DEATH PENALTY

Do YOU support a Federal Law for the death penalty for Police killers

  • 1. Yes

    Votes: 5 55.6%
  • 2. No

    Votes: 4 44.4%

  • Total voters
    9
So would you be willing to change the judicial system to 'guilty until proven innocent'?
Now think about that for just a moment in the times we now live in. Cameras everywhere. Everyone has a camera in a cell phone.
Satellites take our pictures. Street lamps record actions.

Several people, systems RECORD an ambush of a Police car where a man walks up and shoots a policeman and kills him with his face and actions recorded.......do we then say that man is "innocent" till he is proven guilty.

I would submit that the recording of his actions prove his guilt and the trial is only to pronounce sentence.

What defense would he have?

“Innocent until proven guilty” is a principle. To be a principle, a position must be universally applied — to all cases, to all individuals, always. If it is not, then a position becomes nothing more than an agenda.

When we watch the news, local and nationwide, It is clear there are many on the LIBERAL side of humanity who do not share “innocent until proven guilty” as a principle. Instead, they seek to use it to advance an unacceptable agenda of condemning the police as guilty until proven innocent. Just look at the riots after a police shooting.

YES........There are lots of BAD and violent police officers and each case of abuse must be done on an individual basis.

Defunding the police may be their explicit ultimate goal, but delegitimizing the police is their implicit immediate one.
 
Last edited:
I guess I should have been more precise. I thought it was a given that anyone accused of such a crime, would be held in jail till their trial. Anyone who would kill a policeman should not be out on bail. THEN if found guilty there should not be a long drawn out appeal process.

I originally said 60 days but upon reflecction it may take a little longer. I would say 1 year would be the limit. My personal OPINIONS!
Ok, reading hastily (as usual), I thought the 60 days referred from the time of sentencing to the time of execution.
What about appeals, are you against that? Because you can bet your bottom dollar, there will be those.
 
Ok, reading hastily (as usual), I thought the 60 days referred from the time of sentencing to the time of execution.
What about appeals, are you against that? Because you can bet your bottom dollar, there will be those.
NO sir. As usual I did not say what I thought clearly before posting it.

I am talking about AFTER a man is found guilty. An Appeal IMHO would be a mandated event as you are talking about a human life.
But there should be a time limit on appeals. My opinion was for a year! With computers, DNA, and video evidence, there is no reason why it should take longer than that.

Right now in Florida, Tommy Ziegler has been on death row for 47 years!!!!

He was accused, found guilty by a jury, sentenced to death by a judge and has been in prison for 47 years for killing his parents in Winter Garden FL.
 
I'm concluding our judicial system is broken giving further proof of man's depravity, but it's about the best there is, this side of eternity.
I agree. The judicial system has been infected by liberalism and politics!

We live in a society that is depraved and we are all deviant and deviance is an underpinning of criminality.

Everyone has an opinion on what should be done about crime and victimization. For those who don’t ride fences, you’re either tough on crime (and criminals) or you’re not. My family has been a victim of crime and I am what I am, tough on crime!

The criminal justice system is broken and it can’t be fixed.

Look at reality. Crime is UP in every major populated city. In New Youk, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, New Orleans, there is NO bail even asked when a crime is commited!

A man can walk into a store, beat up the cashier, rod the till, be arrested for his crime and be back on the street the next day to do the very same thing!!

However, if we go back in time, and read the Bible we see that Punishment was to be swift, severe, and certain so as to DETER anyone else from doing crime.

THERE IS NO DETERANCE TODAY!
 
A man can walk into a store, beat up the cashier, rod the till, be arrested for his crime and be back on the street the next day to do the very same thing!!
And woe to that store owner if the perpetrator happens to get hurt while committing his crime... He'll probably sue and win in Court. A broken system.
 
Now think about that for just a moment in the times we now live in. Cameras everywhere. Everyone has a camera in a cell phone.
Satellites take our pictures. Street lamps record actions.

Several people, systems RECORD an ambush of a Police car where a man walks up and shoots a policeman and kills him with his face and actions recorded.......do we then say that man is "innocent" till he is proven guilty.

I would submit that the recording of his actions prove his guilt and the trial is only to pronounce sentence.

What defense would he have?

“Innocent until proven guilty” is a principle. To be a principle, a position must be universally applied — to all cases, to all individuals, always. If it is not, then a position becomes nothing more than an agenda.

When we watch the news, local and nationwide, It is clear there are many on the LIBERAL side of humanity who do not share “innocent until proven guilty” as a principle. Instead, they seek to use it to advance an unacceptable agenda of condemning the police as guilty until proven innocent. Just look at the riots after a police shooting.

YES........There are lots of BAD and violent police officers and each case of abuse must be done on an individual basis.

Defunding the police may be their explicit ultimate goal, but delegitimizing the police is their implicit immediate one.
With AI camera technology, they can make a near duplicate of a person and voice. So there would still be a need for 'innocent until proven guilty'.
 
With AI camera technology, they can make a near duplicate of a person and voice. So there would still be a need for 'innocent until proven guilty'.
I agree with you. However, do you really think that the state would go to such lengths when there stands the possiblilty of it being found out???

It seems a little far fetched to me. Not impossible but farfetched.
OIP.j4ez4vXM-eCVLSbD-Y6lIgAAAA
 
I agree with you. However, do you really think that the state would go to such lengths when there stands the possiblilty of it being found out???

It seems a little far fetched to me. Not impossible but farfetched.
OIP.j4ez4vXM-eCVLSbD-Y6lIgAAAA
I'm not sure if the State can keep up with the rapid technological advances.

Hey, that funny cartoon should go with post #26.
 
Absolutly and thanks for the correction.

The issue of the death penalty has long been a constant debate among Christians. One side justifies capital punishment from its biblical origins as retribution of wrongdoing, while the liberal side argues against the practice, maintaining a holistic pro-life stance.

The concept of capital punishment was established in Genesis 9:6: ........
“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.”

Romans 13:4 specifically discusses the concept of government’s authority, mandating the instruction: “he [rulers] does not bear the sword in vain.”

Romans 13 comes closest to speaking of the state's authority to execute, but significantly it refers to the state's authority, not obligation, to execute. This is consistent with the position that states are permitted, not mandated or prohibited, the use of this sanction.

These verses in Romans outline that government has the God-granted right to punish wrongdoing, which includes implementation of the death penalty. New Testament principles of love and forgiveness apply to Christians but not to governments and authority. The Bible makes it clear throughout Romans 13 that government was established as “an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.”

That is exactly what we see in the Old Test. scriptures. With that biblical view of government, Christians can promote the death penalty as directed by God.

Now there is a problem that we all know and it is the wrongful death of someone. Since 1973 according to the Death Penalty Information Center, over 185 mistakenly convicted prisoners on death row have been exonerated, pointing to a trend of erroneous death sentences.
While that is a concern, IMHO it should not overshadow the implementation of a death sentence when appeals have all been exhausted.

The Old Testament Law prescribed the death penalty for an extensive list of crimes including:

Source: https://www.christianbiblereference.org/faq_CapitalPunishment.htm

Now clearly, and I should not have to say this but, Christians are no longer bound by the legal code of Old Testament Law. The argument of a Biblical mandate for capital punishment is also contradicted by the fact that many of the capital crimes in the Old Testament are considered relatively minor today. Very few people in the Christian world would support capital punishment for such things as doing work on the Sabbath, false prophecy or making false statements about a woman's virginity.

However.....NO ONE is talking about the death penalty for breaking the Sabbath or Blasphemy or even prostitution etc.
The mandate for the death penalty is MURDER without mercy and without bias to race.

The point of this passage in Romans 13 is that Christians must not use their freedom from the Old Testament religious Law as an excuse to violate the civil law. We must obey civil authority, which is instituted by God, because of fear of punishment as well as conscience (verse 5).
The death penalty should be applied to any predatory, deliberate murder of a human being. Human beings are made in the image of God and have intrinsic value; murder devalues the life of the victim. Human life is the most precious thing on earth, and only God or those he placed in authority have the right to take it away. Murderers usurp the authority and play God. When they take a life, they should forfeit their own.

In the interests of justice, the death penalty should not be given to any murderer who can bring his/her victim back to life.
 
The death penalty should be applied to any predatory, deliberate murder of a human being. Human beings are made in the image of God and have intrinsic value; murder devalues the life of the victim. Human life is the most precious thing on earth, and only God or those he placed in authority have the right to take it away. Murderers usurp the authority and play God. When they take a life, they should forfeit their own.

In the interests of justice, the death penalty should not be given to any murderer who can bring his/her victim back to life.
Amen! I will buy that all day long!
 
I found this information of the subject of the Death Penalty and where Religion aligns on the topic interesting and thought others might also.
One should keep in mind that these are the views of organizations and not necessarily individual members whose personal beliefs may vary from their respective religious affiliations.
IMG_4493.jpeg
 
I found this information of the subject of the Death Penalty and where Religion aligns on the topic interesting and thought others might also.
One should keep in mind that these are the views of organizations and not necessarily individual members whose personal beliefs may vary from their respective religious affiliations.
View attachment 9455
I wonder what the spread would have been 60 years ago?
I guess I'm in the 'minority' nowadays and I guess the sword in Romans 13:4 was used for spanking and the 'carrying out of God's wrath' was just a slap on the wrist. Oh well.
 
Last edited:
Should we copycat murderers, or follow Jesus?
.
Please Clarify!

The Lord Jesus said to Moses in Genesis 9:5-6: ......
"Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man."

Exodus 21:12: ......."Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death."

Leviticus 24:17:..... "Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death."

Numbers 35:16-18:. "But if he struck him down with an iron object, so that he died, he is a murderer. The murderer shall be put to death."

Deuteronomy 19:11-12: "But if anyone hates his neighbor and lies in wait for him and attacks him and strikes him fatally so that he dies, and he flees into one of these cities, then the elders of his city shall send and take him from there, and hand him over to the avenger of blood, so that he may die."

Was He right? Do we follow the words of God?

Genesis 9:6 says, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.”
The severest of penalties is to follow murder, and God Himself gives the reason for it.

God specified that murder was to be punished by death because of the nature of man. Man is created in God’s own image. As murder destroys an image-bearer, it is a direct affront to God Himself. Humans are unique among God’s creations—none of the animals are created in God’s likeness—and murder is a unique crime.

Another, secondary reason for the mandate is quite practical. The immediate context includes another command given to Noah and his three sons: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Genesis 9:1). Murder, of course, would work against humanity’s being fruitful and multiplying. The death penalty for murder thus served as a deterrent to anyone who sought to thwart God’s plan to replenish the earth. This was especially important when Noah’s family first departed from the ark, at which point only eight people were alive.
 
My church isn't there, Elim Foursquare, but I can easily identify with Anglican (low church) Methodists and the English Baptist church. But seriously, shouldn't Christians follow the Master?
.
Absolutly.

And the Master said in Genesis 9:6......" “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.”
 
I wonder what the spread would have been 60 years ago?
I guess I'm in the 'minority' nowadays and I guess the sword in Romans 13:4 was used for spanking and the 'carrying out of God's wrath' was a slap on the wrist. Oh well.
If that is the case.......then there are TWO in the minority.........You and ME.

The "sword" is an instrument of punishment, as well as an emblem of war. Princes were accustomed to wear a sword as an emblem of their authority; and the "sword" was often used for the purpose of "beheading," or otherwise punishing the guilty.

Jesus told his disciples to buy a SWORD and take with them.

"The tendency of society now is "not" to too sanguinary laws. It is rather to forget that God has doomed the murderer to death; and though humanity should be consulted in the execution of the laws, yet there is no humanity in suffering the murderer to live to infest society, and endanger many lives, in the place of his own, which was forfeited to justice. Far better that one murderer should die, than that he should be suffered to live, to imbrue his hands perhaps in the blood of many who are innocent. "
Source: Barnes Notes On The Bible
 
Jewish law ended at the cross. God's law, the Ten Commandments say not to kill. Those who follow Jesus are under a new law, while you buy into the death penalty, despite this warning from the Master.

Mat 5:21-22 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: (22) But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
.
So by that you think that adultery is permitted?..........It is part of the 10 Commandments!!!
Is lying also permitted along with covetousness?........They are part of the 10 Commandments!!!

How do you differentiate one from all the others????

Yes.....Jewish law ended at the cross, but God's Law is eternal!

If you will do the study of Romans 13:4, it clearly shows that the coming of Christ does not abolish capital punishment, but the responsibility is given to government, not individuals.

While various methods of death were used, the sword, mentioned in Romans 13:4, stood for the power of life or death. Obviously, as suggested by the principles of justice as seen in the Old Testament, capital punishment should only be carried out after clear evidence and by a just court.
 
I'm against making it a federal law because the federal government is big enough as it is, we don't need to make it bigger. But other than that, I agree with your sentiment. I just don't agree with how you propose to go about it. Personally, I feel that life sentence is worse than death. Imagine losing your freedom for life to go anywhere and do anything. That is a worse punishment than death, imho.
 
Recent analysis by the FBI revealed that each execution seems to be associated with 71 fewer murders in the year the execution took place!.

Also, In the early 1980s, the return of the death penalty was associated with a drop in the number of murders. In the mid-to-late 1980s, when the number of executions stabilized at about 20 per year, the number of murders increased. Throughout the 1990s, our society increased the number of executions, and the number of murders plummeted. Since 2001, there has been a decline in executions and an increase in murders.
Source: https://deathpenalty.procon.org/questions/does-the-death-penalty-deter-crime/
I'm against making it a federal law because the federal government is big enough as it is, we don't need to make it bigger. But other than that, I agree with your sentiment. I just don't agree with how you propose to go about it. Personally, I feel that life sentence is worse than death. Imagine losing your freedom for life to go anywhere and do anything. That is a worse punishment than death, imho.
Now......lets suppose that your 5 year old grandchild is kidnapped, raped and murdered. The man is found and convicted and sentenced to life in prison which means he will get 3 meals a day, a roof over his head, a work our space and TV privileges, and usually library time.

Your child is dead. He is alive and living well. If that is OK with you then there is nothing I can say.

The only reason I said Federally mandated is to remove liberal states from NOT following through.
 
Now......lets suppose that your 5 year old grandchild is kidnapped, raped and murdered. The man is found and convicted and sentenced to life in prison which means he will get 3 meals a day, a roof over his head, a work our space and TV privileges, and usually library time.

Your child is dead. He is alive and living well. If that is OK with you then there is nothing I can say.

The only reason I said Federally mandated is to remove liberal states from NOT following through.
I didn't say it was OK with me. I merely said life imprisonment is worse than the death penalty and you disagree.

All of those things you mentioned, 3 meals a day, TV watching ...etc etc do not make up for the lack of freedom. I used to be in a psych ward and I imagine being in a prison is similar. We were allowed to read books, walk around, talk to one another and we had 3 meals a day plus we didn't have to work. There was little entertainment (I don't remember if there was a TV or not), they did not allow computer usage while on the ward. If we "behaved", they might grant us a trip to go to a park nearby, but with close supervision. We were constantly being watched, there was staff on site 24/7, and there were structures even on the outside of the ward to prevent escaping. Many many days I would just walk around in the hall way again and again till I memorized the names on each door because I was so bored. So, pretty similar to a prison. If I had to choose between that or a quick death, I'd choose the latter. It would drive you insane to live like that for the rest of your life.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top