Canada, then you can argue someone is fighting for my life.
Second, if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were retaliation, then your whole eye for an eye argument goes straight down the drain, more were killed there then in pearl harbor.
Moonman540 2 years ago 4
I should also clarify:
I have no issues with soldiers, I have an issue with leaders who exploit desperate people in order to fuel a war-machine.
But this argument has gone off-topic, and I can see you will never change your mind.
If we disagree on the value of life, then nothing is left to argue. That is all.
Moonman540 2 years ago 3
So what? I also live in Canada. Did you think we were immuine to the terrorist threat? All free countries are at risk. Besides, had you not heard that the Taliban put Canada on their list of top targets? And what about the terrorist who just got 14 years for trying to bomb the Parliament buildings?
Japan was bombed after the cowardly attack on Pearl Harbor. It ended WWll, and saved millions more lives. Retaliation = self defence and justice.
And yes, I agree with you that the PM is an idiot.
virus007911 2 years ago
IMO
the only reason to use a death penalty is if your country is poverty striken. In that case its his life against someone else who may be starving or w/o shelter. Better to eliminate the criminals before citizens in an extreme situation.
Barring that, the cost isn't substantial, particularly in the US. 1000 state executions. you would save the same money in a day by decriminalizing marijuana.
Also there is a chance of wrongful conviction. Or even future rehab improvements.
lubermanl 2 years ago
Rehab? Don't make me laugh! Look up a particularly nasty bastard called "the Iceman." He was a brutal hitman who sadistically murdered a lot of innocent people for money. He took great joy in the fact that his face was the last one his victims ever saw. Do you think you could rehabilitate a ruthless motherfucker like him? Save your sympathy for the victims, and do away with these evil cocksuckers!
virus007911 2 years ago
were killed softly with his song! haha
AsSomedayItMayHappen 2 years ago
The only human method of execution I've been able to think up is this, death by explosives. Since high explosives detonate at velocities well past the speed of sound, and nerve impulses travel at well below those velocities, death by explosives would be, in practice, painless. The central nervous system would be entirely destroyed before any pain impulses could register.
BL0GD0R 2 years ago
what the fuck are we doing?
thishitscustom333 2 years ago
I've yet to see a practical use for capital punishment, it it simply a means for state mandated veangence to make the vindictive public feel better. What the fuck does it solve? Nothing, it just continues the cycle of barbaric violence.
koreanrobot47 2 years ago
What "cycle" are you talking about? Someone kills a person, is convicted, and is executed. An execution doesn't make someone else suddenly go kill someone to make up for it. Execution frees up jail space from someone that would have otherwise spent life in prison, at GREAT cost. And yes, there is an eye-for-an-eye aspect to it, and it makes the family and friends of most victims feel that justice was served. So I see it as a win-win situation.
Also, the killer has a 0% chance of escaping jail.
SirReptitious 2 years ago
Yes, perhaps "cycle" was the wrong word. And as far as someone spending life in prison "at GREAT cost", it costs more to have the state execute someone than it does to keep them alive in prison. I don't know how you see it as a win-win situation when a human being is losing their life when they could have been just as easily kept alive (at less cost to the tax-payer) and possibly reformed
koreanrobot47 2 years ago 3
(cont.)The whole eye-for-an-eye mentality seems archaic to me and I think it's time for America to progress past it (example: Sweden).
koreanrobot47 2 years ago 2
"Someone kills a person, is convicted, and is executed." - SirReptitious
The "kills a person" assumption is questionable at best; people have been falsely convicted of murder before. Yeah, keeping people in jail is expensive (and even that can be fixed by sentencing them to hard labour) but so's the appeals process; unless you want to get rid of that too, making it even more likely for someone falsely convicted to be executed.
Or instead, you could lose the death penalty and lose the risk.
HiddenFacedMatt 2 years ago
1. It does cut down recidivism.
2. It increases unemployment for criminal lawyers after execution is complete.
3. Creates a crowd to whom you can sell T-shirts.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
1. It also cuts down on reformation and rehabilitation (dead people can't change)
2. What do you mean by that? Lawyers that deal with criminal law or lawyers that are criminals?
3. .......Touchè
koreanrobot47 2 years ago
Recommended Reading: Wilkes, the Man and His Crimes. Prosecutors in some courts use the term Criminal Defense Lawyers, implying that lawyers who defend the accused are themselves criminals. Some judges don't allow that. Some do.
The people executed have the same chance to reform or rehabilitate as anyone else, which is one chance. Their chance is just a little shorter. We are all dead for an infinity of time.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
You seem to be missing my point. Executing an imprisoned human being who has been completely seperated from society solves nothing. When a citezen decides to kill another person for whatever reason its called murder. When the state decides to kill someone its called justice.
"We are all dead for an infinity of time"
Irrelevant. What about the time we are alive? Is it okay for someone else to decide when that time should come to an end (in a situation that is not dire i.e. self defense)?
koreanrobot47 2 years ago
Agree that is is not permissable for someone else to end a life. So we agree on that. But what do you do when someone does what is not permissable? Do you say "Tch Tch? Or do you punish them, and eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, or a life for a life?
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Of course it's not permissable for someone to kill someone else. And, yes, of course you should punish the person that has murdered someone. But, no, I do not agree at all with the eye-for-an-eye, life-for-a-life mentality. It is a rediculous Draconian mentality feuled primarily by emotion and emotion should have no part in deciding what to do with another's life. If a person has even the slightest possibility to reform then why not try? (cont.)
koreanrobot47 2 years ago
(cont.) I mean it's not like they'll be going anywhere during their life-long prison sentence. Speaking of which, if they are put into prison, what would killing them solve? They're already seperated from everyone else, now they'r dead, What have you accomplished? In what way did you make things better?
koreanrobot47 2 years ago
Their lawyers become unemployed after their death. That is a good thing.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Do you want to pay the bill to support murderers? Serial killers, hired hitmen? Brutal, sadistic monters? I sure don't! I say fuck em' all! If they can decide to kill another human, then somebody should kill them! Save your sympathy for the victims of these brutal murdering bastards, and pray that none of these assholes ever kills you or a loved one of yours. Such creatures cannot be cured, only eliminated. Who talks of rehabilitating a mad dog?
virus007911 2 years ago
Draco, who sponsored the Draconian laws wanted the punishment to be more severe than the crime. Eye for an eye is actually merciful. I don't think that the reward for a particularly heinous crime would be three hots and a cot, and all the health care you can imagine forever, with internet access, TV and library privelidges. The only reason not to put people to death is because the Government can't be trusted.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Many criminals cannot be cured. Serial killers, for one. Why must society foot the bill to keep a monster alive? In those cases, and premeditated murders and cruel, torture killers, then they should be able to take what they dish out. And besides, when you brutally kill an inocent human, your life must be forfeit! If that isn't to your taste, then DON'T kill innocent people!
virus007911 2 years ago
Botched electricutions, several hours of crusifiction, 5 day hangings, paralized but concious heart attack, 5% chance of living after gunshot to head or 10 seconds of life after decapitation? Sign me up for the Guillotine!
orgixvi3 2 years ago 2
I wouldn't argue to a shotugn to the temple. You'd have no brain to feel pain with.
smitty01209 2 years ago
In the end all I would say is that our practice of putting a person to death should be to give them Sodium Piothental followed by a bullet to the head.
monkeypickle23 2 years ago
XD
( sry coment isnt long enough, stupid youtube XP)
firefoxicegirl 2 years ago
government isnt smart enough to be responsible for killing people
volcom13xx 2 years ago 8
government isn't smart enough to be responsible for baking bread.
maczimms 2 years ago 10
haha
OxyCotz 2 years ago
+1'd
dayrache 2 years ago
Government isnt' smart enough to go to the store and buy the ingredients to bake the bread.
the1andonlybigh 2 years ago 2
And yet they are.
ParasiticXExperiment 2 years ago
Which is why it's innocents who sometimes get executed.
MasterBrutaka 2 years ago
And when murderers are not killed, it is sometimes innocents who are killed.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Excellent ending.
TehSmexican 2 years ago
Penn Gilette RULES! I agree with every fucking take this guy has.
Keep "defacing" that currency, Bro!
raisedonriots 2 years ago
You know what's the best way to die?
Delivering a hauntingly powerful speech followed by a hail of arrows (or gunfire).
Psychochaos3 2 years ago
if an individual is in death row, they serve to be tortured. why the fuck do you think they ended up on deathrow? why are so many people such panzy ass sissies?
EvolveVolvo 2 years ago
<3 cameo from Billy the mime. HAHA! :D
Freakylovepirate 2 years ago
brilliant!
henkesen 2 years ago
what does "killed soflty by his song" mean
reptarkingofozone5 2 years ago
Killing Me Softly - it's a song:
"Strumming my pain with his fingers / Singing my life with his words / Killing me softly with his song / Killing me softly with his song / Singing my whole life with his words / Killing me softly, with his sooooong".
Telepresent 2 years ago 3
oh yea haha i know that but, was he making a joke? cuz thats fucking hilarious hahaha
reptarkingofozone5 2 years ago
guillotines were used by vikings 700 years before France.
Bitch needs to learn history. What about stoning, burning, drowning?
ManlySlut 2 years ago
If you reall REALLY have to execute someone and have good enough non-personal reasons, why not put a bullet in the back of the head? sure as hell is cheaper and more ethical than this crap.
TheColombianOne 2 years ago
I wouldnt say more ethical but it would ensure their painless death better then the current methods.
whittleaj 2 years ago
And wouldn't that essentially make the guy pulling the trigger have a really sucky job? Every day shoot some fool in the back of the head.
Kill to make a living
Sign me up! Better than working at Mcdonalds
Pyroblazer 2 years ago 2
Ya firing squad is the way to go in my opinion
sprocket609 2 years ago 2
Yeb, one shot from a rifle to the point what is mostlikely to kill.
Lets say a good shot to the head, whitch pierces brain in right angel and kills for sure.
hcolyle 2 years ago
You have a 5% chance to live from a gunshot to the head. So there is a 5% chance you are going to hit the ground alive with a bullet lodged in your head.
yoman258 2 years ago
"what the fuck are we doing" :D
WickedJ133 2 years ago 5
this is fucking bizarre
EbRanger 2 years ago 2
capital punishment is wrong
kevwayne007 2 years ago 5
I say a well kept guillotine is more humane. Just more a of mess to clean up though.
K2Tanner 2 years ago 5
I'd want to die by firing squad. But I don't want that "hey fire a couple blanks" bs they do or whatever. I want them all to fire a bullet. I want 10 fucking pounds of lead in me.
IAmPhotoBucket 2 years ago 2
why not just shoot someone in the head point blank?
0thatdudewill0 2 years ago
shes got nice legs though.
piratekitsune 2 years ago
What's with the mime?? Creepy mother fuckers...
gbh903 2 years ago 2
Why is she touching the shirt covered in face juice?
dojo999 2 years ago