scblack
Leucocholic
Just fixed that for you. :heh:
The Death Penalty
- Thread starter indica
- Start date
pharmaboy
Eats Squid
People let their rage dictate their views too easily. I would have thought the whole idea of ethics debates are with a cool rational mind.
There was a statement this morning from a parliamentarian that said " all parliamentarians in this country are against capital punishment" or words to that effect. Yet, you run a poll, and depending on how you word it, I'd guess you could get a majority without much trouble of supporting CP
The most recent poll aimed at heightened terrorist concerns showed a majority support for CP, whereas only 5 years ago, it was 23%, when it didn't mention terrorism
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
That is a significant shift.
steve jobs' pancreas
Eats Squid
They gonna bump that Boston bomber bloke on the head
Can't say I have a problem with it.
Can't say I have a problem with it.
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
Interesting method of execution. Hammer or rock?
I'd rather see hard labour for the rest of his days.
Make him build trails that he never gets to ride - cruel and unusual, everybody wins!
steve jobs' pancreas
Eats Squid
Maybe he could spend time as a jump landing ?
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
Pffffffffft. Never ending marathon. He just gets to run. Forever. Nutrients provided along the way and a man with a cattle prod riding next to him to make sure he keeps going. Cruel and poetic.
steve jobs' pancreas
Eats Squid
And lived in North korea
John U
MTB Precision
Your either for the death penalty or your against it. There are no special circumstances where it's allowed.
Here's where we see what our politicians are really made of. I'm betting the silence from the government will be deafening, or they'll come out in support of the USA.
The US should be called out on the barbarity of the death penalty with the same gusto Indonesia was.
The Aust govt is irrelevant in this situation though, apart from a standard position of not supporting capital punishment, which they are not silent about.
The accused is not an Aust citizen and the act did not occur on Aust territory. We don't figure in to the picture other than retaining our values, which we do.
The accused is not an Aust citizen and the act did not occur on Aust territory. We don't figure in to the picture other than retaining our values, which we do.
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
And ran a marathon in born Korea...
Fired out of a mortar cannon into a giant hammer? When shot with an AA gun, did the victim need to be in the air?
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
Perhaps "we" should be using our strong position in the UN to press for wider abolition of the death penalty?
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
Where is my satire emoji...
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
But let's roll with it...ummmmm...the government was chest beating about our security council position a while ago, so through a similar process it wouldn't be inconceivable that a similar position or influence could be gained in other areas.
The UN has a role in pushing to address climate change, slavery/fair work, and health. Why not add a mechanism for fair legal systems and abolition of the death penalty? Again not beyond the means of possibility given their other areas of interest.
From a conspiratorial perspective, surely a entralisation of judicial power would suit the UN and their quest for global domination? Eradicate corruption (well the perception of it) and use your globalist agenda to take control. Or something like that...can't remember what Abbot's business advisor dude was saying.
Cool, I'll play then.
But the UNSC processes are not replicated in other areas of the UN, such as the General Assembly, which is where this would be addressed (well, discussed is more the term). The GA doesn't have a permanent 5 or a rotating membership or even a president as the SC does. The UNGA passes resolution via a vote, which is most often decided by a simple majority. There are no similar processes or positions of meaningful leadership in the UNGA so what you're suggesting is inconceivable.
Utterly impossible and meaningless.
First you'd have to get all 190+ member nations to agree what the term "fair" means in legal terms....., best of luck. Second, you'd have to get all the countries to agree to allow the UN to determine domestic law.
LOL
Thirdly, you'd have to enforce that, world wide. I think you understand the likelihood of that, but just in case, here is something that might assist in understanding: :Banane40:
Out of everything you've suggested, by comparison, this is actually the most likely of being true.
Ya hippy.
pink poodle
気が狂っている男
I am sure the same was once said for the abolition of slavery or in addressing climate change. All things start out as small seeds and grow...you right wing conservatives are so stubborn.