I like conversations that are ethically and morally charged. Then I thought about Gladiators, Rome's ancient combatants of death. I discussed this among some of my friends, and then thought this would be good fodder for the WEPR.
So the basic premise, is to send people already condemned to die (there are plenty of these), into gladiatorial matches, similar to Rome's model, albeit a little more modern. Quick, painful deaths, for all to watch and enjoy, or vomit, as the case may be. These wouldn't be anyone, and as I said, they would already be condemned to die for the crimes they've committed. Hand to hand, die in honor and bravery kind of bloodbaths. It would be great entertainment, for those who feel such requirement to watch them. For everyone else, there is always a corner to protest vainly on.
To put a note on it, they wouldn't have to fight. If they didn't want to fight, there is always a gurney ready for them.
So my question is this: Would it be a good idea, or bad? The ethics and morality are clearly missing from such a brutal sport, but these men are condemned. What difference does it make?
[/quote]You completely missed my point. I was trying to say that destroying a persons life is unacceptable if there is a reasonable chance that they are innocent.[quote]
well that's a risk we have to take if we kill one innocent person in the hopes we at least take out 5 more killers than it should be worth it our prisons are over crowded anyways and if said innocent person go's to jail I'm pretty sure he's no safer
kill one innocent person in the hopes we at least take out 5 more killers
1 in 5 is a good statistic for human life in your opinion? Could you imagine being an innocent person on death row? Could you imagine being a guilty person on death row? Despite their past actions I'm fairly certain they would have very similar emotions.
if said innocent person go's to jail I'm pretty sure he's no safer
Can you justify the complete disregard for this person's mental functionality?
Yes, he is mental enough to kill/murder someone. Or do whatever he has to end up on death row, so what the hell is right with his mental functionality?
I used to think women had lost their minds, taking the kiddies to watch their father slaughter, or be slaughtered on the battlefields of the ACW. The more I study this war the more sense it made as these women followed the battles and fed, nursed, etc. their husbands and sons. A lot of women, on both sides were active in combat, as well. Morals and Ethics aside, I see no difference with modern day gladiatorial battles to the death for the thousands sitting around awaiting certain death. The hard cases that have no hope of parole, like Charles Manson. Let's put him in a cage against a human c@nnibal like Jeffery Dahmer, since Dahmer 's already dead.
Note: For those of you too young to remember he was a serial killer and s*x offender, killing 17 men and boys by: r@pe, torture, dismemberment, necroph*lia and c@nnibalism. A fellow inmate beat him to death.
No, I don't think so. I think that if we had public stocks in the center of our cities/towns, for lesser crimes, like stealing Grandma's purse, then petty thieves would think twice before suffering the humiliation of being placed in stocks and having citizens throw their half eaten fruit, big mac, etc. at them. Just food, mind you, would be allowed to me thrown at the accused.
Aknerd, really, what's the difference between TNA cage matches and watching death-row-never-to-be-paroled prisoners, fight to the death. Where's the justice in shipping off prisoners to unseen facilities while society quickly forgets their heinous crimes. I'm not talking about folks whose cases are still open for parole, mistaken identity, which with DNA is almost nonexistent now.
Look at this way, why do tax payers have to pay for the care these criminals receive when with their crimes, they gave up their rights to live in a free society? Why is the innocent majority responsible for the few people who continually break the law by committing unspeakable acts of violence. They are condemned to die and will die but have one last chance to beat the cr@p out of someone before they do.
To: Orion, WHAT? You are willing to pay these repeat sex offenders, serial killers, baby stealing/selling, teen girl stealing porno freaks: and let them avoid death? No way! This is fiction and I want no part of this discussion, any more. I don't wish to be neighbors with internet pedophiles much less a serial r@pist. That is insane!
Hm.. Well, what I have to say is that it would probably generate some pretty good income, rather than being a drain on the economy like prisons that aren't run as sweatshops.
I'm not Orion, but I feel I should try and answer this.
To: Orion, WHAT? You are willing to pay these repeat sex offenders, serial killers, baby stealing/selling, teen girl stealing porno freaks: and let them avoid death? No way!
I see nowhere anyone saying that they would be payed, and paying them would be worthless, as they would have no use for the money.
Besides, death is unavoidable, even in
a cushy federal pen.
I don't wish to be neighbors with internet pedophiles much less a serial r@pist. That is insane!
Nobody does, but that's not the point. This happens as it is now, and has no real bearing on the discussion. As has been said:
[quote]But what would the prize be? Setting them free? I would strongly disagree to such an idea.
No, of course not. That would be insane. I would be thinking more along the lines of escaping the death penalty, and getting life without parole in a cushy federal pen.[/quote]
