Should Canada Bring Back the Death Penalty?

[[]D e e v e s]

Oh, you mean a first-degree murder conviction or equivalent.

Was that in doubt to any without an agenda?

 

[Juiposa]

That's incorrect. It does serve a purpose. Now my response is as ambiguous as yours.
i can enumerate the purposes the death penalty serves.
Can you prove beyond a doubt that it serves none ? I doubt it.

Serves to enable state sponsored murder and serves to further the idea of "an eye for an eye." It also serves to put a potentially innocent person to death. And it also serves to cost the Federal government million is persecuting those deemed "worthy" of the death penalty.

 

[Middleground]

Serves to enable state sponsored murder and serves to further the idea of "an eye for an eye." It also serves to put a potentially innocent person to death. And it also serves to cost the Federal government million is persecuting those deemed "worthy" of the death penalty.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

When I was in the 6th grade, I won a prize for an essay I wrote about capital punishment. What you noted in your post is pretty much a summary of what I written so many years ago, apart from adding that it really does not give closure to the victims' families. My views on many things have changed through the years, but my stance on capital punishment has remained constant.

 

[admiration]

Serves to enable state sponsored murder and serves to further the idea of "an eye for an eye." It also serves to put a potentially innocent person to death. And it also serves to cost the Federal government million is persecuting those deemed "worthy" of the death penalty.

1. It's a deterrent; "state sponsored murder" is preventing other senseless murders from occurring, thus saving innocent lives.

2. The care that Canadian courts in this modern age with our advancements in forensics would NEVER condemn an innocent person to death.

3. The administering of the death penalty is cheap, the ingredients cost about $65USD. The problem is the appeals process, which is costly. America has an awful appeals process which allows for convicted felons on death row to stay their executions for periods averaging 10-15 years. Our system would have to take this into account in order to speed up the process.

 

[Juiposa]

1. It's a deterrent; "state sponsored murder" is preventing other senseless murders from occurring, thus saving innocent lives.

2. The care that Canadian courts in this modern age with our advancements in forensics would NEVER condemn an innocent person to death.

3. The administering of the death penalty is cheap, the ingredients cost about $65USD. The problem is the appeals process, which is costly. America has an awful appeals process which allows for convicted felons on death row to stay their executions for periods averaging 10-15 years. Our system would have to take this into account in order to speed up the process.

1. There is no evidence that capital punishment is an effective deterrent to crime.

2. I can and would happen. "Never" is a moot word. Certainty is impossible, and as long as there is even a slight chance, the risk is too great.

3. So do you reckon we strip these people of their rights? Refuse them access to the judicial system to defend themselves where THEIR LIFE IS ON THE LINE? That is only way I'd see us "speeding it up," and is contrary to every principal I hold.

 

[Carjosse]

1. It's a deterrent; "state sponsored murder" is preventing other senseless murders from occurring, thus saving innocent lives.

2. The care that Canadian courts in this modern age with our advancements in forensics would NEVER condemn an innocent person to death.

3. The administering of the death penalty is cheap, the ingredients cost about $65USD. The problem is the appeals process, which is costly. America has an awful appeals process which allows for convicted felons on death row to stay their executions for periods averaging 10-15 years. Our system would have to take this into account in order to speed up the process.

People are persecuted wrongly all the time.

 

[[]D e e v e s]

1. There is no evidence that capital punishment is an effective deterrent to crime.

2. I can and would happen. "Never" is a moot word. Certainty is impossible, and as long as there is even a slight chance, the risk is too great.

3. So do you reckon we strip these people of their rights? Refuse them access to the judicial system to defend themselves where THEIR LIFE IS ON THE LINE? That is only way I'd see us "speeding it up," and is contrary to every principal I hold.

Again (and again) I point out that there is no real or definitive "life sentence" for murder or even for murders in Canada.. Life instead of death should be incarceration until the murderer dies.

There are those like Bernardo a convicted serial rapist and murderer working in a prison library and with amenities available, and asking for transfer to a minimal security.
prison.

Might I point out to the boo hooers and those that in actuality are punishing the victims, that every time a murderer gets to plead his/her case, the families..victims are again victimized by the rehashing of the case!!

For &^*%^$#! sake, let us consider the victims feelings over those of a murderer that escaped a death penalty replaced with an opportunity to re offend and to harass family with requests and appeals.

It should be life until death as a sentence alternative to the death penalty with no conveniences beyond necessities, and no opportunities for publicity to harangue and harass the families.

I'm pissed that Bernardo has a rather cushy sentence instead of death, that he can again and again as did Cifford Olson
Serial killer Clifford Olson dies - Canada - CBC News


Why do those here continue to focus on murderers rights above those of the victims?

For justice,if there is no death penalty, the murderer alternatively must die in prison.

 

[Grand Mal]

Justice and revenge are the same thing just from a different point of view.

What complete, utter crap.

 

[Grand Mal]

These are all measures that I agree with. And I do believe that we are tough on crime in the same regard as you cited. But we are not tough on the most serious crimes: murder, rape, theft, armed-robbery etc.. I believe that we should be executing those who are convicted of first degree murder.

It's not that simple. If you give the State the right to execute citizens (shudder!) it'll start with crimes against itself- treason, for example, and espionage.
And why the hell would you want to give the State the right of execution? It's one way you know you're in the third world, when the country has the death penalty.

 

[Grand Mal]

1. It's a deterrent; "state sponsored murder" is preventing other senseless murders from occurring, thus saving innocent lives.

If it's a deterrent, I guess death penalty states have lower murder rates than those without, huh?

2. The care that Canadian courts in this modern age with our advancements in forensics would NEVER condemn an innocent person to death.

So what? They shouldn't condemn a guilty person to death.

3. The administering of the death penalty is cheap, the ingredients cost about $65USD. The problem is the appeals process, which is costly. America has an awful appeals process which allows for convicted felons on death row to stay their executions for periods averaging 10-15 years. Our system would have to take this into account in order to speed up the process.

How can this even enter into the equation? We should execute people because it's cheaper that way?
Yeesh.

 

[DiAnna]

It would be handy for USA authorities if they did, because when one of our serial killers crosses the border, we wouldn't have to promise not to seek the death penalty to get 'em back.

I've known a lot of Canadians over the years, liked almost all of them very much. However, I've never met one who would ever support the death penalty... so, I'm guessing it would be a near-impossible task to sell the Canadian people on a renewed death penalty... so no, Canada shouldn't bring back the death penalty.

 

[[]D e e v e s]

It would be handy for USA authorities if they did, because when one of our serial killers crosses the border, we wouldn't have to promise not to seek the death penalty to get 'em back.

I've known a lot of Canadians over the years, liked almost all of them very much. However, I've never met one who would ever support the death penalty... so, I'm guessing it would be a near-impossible task to sell the Canadian people on a renewed death penalty... so no, Canada shouldn't bring back the death penalty.

See initial post.
You are discounting the reality that there IS INDEED a majority in Canada public for reintroducing a death penalty in certain circumstance...count me in that number if life isn't truly for the rest of the convicted killers natural life.

 

[longview]

I voted no, just because Canada seems to have their act together better than we do
here in the US.
We may sometimes disagree with how they do things, but it does work for them.
Who are we to tell Canada how they should be?

 

[[]D e e v e s]

I voted no, just because Canada seems to have their act together better than we do
here in the US.
We may sometimes disagree with how they do things, but it does work for them.
Who are we to tell Canada how they should be?

Giving an opinion does not equate to telling Canada 'how they should be." It would be an opinion. I may opine that the incarceration of criminals in the USA is not working given the recidivism rate, but unless I can offer an alternative it won't be very helpful.

That's why I as a Canadian say impose either a death penalty for a proven and convicted killer OR alternatively if you are against the death penalty, lock the SOB up for life
and not give him/her opportunity to open wounds by allowing hearings and news stories about the killer getting special treatment or consideration.

What bugs me is that a judge can prohibit the press or media from reporting on trial cases but if a convicted killer farts the media reports it for years and years, reopening the victims (family) wounds.

We lately hear the serial killer Bernardo supposedly doing hard time is allowed to 'work' in the library. That he has requested being held in a low security prison with more amenities. That's not fair to the victims. Had he been executed, had Olsen, the re victimization of the surviving families and friends would not have continued.Let's consider the victims!

 

[Carjosse]

We lately hear the serial killer Bernardo supposedly doing hard time is allowed to 'work' in the library. That he has requested being held in a low security prison with more amenities. That's not fair to the victims. Had he been executed, had Olsen, the re victimization of the surviving families and friends would not have continued.Let's consider the victims!

It also allows the death penalty if juries convict these criminals for what they actually did they would be locked in high security prison forever.

 

[[]D e e v e s]

Huh? Please to explain.

 

[Carjosse]

Huh? Please to explain.

You can't have the death penalty for anyone even if your certain because there is no way to be 100% sure someone innocent is not going to end up dead. You wouldn't have these issues if juries didn't convict them of second-degree murder or only a count of first-degree murder, if your convicted of a straight first-degree murder charge you never get parole ever, period.

 

[Goshin]

Some crimes warrant death, and at least you can say for certain that one offender will never offend again.


But, meh... it is for Canada to decide and I am not Canadian.

 

[[]D e e v e s]

You can't have the death penalty for anyone even if your certain because there is no way to be 100% sure someone innocent is not going to end up dead. You wouldn't have these issues if juries didn't convict them of second-degree murder or only a count of first-degree murder, if your convicted of a straight first-degree murder charge you never get parole ever, period.

Are you saying that in Canada you will never get out of jail if convicted of first degree murder?
If so can you support that with proof that none ever has?

 

[CanadaJohn]

It would be handy for USA authorities if they did, because when one of our serial killers crosses the border, we wouldn't have to promise not to seek the death penalty to get 'em back.

I've known a lot of Canadians over the years, liked almost all of them very much. However, I've never met one who would ever support the death penalty... so, I'm guessing it would be a near-impossible task to sell the Canadian people on a renewed death penalty... so no, Canada shouldn't bring back the death penalty.

You clearly don't know many Canadians nor do you know what you're talking about. Polling steadily shows that the majority, often into the 60% and above range, favors the death penalty, particularly since there are several very heinous murderers in our correctional facilities who would easily qualify for a death sentence if it existed.

Part of the support for the death penalty here is in response to our very weak sentencing standards and the fact that a life-sentence seldom if ever actually means life in prison. Having despicable murderers up for parole every couple of years and seeing the families of their victims have to travel to hearings to oppose their release angers decent Canadians a great deal.

We do, however, have politicians and political parties who aren't interested in starting the battle necessary to have the death penalty reinstituted, at least at this time. Unlike American politics, Canadian politics isn't often about rocking the boat - we usually prefer steady, ahead. For that reason, you are right that it is unlikely to return here, but not because people in general wouldn't support it.

 

[Risky Thicket]

There are crimes in which one forfeits his/her life if committed

I would like to see Canada do it. Pakistan just brought back there's as well.

As if Pakistan needed a law to kill people.

 

[Carjosse]

Are you saying that in Canada you will never get out of jail if convicted of first degree murder?
If so can you support that with proof that none ever has?

That is what the sentence is supposed to be, but it can be changed first-degree murder should always be life with no parole period always. Though some of those killers were convicted of second-degree murder.

 

[[]D e e v e s]

Even the 'appeal hearings' do an injustice to the victims and friends. Anytime the murderer gets any kind of publicity it opens wounds. To often the murderers rights trump the victims.