Tweet
Ok, so i got into an argument with someone about the death penatly and killing cops. Basically it was about why people get the death penatly for killing cops and not for killing others. And that cops are getting special treatment.
So, I said cop's do not get special treatment. Anyone can be a cop (except the ofcourse obvious) I don't like the fact that not all murderers are put to death. There are various reasons for this, murder is legislated by state law, the cost of prosecution ect ect... But when it comes to killing cops its dealt with in a federal court. The prosecution tends to be expedient and the administration of the punishment faster as well.
This person goes on to argue that cops arent special and that the crime is no worse. Well to that I had to say that, killing a cop is a form of betrayal to your goverment and adds to ontop of that a form of social treason. Ofcourse they come back with you're insane its not treason or something like that.
Anyway, I guess I support the death penalty in alot of cases and wish the process would be streamlined to adminster justice quicker and cheaper. I think murdering law enforcement only add's to the crime. I dont believe cops are treated special nor do i think that all cops are great, honorable and heroic. For every benifit to being a cop, there is equally as bad of a penalty. They are held to higher standards than the average person and subjected to alot more stresses. These are done willingly ofcourse, and like I said those who want the benifits of being a cop need only apply themselfs. I think killing a cop is detrimental to our goverment.
I don't know how to word it appropriately but, Police are a form of goverment.
While those who would use the argument that capital punishment is a crime in itself and how are we to have laws when we brake them. I have to come back with so is imprisoning someone against their will. So is detaining them, alot of what cops do under this assinine argument and to these standards would be a "violation of law" if not done by a police officer. So this argument has no purpose except for rhetorical value. If a it's a crime then for it to have any integrity as policy or doctrtine then we cannot persecute criminals at all. Being that morality would come into play here it would be wrong for us not to punish criminals and up hold justice. Our laws are meant to be fair, and in all fairness the crime of murder deserves exaclty that in return. To be un-fair is related to being immoral, so in essence how ever much we disdain it, it is our moral duty to exicute murderers.
Since this is not the case in our legal system, and since states want to write their own laws in accord to their judicial structure it cannot be the case. I see no point in arguing over this at all. It's our obligation to punish criminals justly and fairly. The murder of a cop is worse than the murder of a civilian only because it degrades our goverment and damages further the legal system. Murderers should be put to death anyway, so what point is there other than political and rhetorical in arguing against a fair and just punishment for their crime. In essence, I ask how is it special treatment to the police officer, to put his murderer to death when it is the correct just and fair punishment to begin with.
To me atleast the way i see it is that the argument you should be making is why are not all murderers put to death? To ridicule our legal system for putting cop killers to death is completly a waste of time. The police are not getting any special treatment except for what is fair and just. It is not an injustice to put a cop killer to death because it doesnt change the fact that he is a killer. It is an injustice to not put a murderer to death though, and if in the name of morality, justice and fairness you see a problem with this than to be manifest of those values, you can only argue that all killers are given captial punishment.
Going back to what i was speaking about earlier, being that in our goverment it is not possible to put all murderers to death. That cop killers should be given a harsher treatment for that crime. The police are a product of our society and they are the authority that ensures our stability. They did not take that authority from us, we endowed them with it.
Being that the over all cost tends to be less, that the overturnment rate of those convicted of killing a cop is exceptionally lower than other death row convictions and that punisment tends to be carried out more swiflty i see no reason to argue against this policy. If anything at all its getting rid of just another murderer.
It seems to me atleast that those people who are unwilling to support capital punishment do so because of how much it costs, or do so because they do not want to take the moral responsibility because their personal,religious feelings get in the way. Or simply because they hate governing authority and wish to degrade it at any given chance what so ever.
"One other argument they make is Why give them the mercy of death. Let them sit and rot and think about what they had done." This is unjust as well. It's not a fair punishment for the crime they commited and it to becomes an un-moral and invalid argument.
Those who use the religous argument must understand, we are not a country governed by religion. Those who use the moral argument must understand that it is immoral. Those who use the cost argument must understand that the freedoms we deserve come with a cost. And those who feel that life in prison is a worse penalty must understand that that punishment is un-just.
I just can't see a way to be against capitol punishment, without being immoral and without sacrificing the un-bridled integrity that is supposed to come with justice. Nor given that, since capital punishment cant be given to all murderers, how anyone could not support it when its commited against law enforcement without yeilding some loyalty to your government.
So, I said cop's do not get special treatment. Anyone can be a cop (except the ofcourse obvious) I don't like the fact that not all murderers are put to death. There are various reasons for this, murder is legislated by state law, the cost of prosecution ect ect... But when it comes to killing cops its dealt with in a federal court. The prosecution tends to be expedient and the administration of the punishment faster as well.
This person goes on to argue that cops arent special and that the crime is no worse. Well to that I had to say that, killing a cop is a form of betrayal to your goverment and adds to ontop of that a form of social treason. Ofcourse they come back with you're insane its not treason or something like that.
Anyway, I guess I support the death penalty in alot of cases and wish the process would be streamlined to adminster justice quicker and cheaper. I think murdering law enforcement only add's to the crime. I dont believe cops are treated special nor do i think that all cops are great, honorable and heroic. For every benifit to being a cop, there is equally as bad of a penalty. They are held to higher standards than the average person and subjected to alot more stresses. These are done willingly ofcourse, and like I said those who want the benifits of being a cop need only apply themselfs. I think killing a cop is detrimental to our goverment.
I don't know how to word it appropriately but, Police are a form of goverment.
While those who would use the argument that capital punishment is a crime in itself and how are we to have laws when we brake them. I have to come back with so is imprisoning someone against their will. So is detaining them, alot of what cops do under this assinine argument and to these standards would be a "violation of law" if not done by a police officer. So this argument has no purpose except for rhetorical value. If a it's a crime then for it to have any integrity as policy or doctrtine then we cannot persecute criminals at all. Being that morality would come into play here it would be wrong for us not to punish criminals and up hold justice. Our laws are meant to be fair, and in all fairness the crime of murder deserves exaclty that in return. To be un-fair is related to being immoral, so in essence how ever much we disdain it, it is our moral duty to exicute murderers.
Since this is not the case in our legal system, and since states want to write their own laws in accord to their judicial structure it cannot be the case. I see no point in arguing over this at all. It's our obligation to punish criminals justly and fairly. The murder of a cop is worse than the murder of a civilian only because it degrades our goverment and damages further the legal system. Murderers should be put to death anyway, so what point is there other than political and rhetorical in arguing against a fair and just punishment for their crime. In essence, I ask how is it special treatment to the police officer, to put his murderer to death when it is the correct just and fair punishment to begin with.
To me atleast the way i see it is that the argument you should be making is why are not all murderers put to death? To ridicule our legal system for putting cop killers to death is completly a waste of time. The police are not getting any special treatment except for what is fair and just. It is not an injustice to put a cop killer to death because it doesnt change the fact that he is a killer. It is an injustice to not put a murderer to death though, and if in the name of morality, justice and fairness you see a problem with this than to be manifest of those values, you can only argue that all killers are given captial punishment.
Going back to what i was speaking about earlier, being that in our goverment it is not possible to put all murderers to death. That cop killers should be given a harsher treatment for that crime. The police are a product of our society and they are the authority that ensures our stability. They did not take that authority from us, we endowed them with it.
Being that the over all cost tends to be less, that the overturnment rate of those convicted of killing a cop is exceptionally lower than other death row convictions and that punisment tends to be carried out more swiflty i see no reason to argue against this policy. If anything at all its getting rid of just another murderer.
It seems to me atleast that those people who are unwilling to support capital punishment do so because of how much it costs, or do so because they do not want to take the moral responsibility because their personal,religious feelings get in the way. Or simply because they hate governing authority and wish to degrade it at any given chance what so ever.
"One other argument they make is Why give them the mercy of death. Let them sit and rot and think about what they had done." This is unjust as well. It's not a fair punishment for the crime they commited and it to becomes an un-moral and invalid argument.
Those who use the religous argument must understand, we are not a country governed by religion. Those who use the moral argument must understand that it is immoral. Those who use the cost argument must understand that the freedoms we deserve come with a cost. And those who feel that life in prison is a worse penalty must understand that that punishment is un-just.
I just can't see a way to be against capitol punishment, without being immoral and without sacrificing the un-bridled integrity that is supposed to come with justice. Nor given that, since capital punishment cant be given to all murderers, how anyone could not support it when its commited against law enforcement without yeilding some loyalty to your government.
Comment