Should we execute terroists?

[Rayne]

It's in the Constitution that we can excute people for treason.
If a person in this country is plotting to kill Americans and destroy stuff, wouldn't that be considered treason?
Should we kill these people....specifically the people arrested for plotting to blow up the fuel lines under La Guardia. (They run all the way through Queens). It would have taken out the airport and Queens, too.

[toyota24]

It's in the Constitution that we can excute people for treason.
If a person in this country is plotting to kill Americans and destroy stuff, wouldn't that be considered treason?
Should we kill these people....specifically the people arrested for plotting to blow up the fuel lines under La Guardia. (They run all the way through Queens). It would have taken out the airport and Queens, too.
It was JFK, not LaGuardia. I say do it.

[ThePekoSquad]

It's in the Constitution that we can excute people for treason.
If a person in this country is plotting to kill Americans and destroy stuff, wouldn't that be considered treason?
Should we kill these people....specifically the people arrested for plotting to blow up the fuel lines under La Guardia. (They run all the way through Queens). It would have taken out the airport and Queens, too.


I think if we execute them it will create a war onto our home front, and nobody wants that here.
Its a double sided coin if you look at it, all of us Americans say do it, kill all that are trying to kill us, but yet if you really look at it, if we kill them, what message is that sending the rest? Will that make them so mad it will create a war over here in America? If a war would happen in America are economy will drop into another Stock Market accident and we will be in poverty.

[Jom112]

If they're found guilty. Execute them...

[jamiethelanky]

What gives the state the right to kill? What gives one person more rights than another? It wasn't 'Thou shalt not murder: terms and conditions apply' it was thou shalt not murder. To quote Gandhi: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

[Jom112]

What gives the state the right to kill? What gives one person more rights than another? It wasn't 'Thou shalt not murder: terms and conditions apply' it was thou shalt not murder. To quote Gandhi: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
The people in this case are not trying to take out one eye, they're trying to take out thousands of eyes.
If a person is mass murderer than what exactly is the point in keeping them alive? The main issue with the death penalty is when it happens to the wrong person. But in cases such as these usually the person will admit to the plot and be proud of what they were attempting to do. Which is why I said IF they're found guilty then they should be executed. What benefit do you think there would be in keeping them alive and locked up in jail for the next 50 years instead of executing them?
And Jamie it is ALWAYS "terms and conditions apply". Let's say a guy is running around with a gun in the streets. He's just shooting up everyone and has no plans on stopping. Would it be OK then for a police officer to use deadly force? Technically the police officer is killing, what gives him or her the right? Extreme circumstances call for extreme penalties. A person plotting to kill thousands I consider an extreme circumstance...

[Rayne]

What gives the state the right to kill? What gives one person more rights than another? It wasn't 'Thou shalt not murder: terms and conditions apply' it was thou shalt not murder. To quote Gandhi: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
Thank you for correctly quoting that verse. It applies to murder, not killing.
As to your question of what gives the state the right to kill - that would be God.
He set up no less than 17 death penalties in the Old Testament, one of those was treason. If a person or people are plotting to kill Americans in this country - I say that's treason and they should die.

[jamiethelanky]

Then again, the Old Testament also refers to eating shellfish, cutting one's hair and working on the Sabbath abominations - but they seem to be getting ignored. It is this that's part of the seperation of state and church. So what if it says it in the Bible? Many people don't give two hoots what it says in there. For me, because it is a situation that cannot be reversed it runs the very real risk of there being a serious miscarriage of justice with a death without reason, and death without reason is murder.

[Rayne]

Then again, the Old Testament also refers to eating shellfish, cutting one's hair and working on the Sabbath abominations - but they seem to be getting ignored. It is this that's part of the seperation of state and church. So what if it says it in the Bible? Many people don't give two hoots what it says in there. For me, because it is a situation that cannot be reversed it runs the very real risk of there being a serious miscarriage of justice with a death without reason, and death without reason is murder.

You dont feel that plotting to kill a few thousand American men, women, and children is a good enough reason?

[Jom112]

Then again, the Old Testament also refers to eating shellfish, cutting one's hair and working on the Sabbath abominations - but they seem to be getting ignored. It is this that's part of the seperation of state and church. So what if it says it in the Bible? Many people don't give two hoots what it says in there. For me, because it is a situation that cannot be reversed it runs the very real risk of there being a serious miscarriage of justice with a death without reason, and death without reason is murder.

I agree with that concept that it is difficult to be 100% sure of guilt before condemning someone to the death penalty. BUT as I said earlier in a lot of these terror cases, the suspects are proud of what they were attempting to do and try to use the trail as to make a political statement. If that is the case in this one then you can be sure that they were plotting to kill thousands...

[Beaker]

I have stated before that I am against the death penalty. Its all about revenge, nothing more.

[Ali]

I have stated before that I am against the death penalty. Its all about revenge, nothing more.

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"

--Mahatma Ghandi

[toyota24]

Executing them is fine, as long as due process is followed. No more holding suspects without bringing them up on charges or detaining them in limbo indefinetly. These people should be prosecuted as criminals, convicted and then executed. It worked with Tim McVeigh. He was caught, tried and killed. The overreaction is the problem, not the death penalty. Bring back Habeas Corpus.

[cinc4ever1]

It's in the Constitution that we can excute people for treason.
If a person in this country is plotting to kill Americans and destroy stuff, wouldn't that be considered treason?
Should we kill these people....specifically the people arrested for plotting to blow up the fuel lines under La Guardia. (They run all the way through Queens). It would have taken out the airport and Queens, too.


I say execute them we all know what they are capable of and it's not like they really care.Terroists know exactly what they want to do and don't care how or who they do it to.If there out there then innocent people are in danger for know reason.