• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When the death penalty is justified...

i am sorry for your loss.

i respect that it may have been comforting for you to see his murderers put to death. i would never argue or debate that because they are your feelings so who am i to tell you how you do or do not feel.

having said that, can you please respect the fact that some others who have lost family members or friends in a similar manner, feel that the death penalty is not what brings closure or comfort and revenge killing serves no good purpose whatsoever.

that's all i'm saying.

On the same night that my friend was killed, a co-worker of his was also killed, an even younger man. His father was an immigrant and naturalized citizen from the UK. This gentleman was a very cultured and soft-spoken man, a man of many accomplishments, and practically the epitome of "mild mannered". He maintained his decorum and public self-control throughout it all in a very quiet British fashion. I got to know him and his surviving child rather well during the whole ordeal.

One thing he said stands out in my mind just now: He told me "At least in this country, you can get real justice sometimes." He said that right after his son's killer had been sentenced to death.

Okay, some people don't feel that way. :shrug: If they want to plead for mercy for the killer of their son/daughter/wife/husband/brother/friend that's their business.

In my opinion, sympathy for a cold-blooded murderer is an insult to his victims.
 
… In my opinion, sympathy for a cold-blooded murderer is an insult to his victims.

Whatever happened to sympathy for the loved ones of the victims who don't agree with capital punishment? What about sympathy for the people tasked with carrying out the capital sentence? Any sympathy for the decision makers in the process? The governor? The judges? What about sympathy for the people who have to pay for this costly, unnecessary and irreversible punishment?

The truth is that capital punishment is neither an effective deterrent or an efficient solution and it carries a heavy and costly burden in American society committed to the principle that it is better that a guilty man go free than a innocent one suffer injustice.
 
On the same night that my friend was killed, a co-worker of his was also killed, an even younger man. His father was an immigrant and naturalized citizen from the UK. This gentleman was a very cultured and soft-spoken man, a man of many accomplishments, and practically the epitome of "mild mannered". He maintained his decorum and public self-control throughout it all in a very quiet British fashion. I got to know him and his surviving child rather well during the whole ordeal.

One thing he said stands out in my mind just now: He told me "At least in this country, you can get real justice sometimes." He said that right after his son's killer had been sentenced to death.

Okay, some people don't feel that way. :shrug: If they want to plead for mercy for the killer of their son/daughter/wife/husband/brother/friend that's their business.

In my opinion, sympathy for a cold-blooded murderer is an insult to his victims.
i don't have any sympathy for cold blooded murders and i don't believe i have said that i do.
 
Whatever happened to sympathy for the loved ones of the victims who don't agree with capital punishment? What about sympathy for the people tasked with carrying out the capital sentence? Any sympathy for the decision makers in the process? The governor? The judges? What about sympathy for the people who have to pay for this costly, unnecessary and irreversible punishment?

The truth is that capital punishment is neither an effective deterrent or an efficient solution and it carries a heavy and costly burden in American society committed to the principle that it is better that a guilty man go free than a innocent one suffer injustice.


I find your logic interesting

you damn the DP as not an effective deterrent even though it is undisputed that no executed prisoner has ever committed more crimes after his punishment while many doing life in prison have

yet you want to ban guns which is a solution that has less evidence supporting it as a crime deterrent than capital punishment

and the death penalty is almost always inflicted on the guilty while gun control such as bans only affects the honest since felons are already banned from legally owning guns
 
Goshin said his best friend was murdered and it was a comfort for him to see the murderers put to death. whilst it wouldn't be comforting to me, i respect his feelings and i'm certainly not going to be disrespectful to those feelings he has as a result of a real life personal situation he has had and tell him those feelings aren't valid.

whether i agree or disagree with him regarding the method of punishment of the murderers, his feelings are valid. they are real.

I meant with regards to you not responding to my post...
 
… you want to ban guns …

and the death penalty is almost always inflicted on the guilty …

Assuming facts not in evidence. I don't want to ban guns.

And you say the death penalty is “almost always inflicted on the guilty.” Think about that. You're saying people innocent of the crime they were convicted of have been put to death for that crime. If true, it will be one of the most shameful chapters of American jurisprudence imaginable. An innocent's death at the hands of the state. Innocent blood on our hands. Reason enough to ban capital punishment.
 
Whatever happened to sympathy for the loved ones of the victims who don't agree with capital punishment? What about sympathy for the people tasked with carrying out the capital sentence? Any sympathy for the decision makers in the process? The governor? The judges? What about sympathy for the people who have to pay for this costly, unnecessary and irreversible punishment?

The truth is that capital punishment is neither an effective deterrent or an efficient solution and it carries a heavy and costly burden in American society committed to the principle that it is better that a guilty man go free than a innocent one suffer injustice.

The DP is a PERFECT solution... the murderer, rapist or molestor is permanently removed. Done. End of story...

With regards to sympathy... what are you talking about? Sympathy for a judge? Governor? Seriously, what in the world are you talking about? They have to judge a person and sentence them to death and wee should feel sorry for them, or something? That is ridiculous. I bet many feel the way I do and wouldn't feel bad for one second about sentencing some murdering piece of crap to death.
 
Assuming facts not in evidence. I don't want to ban guns.

And you say the death penalty is “almost always inflicted on the guilty.” Think about that. You're saying people innocent of the crime they were convicted of have been put to death for that crime. If true, it will be one of the most shameful chapters of American jurisprudence imaginable. An innocent's death at the hands of the state. Innocent blood on our hands. Reason enough to ban capital punishment.

The DP is becoming more reliable than ever, with past sentences seeing some innocent people be killed, and that sucks, but with DNA evidence now, I seriously doubt any innocent people are being given the DP. At best, give the DP to people only convicted with DNA evidence, that solves the problem.
 
The DP is a PERFECT solution... the murderer, rapist or molestor is permanently removed. Done. End of story...

With regards to sympathy... what are you talking about? Sympathy for a judge? Governor? Seriously, what in the world are you talking about? They have to judge a person and sentence them to death and wee should feel sorry for them, or something? That is ridiculous. I bet many feel the way I do and wouldn't feel bad for one second about sentencing some murdering piece of crap to death.

It's always nice when everything is nice and clear cut. Black and white. Victim and victimizer.

But, most things in life are far more ambiguous to one degree or another. Shades of grey. And, the minute you are in the position of the jury member, or the judge, the burden weighs heavier and heavier. And, then there's that extra heavy burden called capital punishment which demands an absolute, clear eyed certainty because once the punishment is carried out, there's no going back.

Was the victimizer in fact our victim?

The executioner is not without his stress no matter what his opinion of capital punishment. He strapped the victimizer to the execution board like Christ was nailed to the cross. He held his hand to the switch that would certainly kill the now helpless victimizer. And then he pulled the switch, knowing through his action a man died because of it. You might think he's just like a sanitation engineer, taking out the trash, but, life and death must never be like that, at least, for fully functioning individuals.

And the warden who ordered the executioner, he felt the burden, too, even if he was a cog in the wheel. And, the governor, knowing his was the last reprieve denied. The judge who stepped aside and let the process proceed. All of them knew their mortal role and felt the burden; felt the stress of someone's death on their actions. These things linger.

I say lift the burden from their shoulders.

I have no sympathy for the victimizer. I have only respect and sympathy for the public servants who are tasked within our capital punishment system.

Blackstone's formulation: “better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

It is better that we lock the victimizers up and hold them for God's justice than we in our imperfect way attempt to replicate that here on earth.
 
It's always nice when everything is nice and clear cut. Black and white. Victim and victimizer.

But, most things in life are far more ambiguous to one degree or another. Shades of grey. And, the minute you are in the position of the jury member, or the judge, the burden weighs heavier and heavier. And, then there's that extra heavy burden called capital punishment which demands an absolute, clear eyed certainty because once the punishment is carried out, there's no going back.

Was the victimizer in fact our victim?

The executioner is not without his stress no matter what his opinion of capital punishment. He strapped the victimizer to the execution board like Christ was nailed to the cross. He held his hand to the switch that would certainly kill the now helpless victimizer. And then he pulled the switch, knowing through his action a man died because of it. You might think he's just like a sanitation engineer, taking out the trash, but, life and death must never be like that, at least, for fully functioning individuals.

And the warden who ordered the executioner, he felt the burden, too, even if he was a cog in the wheel. And, the governor, knowing his was the last reprieve denied. The judge who stepped aside and let the process proceed. All of them knew their mortal role and felt the burden; felt the stress of someone's death on their actions. These things linger.

I say lift the burden from their shoulders.

I have no sympathy for the victimizer. I have only respect and sympathy for the public servants who are tasked within our capital punishment system.

Blackstone's formulation: “better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

It is better that we lock the victimizers up and hold them for God's justice than we in our imperfect way attempt to replicate that here on earth.

That 's sentimental and all... but if the judge or executioner doesn't like aspects of their job, they can always quit and go and get another. You have shared your opinion, but doing away with a system that is extremely effective and no longer sentences people to death without DNA evidence without some evidence is foolhardy... Buy exacting the highest cost from the convicted, their life, we are showing that we place the value of human life as the highest in our society...
 
I suspect that for every ""innocent" person executed (and that would include say the guy who did not pull the trigger in a botched robbery but got fried rather than the triggerman) there are many many more people who died because they could not protect themselves due to gun laws people like chappy support

example-ever heard of the laBiancas? the other victims of "helter skelter"

when vincent Bugliosi (hardly a big right winger) came to my law school several of us had lunch with him. He noted that after the Tate murder (august 9, 1969) Antonio LaBiana (who was killed 24 hours later) tried to get a pistol but due to the California waiting period he could not

there are dozens of other cases including a female member of the military who died after being delayed in trying to get a handgun when being stalked or threatened

in other words

gun laws that Chappy wants have killed more innocent people than the death penalty has in the last 40 years or so
 
I suspect that for every ""innocent" person executed (and that would include say the guy who did not pull the trigger in a botched robbery but got fried rather than the triggerman) there are many many more people who died because they could not protect themselves due to gun laws people like chappy support

example-ever heard of the laBiancas? the other victims of "helter skelter"

when vincent Bugliosi (hardly a big right winger) came to my law school several of us had lunch with him. He noted that after the Tate murder (august 9, 1969) Antonio LaBiana (who was killed 24 hours later) tried to get a pistol but due to the California waiting period he could not

there are dozens of other cases including a female member of the military who died after being delayed in trying to get a handgun when being stalked or threatened

in other words

gun laws that Chappy wants have killed more innocent people than the death penalty has in the last 40 years or so

Good point... and I bet more people have been killed by murderers that have been released from prison instead of facing a mandatory life prison term than have been put to death when innocent...
 
… Buy [sic] exacting the highest cost from the convicted, their life, we are showing that we place the value of human life as the highest in our society...

How ironic, your argument that we demonstrate the high value we place upon human life by putting people to death. I rather think we discount it with each execution.
 
That 's sentimental and all... but if the judge or executioner doesn't like aspects of their job, they can always quit and go and get another. You have shared your opinion, but doing away with a system that is extremely effective and no longer sentences people to death without DNA evidence without some evidence is foolhardy... Buy exacting the highest cost from the convicted, their life, we are showing that we place the value of human life as the highest in our society...

People keep saying that, but it's complete and utter bull****. It's a little statement that y'all say to make yourselves feel better, maybe even bigger, about using the death penalty. The use of the death penalty in no way, shape, or form upholds the value of human life. It in fact turns it into a trading piece for lawyers and judges. It's pretty retarded to think that killing people through state power somehow upholds the high value of human life.

Regardless, the system is not extremely effective. Not only does it not provide a deterrent, it also consumes innocent lives. In a way which destorys said life quite thoroughly. Because the cost of failure with the death penalty is so high, it should not be used anymore. It's not worth the cost.
 
How ironic, your argument that we demonstrate the high value we place upon human life by putting people to death. I rather think we discount it with each execution.

It seems ironic or contradictory at first, but it isn't. It is an ethical argument...

explains the rightness of actions in terms of the goodness of the state of affairs that occurs because of that action. If some action genuinely brings about greater good in the world, then it is a right action, and this rightness is independent of the nature of the action or the intentions of the person carrying out the action.

Deontological ethics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Others have a like opinion, including the Bible...

Again, every rogue who criminously attacks social rights becomes, by his wrong, a rebel and a traitor to his fatherland. By contravening its laws, he ceases to be one of its citizens: he even wages war against it. In such circumstances, the State and he cannot both be saved: one or the other must perish. In killing the criminal, we destroy not so much a citizen as an enemy. The trial and judgements are proofs that he has broken the Social Contract, and so is no longer a member of the State.

In J.J. Rousseau's The Social Contract written in 1762

Rousseau: Social Contract


"He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death." -Exodus 21:12

Pro-death penalty.com

Ikari
People keep saying that, but it's complete and utter bull****. It's a little statement that y'all say to make yourselves feel better, maybe even bigger, about using the death penalty. The use of the death penalty in no way, shape, or form upholds the value of human life. It in fact turns it into a trading piece for lawyers and judges. It's pretty retarded to think that killing people through state power somehow upholds the high value of human life.

Regardless, the system is not extremely effective. Not only does it not provide a deterrent, it also consumes innocent lives. In a way which destorys said life quite thoroughly. Because the cost of failure with the death penalty is so high, it should not be used anymore. It's not worth the cost.

We have had this argument for a couple of years now and it doesn't look like it is going to change... you don't agree with me and have made good arguments against my assertion, but in the end, these ethical positions are opinions. You don't have to be rude about it though... seriously.

The DP is not meant to be a deterrent, it is meant to be a consequence to murder, rape or molestation...
 
We have had this argument for a couple of years now and it doesn't look like it is going to change... you don't agree with me and have made good arguments against my assertion, but in the end, these ethical positions are opinions. You don't have to be rude about it though... seriously.

It was merely truth. To turn human life into a bartering chip for lawyers and judges is not upholding it's high value. To truly uphold its high value, you have to uphold its high value; particularly in the methods you allow to the State. By taking life you do not show the high intrinsic value of life; you merely show that you can take it.

The DP is not meant to be a deterrent, it is meant to be a consequence to murder, rape or molestation...

At what cost? Let alone the financial burdens of using the death penalty, but in terms of life as well. For one claiming to endorse life as high value, you certainly have nor quarrel with backing a system which will innately consume life. Not only that, but it will take innocent life as well. Is that really upholding the high intrinsic value of human life?
 
It was merely truth. To turn human life into a bartering chip for lawyers and judges is not upholding it's high value. To truly uphold its high value, you have to uphold its high value; particularly in the methods you allow to the State. By taking life you do not show the high intrinsic value of life; you merely show that you can take it.

It is merely your opinion... I can see what you are saying and understand it, I just don't agree. It is not about being a bartering chip... never actually heard that one before. Upholding the high value of a human life happens when we determine that the taking of a human life will result in the highest penalty... the taking of the criminals life. There life no longer has any value... that is the point. Not all life is valued, just the innocent law abiding citizens life is valued. The criminals life is not valued at all, hence their life is taken in order to show the value of the life that they took.

At what cost? Let alone the financial burdens of using the death penalty, but in terms of life as well. For one claiming to endorse life as high value, you certainly have nor quarrel with backing a system which will innately consume life. Not only that, but it will take innocent life as well. Is that really upholding the high intrinsic value of human life?

I don't back the system as it stands now and I have never said that I do. Hanging is not expensive. Neither is a bullet.

I don't support taking of innocent life, just life that has been conclusively proven through DNA to link the crime to the criminal.
 
I don't see the point in wasting taxpayer money on the penalty. Obviously, the are too dangerous to ever be allowed back into society, but there is no practical reason to kill them.

One practical reason is the fact that we have to pay incarceration costs for the rest of their miserable lives.
 
Back
Top Bottom