Why the death penalt?

[Flea]

I think it's entirely the point. If we don't need to exercise it anymore, there's no point in using it.

We never needed to exercise it, nobody ever has except in dire times when keeping a prisoner is impossible. The Death Penalty is what is best for society. The end result is less felons.

 

[Flea]

How can you be sure that all convicted murders are guilty? I saw in american tv that around 100 are set free every years, mostly based on DNA. Thats absoulte proof.

I have the feeling that your more interested in hanging anyone rather than hanging the right one.

I wish you were innocent and sitting in prison and be rescued from a liberal lawyer.

Today's criminals are being locked up with the same DNA procedures that are being used to free criminals from that past that were locked up without DNA procedures. Think about it for a minute and it might dawn on you.

 

[Ikari]

We never needed to exercise it, nobody ever has except in dire times when keeping a prisoner is impossible. The Death Penalty is what is best for society. The end result is less felons.

There are times when you need to use it for sure. When there is no realistic option of jail or stressed times when most of our resources are invested elsewhere.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

I'm all for it.

I consider a lifetime in prison to actually be cruel and unusual punishment. If someone is *that* unfit to be in society then why force them to live in confined solitary when there's no hope for them to rejoin society as a balanced citizen?

Certainly no more cruel and unusual than watching the clock for the right time to strap them to the seat and euthanize them like a dangerous animal in front of the glaring eyes of the vengeful family of the victim and authorities, not to mention the years of psychological torture leading up to it. It's not so much that they don't often deserve it, but it makes me sick all the same.

 

[Flea]

Certainly no more cruel and unusual than watching the clock for the right time to strap them to the seat and euthanize them like a dangerous animal in front of the glaring eyes of the vengeful family of the victim and authorities, not to mention the years of psychological torture leading up to it. It's not so much that they don't often deserve it, but it makes me sick all the same.

But they are a dangerous animal. That is what we do, put them down. As for the rest, it is emotional espionage.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

But they are a dangerous animal. That is what we do, put them down. As for the rest, it is emotional espionage.

It is beneath the State to treat people with the same kind of lack of dignity that the murderer did, and to be in the business of eye-for-an-eye revenge. It seems kind of hypocritical to kill somebody to show that killing is wrong. Sure we need to be protected against murderers, but life in prison accomplishes that just fine.

 

[Flea]

It is beneath the State to treat people with the same kind of lack of dignity that the murderer did, and to be in the business of eye-for-an-eye revenge. It seems kind of hypocritical to kill somebody to show that killing is wrong. Sure we need to be protected against murderers, but life in prison accomplishes that just fine.

The end result is what matters. The end result is that there are less murderers. The State, in carrying out the Death Penalty, is showing that it holds human life at the highest possible level. It is an ethical stance.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

We consider it a barbaric ritual from the wicked past. Even Russia doesnt do it, so now we liberals are comparing the USA to China, North Korea and Iran. Isnt that a terrible comparison?

If the american judicial system could be 100% certain that the convicted commited the crime, then we could talk about it. However, your system is not perfect and I read about 100 americans are freed per year, many through DNA samples, which they have to pay themselfs.

It would really be cynical if one says 100 ouf of x prisoners is ok. I look it this way, what if I were one of those innocent people put to death!

Are there anybody out there who is against the death penalty and why?

A few thoughts that hung around me since responding to this yesterday is:

1) Thankfully our system DOES work so effectively that people who ARE in prison falsely can actually be freed when new evidence is discovered.
That's quite wonderful.

2) Why would any presume that I (or others) support execution for those in prison for crimes that can be proven 'not guilty' after the sentence is passed?

At least for me - if anything is possibly questionable then it's not appropriate. I favor the death-penalty but only for those who are, without a doubt, guilty of their crimes. . . not *just* those who were sentenced based on DNA or heresay.

Basicly - for me to find it acceptable someone would have to be caught in the act or confessed to it.

3) All these other countries who don't have a death-penalty - what is the success of their legal system in convicting criminals? What is the reprival and release rate for those who might have been falsely convicted? How effect is their overall system?

Simply stating "Russia doesn't even do it" really means nothing to me - what *does* Russia do and is it actually *more* effective?

 

[Caine]

How can you be sure that all convicted murders are guilty? I saw in american tv that around 100 are set free every years, mostly based on DNA. Thats absoulte proof.

I have the feeling that your more interested in hanging anyone rather than hanging the right one.

I wish you were innocent and sitting in prison and be rescued from a liberal lawyer.

Where have you been?

These people who are being set free every year based on DNA were convicted back when we couldn't analyze DNA. Back when we weren't required to videotape interrogations, back when there were not alot of other judicial/legal restraints on capital punishment cases that there are today.

The fact that people from old cases where our investigatory skills were lacking and our judicial system wasn't as strong are being released as "innocent" has no place in this debate, as we are talking about Is the death penalty okay NOW not 30 years ago...

 

[Regicollis]

The death penalty is a barbaric custom. Criminals are convicted by courts composed of fallible humans who will make mistakes at some points. If someone is falsely convicted to a fine or a prison sentence we can make up for the mistake by giving him a public apology and a hefty compensation. But what are you going to do if you have already killed him? How could the state ever make up for the mistake of killing an innocent man?

The practical problems with having irreversible punishments in a fallible system are by themselves enough of an argument against the death penalty. However I think the death penalty would be an indefensible form of punishment even if we could establish the guilt of someone beyond any doubt.

To me, killing someone is wrong no matter who you are and no matter what your reasons are. This is why we punish murderers in the first place. The only justifiable instance of killing someone is after their own express wishes or to avert imminent danger to someone else's life and there is no other and less harmful way to do it. None of these criteria are met when the state murders convicted criminals.

A typical argument in the favour of state-sanctioned murder of convicted criminals is that it happens to protect the public. But it is not necessary for the state to sink to the level of criminals in order to accomplish this. Even the most dangerous psychopath, the worst product of our society, can be incapacitated in a secure mental hospital until he either dies of natural causes or is deemed not to pose a threat no more.

Almost all civilised nations has abandoned the practice of state-sanctioned murder. The process started a long time ago and today a majority of civilised nations consider the death penalty not only outdated and cruel but an outright infringement on basic human rights.

The trend is clear; country after country is leaving this barbaric chapter of their legal history behind them. Portugal abolished it in 1867, Britain had its last execution in 1964, France abolished it in 1981, Canada in 1976 and most recently Togo abolished it last year. Throughout the entire area of the European Council the death penalty has been totally banned under all circumstances since the addition of protocol 13 to the European Declaration on Human Rights in 2003.

Besides the US countries that use the death penalty are such shining examples on how to organise society as China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and North Korea. Is that really a club suitable for a country that sees itself as a stronghold for liberty and justice? Are those nations that the US wishes to be compared to?

 

[bennyhill]

Some say by killing a convicted murder you solve the problem, but is a life sentence without parole doing the same thing?
I just feel that a lot of conservatives have a barbaric revenge thing in their hearts, which was comon among the Romans and early Jews (see Old Testament). This eye-for-eye mentality is barbaric.

 

[spud_meister]

I'm all for it.

I consider a lifetime in prison to actually be cruel and unusual punishment. If someone is *that* unfit to be in society then why force them to live in confined solitary when there's no hope for them to rejoin society as a balanced citizen?

and thats the reason i'm against the death penalty, if they commit a horrendous crime, they should suffer for it

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Some say by killing a convicted murder you solve the problem, but is a life sentence without parole doing the same thing?
I just feel that a lot of conservatives have a barbaric revenge thing in their hearts, which was comon among the Romans and early Jews (see Old Testament). This eye-for-eye mentality is barbaric.

When a violent offender is in jail - solitary confinement, life imprisonment, etc - they only become more violent and more difficult to deal with on a daily basis and pose purely a threat to other inmates who aren't as vile and prison wardens and others who are suppose to care for these individuals on a daily basis.

and thats the reason i'm against the death penalty, if they commit a horrendous crime, they should suffer for it

They suffer - and so does everyone else who deals with them daily.

I'd rather compassion and respect, time and concern be given for others - not for mass murderers like Gacy or pedophile murderers like Couey.

Why does Couey deserve shelter, food and healthcare?
He robbed a little girl of her precious life - but to you it somehow it makes sense to keep his blood pumping? What for? So he can suffer in some way?

Oh yeah - shelter, food and healtcare free of charge for the rest of someone's life, my my, what misery :roll:
That's something that people struggle to provide for their children, yet these freaks of society get it for being inhumane and vile. I see NO justice in that.

Either our prison system is too damn soft - or people have their priorities straight. I say we let God sort them out and just dispose of them for the filth that they are.

 

[Regicollis]

When a violent offender is in jail - solitary confinement, life imprisonment, etc - they only become more violent and more difficult to deal with on a daily basis and pose purely a threat to other inmates who aren't as vile and prison wardens and others who are suppose to care for these individuals on a daily basis.

That depends on how you organise your prison system. Some prison systems are extremely violent, some are not. Maybe you should learn from those who are not as violent.

They suffer - and so does everyone else who deals with them daily.

I'd rather compassion and respect, time and concern be given for others - not for mass murderers like Gacy or pedophile murderers like Couey.

Why does Couey deserve shelter, food and healthcare?
He robbed a little girl of her precious life - but to you it somehow it makes sense to keep his blood pumping? What for? So he can suffer in some way?

Oh yeah - shelter, food and healtcare free of charge for the rest of someone's life, my my, what misery :roll:
That's something that people struggle to provide for their children, yet these freaks of society get it for being inhumane and vile. I see NO justice in that.

After all the number of murderers is really small. Imprisoning them for as long as necessary for them to die a natural death or not pose a threat any more are negligible compared to many other posts on the budget.

If people in prison are having better material conditions than those outside, maybe it is not the prisons there are something wrong with but the conditions outside. Just a thought I had.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

That depends on how you organise your prison system. Some prison systems are extremely violent, some are not. Maybe you should learn from those who are not as violent.

Joe Arpaio keeps a smooth system - but without all the perks and amenities - and has a low turn around rate and low incidences of violence and other issues.

However, his model has yet to be followed and many claim it to be barbaric. . . .so obvious learning from working examples still doesn't make people happy about it.

After all the number of murderers is really small. Imprisoning them for as long as necessary for them to die a natural death or not pose a threat any more are negligible compared to many other posts on the budget.

If people in prison are having better material conditions than those outside, maybe it is not the prisons there are something wrong with but the conditions outside. Just a thought I had.

No, it's a problem on the inside AND it's also present on the outside.

The problem in this bracket of issues is that once the government becomes reponsible for an individual then that person MUST be given all the basics and cared for - in part because of liability issues, honestly.

Prisoner's have demoted theirselves to being children of the state.

 

[Goobieman]

We consider it a barbaric ritual from the wicked past.

So?

Even Russia doesnt do it, so now we liberals are comparing the USA to China, North Korea and Iran. Isnt that a terrible comparison?

Hitler breathed air. You breathe air.
That puts you in the same company as Hitler.

If the american judicial system could be 100% certain that the convicted commited the crime, then we could talk about it.

We can still talk about it. We have it, and we dont care if you don't and/or if you don't like it.

 

[molten_dragon]

If someone is falsely convicted to a fine or a prison sentence we can make up for the mistake by giving him a public apology and a hefty compensation.

You're horribly naive if you think a public apology and some money would make up for sending an innocent person to prison for several years.

 

[molten_dragon]

Some say by killing a convicted murder you solve the problem, but is a life sentence without parole doing the same thing?

No, because as long as that person is alive, they can commit more crimes.

They could escape from prison and commit more crimes against the population in general.

They could commit crimes against the guards and other staff that work at the prison where they are confined.

The can even commit crimes against the other prisoners who are housed in the prison with them.

A dead criminal will NEVER again commit another crime. That's a 100% absolute guarantee.

 

[Comic Relief]

How could the state ever make up for the mistake of killing an innocent man?

No system is going to be perfect. Some innocents will die. I accept this.
But let me ask you this: How could the state ever make up for the mistake of not killing a guilty man?

To me, killing someone is wrong no matter who you are and no matter what your reasons are.

If you care to explain, I'd like to hear why.

 

[Caine]

So?

Hitler breathed air. You breathe air.
That puts you in the same company as Hitler.

my new all time favorite quote

 

[sunnee]

We consider it a barbaric ritual from the wicked past. Even Russia doesnt do it, so now we liberals are comparing the USA to China, North Korea and Iran. Isnt that a terrible comparison?

If the american judicial system could be 100% certain that the convicted commited the crime, then we could talk about it. However, your system is not perfect and I read about 100 americans are freed per year, many through DNA samples, which they have to pay themselfs.

It would really be cynical if one says 100 ouf of x prisoners is ok. I look it this way, what if I were one of those innocent people put to death!

Are there anybody out there who is against the death penalty and why?

I'm against the death penalty, same as you. Too many innocent people have been released from death row in recent years, proving how imperfect the system is. There have been many circumstantial cases where people were sentenced to death, meanwhile, serial killers like the green river killer get a life sentence. Makes no sense at all. A poor person will end up on death row and more than likely executed, guilty or not, due to improper legal representation. And if they've got a prior felony on their record and were in the wrong place at the wrong time, plus being poor, they are clearly done.

Not only that-- based on all the stories I've read, this barbaric process, called the death penalty- does not bring back the already diseased, or tribute to anyone's memory. All it does is bring about more pain, suffering, for possibly the parents of loved ones of the inmate (which I know some say that doesn't matter, but still they didn't commit any crimes.) and it also makes victims familys re-live the whole tragic murder again.

Justice can be served behind bars. Death will come soon enough in the dark days of prison life.

 

[Caine]

I'm against the death penalty, same as you. Too many innocent people have been released from death row in recent years, proving how imperfect the system is. There have been many circumstantial cases where people were sentenced to death, meanwhile, serial killers like the green river killer get a life sentence. Makes no sense at all. A poor person will end up on death row and more than likely executed, guilty or not, due to improper legal representation. And if they've got a prior felony on their record and were in the wrong place at the wrong time, plus being poor, they are clearly done.

Not only that-- based on all the stories I've read, this barbaric process, called the death penalty- does not bring back the already diseased, or tribute to anyone's memory. All it does is bring about more pain, suffering, for possibly the parents of loved ones of the inmate (which I know some say that doesn't matter, but still they didn't commit any crimes.) and it also makes victims familys re-live the whole tragic murder again.

Justice can be served behind bars. Death will come soon enough in the dark days of prison life.

proving how imperfect the system WAS

not that it is perfect now, but lets not pretend the system we have today is anything like the system we had when these individuals were convicted.
let us not also forget that many people get released due to technicalities rather than some bit of evidence that completely exonerates them.

these other emotional appeals have no effect on my continued support of the death penalty.

 

[molten_dragon]

Justice can be served behind bars. Death will come soon enough in the dark days of prison life.

How do you respond to the fact that the death penalty is the only way to guarantee that someone never commits another crime?

 

[Yossarian]

How do you respond to the fact that the death penalty is the only way to guarantee that someone never commits another crime?

By contending that it's false.

Prison has long been a fairly acceptable way of preventing re-offence (so long as they offender remains inside, that is).

Besides, you're assuming that this black-and-white deterrence (disregarding degrees of offence) is the only reason for having a criminal punishment system in the first place.

 

[molten_dragon]

By contending that it's false.

Prison has long been a fairly acceptable way of preventing re-offence (so long as they offender remains inside, that is).

I'm not sure why you seem to be operating under the assumption that an imprisoned criminal cannot commit further crimes while in prison. They can, and frequently do. A dead criminal on the other hand, will absolutely NEVER commit another crime.

Besides, you're assuming that this black-and-white deterrence (disregarding degrees of offence) is the only reason for having a criminal punishment system in the first place.

The purpose of having a criminal punishment system IS to prevent people from committing crimes. What other purpose do you think it serves?

And I'm not saying that there should be no degrees of offense, that's just stupid. I'm not advocating killing people for shoplifting. I'm not even advocating killing people for manslaughter or rape. But when someone kills another human being in cold blood, most likely they're the kind of person who would do it again, and we don't need to keep people like that around.