gregorygarver.com

BestbankRealEstate · Joined: 02 Jul 2006 Posts: 2

please write some content for the above debate topic!!!

Niggle · Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 6

Sorry, can't debate against. Fry them all.

happygirl · Joined: 26 Oct 2004 Posts: 7

What if you were the criminal? Would you still think that?

acermill0377 · Joined: 04 Apr 2006 Posts: 4

YeS and No. Yes criminals do deserve punishment. I believe if you do the crime you deserve the time. If there was no punishment for criminals, they would be running rapid which would lead to the world being full of chaos. On the flip side not all criminals are wicked. There is a high percentage of innmates in jail who have been falsely accussed of a crime that they did not even commit. They just happened to be at the wrong place, and at the wrong time. Hope this helped. God Bless!!!!

RickyT · Joined: 07 Mar 2006 Posts: 3

criminals are wicked and deserve punishment?that's true to an extent.depending on the crime would depend on the punishment.people make mistakes. even you.

Shagrag · Joined: 12 Jan 2006 Posts: 4

criminals are just people that have made some bad decisions. jail should focus on rehab not punishment.

loki_only1 · Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 5

what is your definition of a criminal? someone who breaks the law? the founders of this nation where criminals. they should have been killed for what they did, but aren't we glad they did. don't bash what you don't know.

Kayde · Joined: 10 Oct 2005 Posts: 5

only those who commit murder and rape. ONLY if proven without a doubt. Flashing your headlights in Maryland is against the law thus making you a criminal...is that person wicked and deserving of punishment? I hardly think anyone stealing a stereo is deserving of a harsh punishment. Sure, the victim is pist as hell and I know if it happend to me I would lose all senses but come on. Alot of people are wrongly accused, why should they be wicked and punished?

Streaker · Joined: 26 Oct 2005 Posts: 4

"An eye for an eye, the whole world goes blind"Here's a concern that's not unheard of. Criminals regardless of how they arrived at the conclusion of "being criminals" be it the crime, the mental capacity, an influence, or by accident, if there was not a government in place to determine the extent of punishment, then such persons have the opportunity to be repeat offenders. Does that mean that I agree with the death penalty? Do I believe that Karma can do more in ways of retribution than by mans hands, sure I do. Does that mean that the victim or victims of the predator rest any easier at night...not always. Sure that individual/s may no longer be capable of committing acts agains the victim any longer, but the victim suffers over and over and over, everytime they re-tell what happened, everytime they think about it, everytime they go to therapy. There are other factors in which the death penalty was/has been in place for hundreds of years. To start, if you trace the fundamentalist ideology you will find that retribution begins with traditional old testiment teachings. Many thoughts are fueled by the purpose of the death penalty. Restituion is the first reason, where prevention of crime/repeat crimes is the second. Our system is designed to control the thought process of the human being. I believe that they're are other ways in which "restitution" can be achieved. The death penalty offers an easy way out. Even if the person remained alive, just exactly what kind of life would they have to boast of? They would'nt. Our government needs to be smarter. More inventive and sound. I think that people need to speak up and voice their ideas, get them into congress and try new methods of discipline. For those that cannot be taught, then punishment would be a politically correct term to refer them as.