Topic: DEATH NOTE!!!! .:.Master Thread.:.

[xjapan]

I could even pose the old theory...if time travel existed would go back in time and have Hitler executed?...

We,d all be living in Britain , America, France and Russia due to colonization 

If, like Light, you were given the power and the opportunity to create your own morality, would you not be tempted to go down the same path?

Hmm. if i had the DeathNote. Firstly i wouldnt even think that its real. I,d prolly assume it to be a fancy notebook from the store. Then, gosh. i wouldnt wanna own a DeathNote. It would be all ok at first. Until the Death God comes to find me. Unlike Light , I,d freak and run away. If somehow i calm down enough to actually believe that the Death God wont kill me. Thenn..I dont know.. a human who uses the Death Note can neither go to heaven nor hell. I guess i,d keep it , Just tuck it inside my shelf. MY parents respect my privacy so ill be alright. But the day may come where something shocking happens for example if i get married , have children and someone killed my kid. I,d definitely use the Note. Well, not definitely but theres a high possibility.

Ah well. I guess firstly its all about the fear of the Note. If ya get over that then it,d be your ego , and how you feel about murder. That would decide if you would go down the same path as Yagami Light

[hostghost]

I have said this before...

I would have to ways to react if I had a death note and I was aware of what it is capable of. Most likely I would just hide it, keep it to myself perhaps in a bank with a note explaining what it is and that no one should ever use at and it should remain a secret forever. Could be like a family eirloom 
The other posibility is that I use it to become a hitman, a hitman that can't be found. I said earlier that I do not think killing is justified, so I do not think I would come to this. But perhaps if I felt that I had no other option I would use it.
Like in a kill or be killed situation...
But I guess I would feel totally miserable, and would have a hard time deciding whether to do it or not.

I can't wait to see some of Light's reactions to killing, until now he is just a cold killer, but there must be some reactions in him as to his feelings towards life.

[kayryn]

 The thing you have to realise in the "if you had it, what would you do?" situation is that if you WERE in Light's position, you wouldn't know for sure that the Death note IS real.

Consider, then, if it was an entirely new idea you came across, how would you react to it?

I have this slight belief that you should let whatever is coming, come. Specifically, if there's some way of cheating out of something bad happen by using unjust, or questionable means, then it it almost unfair, in a way, to allow yourself the privelage.

Also, on my view of the death penalty, sometimes, be it in murder, or other things, people get what's coming for them. By no means is that always the case, as there are so, so many innocent people who don't deserve what they get.

but when someone hasn't helped themselves whatsoever in a situation, there's sometimes a point where you have to think "well, they deserved that, really" One of my friends is doing one subject at sixth form (american version: high school) and she's behind, so far that she's been threatened with being thrown off the course, has more free periods than not, and complains she's bored during those.

There are others, including myself, who do four, or even five subjects and aren't behind, nor struggling. I have to say, I find that, if she's chucked out of sixth form, she got what she deserved, for an example. So, in SOME accounts, when someone is most certainly a murderer, and perhaps in cases of which the murder is predetermined, the death penalty is a possible conviction, while other situations would have to be more lenient.

The UK has no death penalty, and hasn't for years. I remember having to do an essay  on capital punishmet in English three years ago, and the whole class was entirely split on the views. A keen argument that relates greatly to Death Note is that it can be used as a deterrant. It's ruling by fear, but it's effective, and doens't cause problems for those who are law-abiding, or just...not murderers.

One quick question, though. If you killed someone by running them over, is the death penalty a possible punishment? Not asking for opinions, more facts, but wouldn't mide hearing some views.

[keepergirl]

Here in Norway we have a maximum sentence for 21 years, this works quite allright for now. Since we don't have serial killers or mass rapists etc. The crime repetition rate for murderers here are almost 0.
...
I know that crime is diffrent around the world, and when you actually have repetative criminals there is no problem to lock them up for good. I can't see why you would have to kill them. How many innocent people do you think the american legal system  have murdered?
It is so tragic when you read that they find evidence that contradicts a verdict and the person was killed just a few days ago....

Death penalty is contradicting the human rights, and when you take the boy away from he's mother and kills him. Becouse he pulled a trigger? Should one really be able to ruin ones life with such a small decission. Guns are widely available in the US and danger lurks almost every corner, atleast for the less fortunate ones. Should we condemn them for infinity for just a fraction of a second decission?

First of all, it wouldn't be a fraction of a second, unless you're dealing with underground gun distribution.  Legal gun distribution, at least here in NY (my mind is failing me right now and I can't remember whether these guns laws are set by the state or country) require a waiting period before you get your gun.  And chances are, if you're dealing with 'black market' firearms, you're probably already involved in a world that can never be good.  (Interesting note: I was just doing some reading online, and it appears that Norway's laws regarding gun control are more relaxed than those of the US, and gun ownership there is higher than in the US.  So guns are also widely available in Norway, and yet that doesn't seem to affect their crime rates [unless it's bringing them down].)
I also find it amusing that you consider those that kill less fortunate.  Personally, I consider the victims to be on the unfortunate side of that exchange.
Essentially, I believe that yes, these criminals should be condemned for their decision.  Because it was not only their decision, but their actions.  And people need to accept the consequences of their actions.  (Which is something that any good school teaches children.  I fail to see why children should be held responsible for their actions but adults shouldn't be.)
(Also, I should specify that the people convicted of murder are usually not the "heat-of-the-moment" type people who kill.  When I say murderers, these are the people who have planned in advance to kill, and are not bothered by the fact that they just took a human life.)

So, now for some fun statistics regarding crime in the US:
Fifty-three percent of jail inmates were on probation, parole or pretrial release at the time of arrest.
Four in 10 jail inmates had a current or past sentence for a violent offense.
Thirty-nine percent of jail inmates in 2002 had served 3 or more prior sentences to incarceration or probation...
(Stats from 2002, taken from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm - Bureau of Justice Statistics [US Department of Justice]).

Also, from the 105th Congress Report (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr157&dbname=105&):
"Much of the problem of violent crime is a result of a relatively small group of chronic violent offenders who repeatedly cycle through our criminal justice system: they get arrested, sometimes convicted, occasionally sent to prison and then they are almost always released early after serving only a fraction of their sentences. Victims are frequently under the impression that a convicted offender will serve his or her sentence in full when in fact, violent criminals--those who murder, rape, rob and assault--serve an average of 48 percent of their sentences."

If you read the footnotes following that, it's even more disgusting:
"Although violent offenders receive an average sentence of almost eight years imprisonment, they actually serve less than four years in prison. Typically, violent criminals are discharged from prison in two years or less, and 76 percent will be back on the street in four years or less."
"Many violent offenders get no prison time at all. On any given day, about 3 convicted offenders were on probation and parole for every 1 convicted offender in prison."

Obviously, repeat offenses are a huge problem here in the US.  Particularly in violent crimes.  (Another growing problem, by the way, is prison overcrowding.  This is one of the reasons why prisoners who have not served their full time are ending up back out on the streets.)

As for your question of how many innocent people have been given the death penalty?  I haven't checked out the stats on that, but I don't believe that happens very often.  Our appeal system allows many, many, many appeals of the conviction and sentence.  As much as the death penalty seems like a big thing to people in countries without, here in NY very few people ever get sentenced to death, and even fewer actually get killed.

(By the way, the repeat offenders thing isn't unique to the US.  I was just reading some British facts/ statistics, and it appears they, too, have an issue with repeat offenses, especially for violent crimes.)

Kayryn: No, hitting someone with your car is not considered murder in the first degree (which, as far as I know, is the only murder charge punishable by death).  This is why I specified above that the people who I am referring to are not the 'accidently killed a person once' type killers.  People who get convicted on a first-degree murder charge are usually cold, hard, uncaring,  psychopathic and very intelligent people.  The type of people who would look their mother in the eye as they stabbed her repeatedly. 

To keep this post from being entirely off-topic: If I happened upon a Death Note, I probably would feel the need to test it out to see if it really works.  But that's only if I picked it up.  If I saw it lying on the ground, I probably wouldn't even pick it up, figuring that it was just someone's notebook and not anything special.

[xjapan]

People who get convicted on a first-degree murder charge are usually cold, hard, uncaring,  psychopathic and very intelligent people.  The type of people who would look their mother in the eye as they stabbed her repeatedly. 

For some reason the first thing that came to my mind when i read that was praying mantises. even though they dont exactly do that to their moms. and eat their mates for survival. but still kinda gross

[hostghost]

People who get convicted on a first-degree murder charge are usually cold, hard, uncaring,  psychopathic and very intelligent people.  The type of people who would look their mother in the eye as they stabbed her repeatedly. 

This is just funny..... not.

You are good with facts etc. And prove valid points but I can't see how death penalty helps recurring crimes. To get the death penalty you would have had to do something so severe that if one would not have death penalty you would be in jail probably for all your life or until you are old. So Death penalty really don't do anything about recurring of crime, since the recurring criminals don't commit that severe crimes.
And overpopulation is a problem yes, we have it here too, the cops keep arresting drug addicts and filling the prisons up... Like they do over there as well. Also when the government can spend millions of dollars keeping a top security prison for only a few selected prisoners in Guantanamo they should be able to build more prisons.

About the split second thing, It's the decision of pulling the trigger that takes a second and not buying the gun! And you read that gun laws here are more liberal, no they are not. You actually have to have a hunters license to carry a rifle, and the fact that 95% of all guns are for hunting makes a lot of diffrence.

[keepergirl]

It wasn't meant to be funny.  I was completely serious when I wrote that.  The type of people who are sentenced to the death penalty here are those types of people- the ones who see no value in anyone's life.

Regarding the death penalty and recurring crimes, I personally feel the death penalty is not used often enough.  At least not here in NY (I know in Texas they do make more use out of it, although I'm not sure of statistics there).  In my mind, the death penalty accomplishes a few things:
1. If people fear the death penalty, they may avoid committing the crime (which wouldn't really help with the type of people described above, because most of them don't even think of consequences, but it may help some others hold themselves back from committing the crime).
2. If the death penalty gets used, it frees up room in prisons and lessens the cost for taxpayers, who won't have to provide that criminal with food and shelter for the rest of his life.
3. It often eases the burden on the victim's loved ones to know that the criminal who stole the victim's life lost his own as a consequence.
4. It properly punishes the criminal for his crime, in my opinion.
5. It ensures that the criminal will NEVER be on the streets again.  This is the most important point, in my mind, because you'd be surprised to see some of the criminals that manage to get back out into civilization, whether it be through escaping, mistakes in paperwork, or actual, legit release. 

With building more prisons, the problem isn't just money to build it.  It's also money to keep it running, provide staff, provide food to criminals, etc.  Also, there are space issues.  The places that need the prisons are the same places that have no room for more prisons.

My point with the fraction of a second thing is that it requires forethought and intent.  Planning, in other words.  That's not just a split second thing- that's a major difference.  In the time that it takes to plan, that criminal did not stop and think about the morals and consequences of the act.  So yes, s/he should be punished accordingly.  Failure to think about consequences is NOT an excuse.

(Regarding Norway's gun laws, I do believe you.  Upon further reading I'm seeing contradictory information, so I'm still researching it.  Finding info about Norway is rather difficult- almost everything is either the US or Britain. )
(Oh, I should add: the majority of guns that are used to harm or kill others in the US are illegally owned.  They are smuggled in usually from other areas and distributed illegally.  Many of the types of guns are not even legal at all in the US.  So stricter gun control laws don't even seem to help, because they affect only legal channels of distribution, while the criminals generally don't use legal means.  Just thought I'd add that for clarification- I'm not trying to start a gun control debate here.)

[kayryn]

In the UK, gun crimes are almost unknown. Over this summer, a police officer was shot when pursuing some criminals, and it made the front page, as it was such an infrequent event. I don't know about murder rates here, but I know that guns aren't what cause murders that do happen here.

However, we also don't have the death penalty. Maybe, in countries where it applies, the severity of punishment is proportional to the access to the ability to murder? If that makes sense?

[hostghost]

In the UK, gun crimes are almost unknown. Over this summer, a police officer was shot when pursuing some criminals, and it made the front page, as it was such an infrequent event. I don't know about murder rates here, but I know that guns aren't what cause murders that do happen here.

However, we also don't have the death penalty. Maybe, in countries where it applies, the severity of punishment is proportional to the access to the ability to murder? If that makes sense?

It makes a lot of sense.

I see that keepergirl and I come from completely diffrent places here, when you list reasons for the death penalty I only see reasons why not to have it. And the last point is quite intresting, all though completely nonsense. The main point after catching criminals is to get them back into civilization. If you look at murdercases, how many murderes actually commit another one? A tiny persentage, and they are mostly part of organized crime. Which i said earlier is something to strike hard down on.

Anyway, I think most of your points are based on ignorance, no matter how much facts you cough up. I don't think I will ever understand the death penalty, even if someone would rape my girlfriend I would not want to see them dead. Better with a lifetime of regret than a few years of martyrdom.

This has gotten quite off topic so I will let this be for now. We could talk more on IRC if you want 

[xjapan]

This has gotten quite off topic so I will let this be for now. We could talk more on IRC if you want

T_T i know its the wrong forums to post this. but i keep getting autokilled at enterthegame. but i seem to be able to join other servers ~


As for gun crimes. the city of singapore does not permit gun ownership. after all we,re but a tiny red dot on the map. i,ve seen some murders in the papers but their mostly bandits who prey on people who are travelling to malaysia on the causeway

[kayryn]

Anyway, I think most of your points are based on ignorance, no matter how much facts you cough up.

I would advise against calling people ignorant. It's often thought of as an insult. ¬¬

Oddly somehow related crime that's happening in England right now: five prostitues have been found dead over the last ten days in the Ipswitch area. Police are searching for a mass murderer.

Somewhat like Light's need to clean up the area, perhaps? Police were chacking for sexual abuse a few days ago, when there were only three, but haven't really reported any confirmation, or otherwise on the matter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/6175669.stm

Newspapers in other countries, including papers from New York and Los Angeles are saying there's " shadow of the 'ripper'"

My dad also believes this case to be similar to that of Jack the Ripper.

Of course, it anyone tkes offence or believes this to be unsuitable for the forum, I'll delete this post...

[Sindobook]

The problem with questions like this (murder, guns, death penalty, if you had a death note..., etc.) is that questions like 'is it a good thing' and 'is it a bad thing' can't be answered at the moment of knowing.  A wise man knows that things that seem good at first sight can in truth be bad, and things that seem bad at first sight can in truth be good.  Like in the old tale told by Lao-Tsu of a wise farmer and his neighbor.

"Once there was a farmer whose horse ran away. His neighbor came over to tell him he felt sorry for him, only to be told in return: "Who knows what is good or bad?" It was true. The next day the horse returned, bringing with it eleven wild horses it had met during its adventurous escape. The neighbor came over again, this time to congratulate the farmer on his good fortune. Only to be told once again "Who knows what is good or bad? True this time too; the next day the farmer's son tried to tame one of the wild horses and fell off, breaking his leg. His neighbor came back again one more time to express how bad he felt But for the third time all the farmer had to say was: "Who knows what is good or bad?" And once again the farmer was correct, for this time, the king of that land had started a war and the following day soldiers came by to draft young men into the army, but because of his injury the son was not taken."

Since we don't know what is good and what is bad, it is entirely possible to commit a 'good' or 'beneficial' act with 'evil or malevolent' intent and to commit an 'evil or absolutely reprehensible' act with the best intentions.  In either case, does the one who committed the act deserve to be punished?  (Surely not in either case.)  Would punishment a good or bad thing?  (Who can say.) 

Oh and when it comes to death in a modern society, look at the statistics on this page:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm
If you follow the links, you'll see that things like "Assualt (homocide)" is pretty far down the list, generally around #15.  Politically charged issues like 'guns' are often overblown.  A madman with a gun can kill 20-or-so people before he is stopped, but a madman with an explosive can kill more, and a madman with a poison or toxin can kill even more.  Yet the gun is often illegal, and the latter two are legal (explosives are used for mining and demolition, and toxins are avaliable over-the-counter in supermarket and hardware store shelves).  And even many places where guns are allowed often had oddball laws... in the US many states guns are legal but nunchaku, double-edged blades, brass knuckles, etc. are illegal (a gun is clearly more dangerous than any of these other archaic weapons).

[xjapan]

The problem with questions like this (murder, guns, death penalty, if you had a death note..., etc.) is that questions like 'is it a good thing' and 'is it a bad thing' can't be answered at the moment of knowing.

You,ve said it Sindo. I agree with ya. Its prolly the most legit answer to the is killing good / bad thing.
You,ve also provided an excelent reference in the form of that fable.

And even many places where guns are allowed often had oddball laws... in the US many states guns are legal but nunchaku, double-edged blades, brass knuckles, etc. are illegal (a gun is clearly more dangerous than any of these other archaic weapons).

This is most probably because of the other uses for guns besides killing , hunting , sharpshooting as a sport. etc.
Therefore there are other uses for guns besides hurting people.
I doubt you could bring a numchuck and say that you,re going deer hunting

[keepergirl]

I see that keepergirl and I come from completely diffrent places here, when you list reasons for the death penalty I only see reasons why not to have it. And the last point is quite intresting, all though completely nonsense. The main point after catching criminals is to get them back into civilization. If you look at murdercases, how many murderes actually commit another one? A tiny persentage, and they are mostly part of organized crime. Which i said earlier is something to strike hard down on.

Anyway, I think most of your points are based on ignorance, no matter how much facts you cough up. I don't think I will ever understand the death penalty, even if someone would rape my girlfriend I would not want to see them dead. Better with a lifetime of regret than a few years of martyrdom.

This has gotten quite off topic so I will let this be for now. We could talk more on IRC if you want 

Did you really think I would let this die with your post in which you imply I'm ignorant? 

You and I do come from very different places, geographically, culturally, and mentally. 
As for your belief that our main goal in catching criminals is to rehabilitate them and release them, I completely disagree (and this is the root of our entire disagreement).  I feel the main goal in catching criminals should be to make society safer for the innocent people.  Rehabilitation as a goal has continually failed in US prisons, which is a cause of repeated offenses.  Some people can NEVER fit into a civilized society.  It's something I said earlier and I still believe it.  And yet, these people are allowed back on to the streets to commit the crimes, and more innocent lives are shattered. 
It is true that murder has a lower repeated offense rate than most other crimes, even in the US.  This is simply because (in the US) most murderers get life imprisonment, so they are kept out of society. 
Regarding your 'lifetime of regret' line, do you really think most people who commit crimes worth the death penalty feel regret?  I can assure you that most do not.  Reading some last lines before death from criminals really demonstrates how cold to the core these people are.

It appears, hostghost, that you and I are just too different in our fundamental beliefs to ever come close to agreeing on this topic.  It seems to me that you are an idealist, and hold optimistic views regarding other people.  I, on the other hand, am a realist for the most part.  I think our (the US's) penal system is too lax on people who commit felonies and on people who are repeat offenders.  I also feel the entire system needs an overhaul, but I know that that will probably never happen.  Regardless, I think we should just agree to disagree here.  Much like the offer given to me, if you would like to discuss this topic more, feel free to PM me on IRC.

If you follow the links, you'll see that things like "Assualt (homocide)" is pretty far down the list, generally around #15.  Politically charged issues like 'guns' are often overblown.  A madman with a gun can kill 20-or-so people before he is stopped, but a madman with an explosive can kill more, and a madman with a poison or toxin can kill even more.  Yet the gun is often illegal, and the latter two are legal (explosives are used for mining and demolition, and toxins are avaliable over-the-counter in supermarket and hardware store shelves).  And even many places where guns are allowed often had oddball laws... in the US many states guns are legal but nunchaku, double-edged blades, brass knuckles, etc. are illegal (a gun is clearly more dangerous than any of these other archaic weapons).

I agree 100% with all this.  These issues are often overblown, particularly gun control.  That's actually why I did not want this discussion to turn into a debate about guns, because there is no conclusive evidence for either side of the argument (although the same can probably be said about the death penalty).

[twik]

"Once there was a farmer whose horse ran away. His neighbor came over to tell him he felt sorry for him, only to be told in return: "Who knows what is good or bad?" It was true. The next day the horse returned, bringing with it eleven wild horses it had met during its adventurous escape. The neighbor came over again, this time to congratulate the farmer on his good fortune. Only to be told once again "Who knows what is good or bad? True this time too; the next day the farmer's son tried to tame one of the wild horses and fell off, breaking his leg. His neighbor came back again one more time to express how bad he felt But for the third time all the farmer had to say was: "Who knows what is good or bad?" And once again the farmer was correct, for this time, the king of that land had started a war and the following day soldiers came by to draft young men into the army, but because of his injury the son was not taken."

Interesting tale, but it doesn't quite fit.  The discussion is about good vs evil.  In this case, what you refer to as "good" or "bad" could be more accurately translated as "fortune" or "misfortune."  I challenge anyone to assign a value of inherent evilness to a horse running away or a kid breaking his leg while riding.  On the other hand, using the Death Note (<= feeble attempt at staying on topic) to commit murder strikes me as belonging to another category.  Still, it's a great story that gives us something to remember when we are faced with adversity.  Thanks for posting it.

Anyway, I think most of your points are based on ignorance, no matter how much facts you cough up.

Whoa, bad form there buddy.  Let's keep it civil.