Why the proper use of Death Penalty is good (1 Viewer)

[Jack Dawson]

It is a punishment! It was never designed to rehabilitate or send a message to others that it could happen to them too if they screwed up. I believe the term was detterent. Even though it was NOT designed to be it definitely has deterred those that have been executed. They have not brutally murdered any more, they have not rapted any more, they have not terrorized anyone any more, the have not molested children any more.

I am NOT for random use of the death penalty but when convicted and proven (where needed) be DNA testing or when there has been a confession it is appropriate PUNISHMENT for a deed done.

 

[shuamort]

It is a punishment! It was never designed to rehabilitate or send a message to others that it could happen to them too if they screwed up. I believe the term was detterent. Even though it was NOT designed to be it definitely has deterred those that have been executed. They have not brutally murdered any more, they have not rapted any more, they have not terrorized anyone any more, the have not molested children any more.

I am NOT for random use of the death penalty but when convicted and proven (where needed) be DNA testing or when there has been a confession it is appropriate PUNISHMENT for a deed done.

I have yet to see a study that shows that the death penalty that has been re-enacted in any state has been a deterrent. Can you please show me how it's deterred people from committing those crimes in the first place?

(Basing it as a death penalty vs. life in prisonment removes any factors such as recidivism from play obviously).

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

What's the point? I disagree with any support for killing especially support coming from the government. The difference between someone rotting away in a skin head rape house (federal penetentary) and sitting there for twenty some odd years and killing them is cost.

It's cheaper to keep them alive than killing them.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7

I think it's more important for the perpetrator to say, "I should not have done what I did," and pay the price than for him to be put down as some sort of punishment.

 

[Arch Enemy]

I'll argue this till the day I die...

The death penalty is wrong.. more people are wrongfully convicted and sent to death then those who are rightfully sent to death. In the past the usage and sentencing of the Death Penalty has been used as a way to show a white judge's racism to a black protester.

The death penalty is morally wrong; truth for the Liberals.
The death penalty is against biblical teachings; truth for the Christian Conservatives.

I'd like to see 3 cases where the out-come, as a whole, has been successful and "good"

 

[Blue Hobgoblin]

There is no "proper" use for the death penalty. Never has been, never will be.

 

[sebastiansdreams]

I'll argue this till the day I die...

The death penalty is wrong.. more people are wrongfully convicted and sent to death then those who are rightfully sent to death. In the past the usage and sentencing of the Death Penalty has been used as a way to show a white judge's racism to a black protester.

The death penalty is morally wrong; truth for the Liberals.
The death penalty is against biblical teachings; truth for the Christian Conservatives.

I'd like to see 3 cases where the out-come, as a whole, has been successful and "good"

Firstly, let me state that I am not for the death penalty. BUT, I do not believe unless you can somehow provide some pretty convincing evidence that more people are wrongly convicted of crimes warranting the death penalty than are correctly warranting the death penalty. That simply cannot be the case or there would be no one in support of the death penalty.

 

[shuamort]

Firstly, let me state that I am not for the death penalty. BUT, I do not believe unless you can somehow provide some pretty convincing evidence that more people are wrongly convicted of crimes warranting the death penalty than are correctly warranting the death penalty. That simply cannot be the case or there would be no one in support of the death penalty.

I think any more than zero of incorrectly applied death penalties is too much.

From Amnesty International:

No one knows how many of the approximately 7,000 people put to death in the USA during this century were innocent. Since the resumption of US executions in 1977, Amnesty International has documented numerous cases where serious doubts concerning the prisoner's guilt still existed immediately prior to the execution. According to one prominent study, at least 23 innocent people had been executed in the USA this century prior to 1984.(3) Significantly, the authors of the report do not claim that the numbers represent the total of all innocent victims of the US death penalty, but merely those cases which their own research uncovered.

 

[sebastiansdreams]

I think any more than zero of incorrectly applied death penalties is too much.

From Amnesty International:

That I agree with. But that is not his statement. His statement was to a completely different effect. You must be incredibly thorough in such arguments, and that is a fairly large loophole don't you agree?

 

[shuamort]

That I agree with. But that is not his statement. His statement was to a completely different effect. You must be incredibly thorough in such arguments, and that is a fairly large loophole don't you agree?

Very much so, and that's my first problem with the death penalty. It's not infallible. It's not proven to be infallible. Yes, we have the technology now for DNA testing but a capitol punishment doesn't always rest on DNA.

As for his statement of correctly vs incorrectly. Well, to address that it's better to discuss this as per the letter of the law and subjectively as opposed to objectively. Let's just say that since 1977, of the 7000ish capitol punishments, Amnesty International is confident in listing 23. That's far from midway point as to correct applicability. Even mulitplying that by 100 is still under half.

Moreover, death penalty cases are always decided by juries and not judges per a 2002 Supreme Court decision:
The Supreme Court Monday ruled 7-2 that it is unconstitutional for judges rather than juries to make findings of fact that result in a person being sentenced to death.

 

[shuamort]

:doh capital not capitol.

 

[sebastiansdreams]

Yeah, large numerical mistake, however, like you said, twenty three possible wrongful deaths is twenty three far too many. I do not believe we have the ability, especially not as jurors, to decide whether a person acussed lives or dies.

 

[Arch Enemy]

the edit key is helpful

According to Death Penalty Info "Since 1973, 119 People in 25 states have been released from Death Row" That goes to show that trials aren't always as non-biast or true as some would like to think, now that people have been pressuring the Government to actually take second looks at cases the findings of innocents is staggering. Think of have many people have been executed innocently before 1973!

 

[Jack Dawson]

:roll: Well folks, face the fact. An executed, proven, convicted killer, rapist, child molester, will never have that opportunity again because some liberal judge thought his life sentence was too much or that he had been a 'model' prisoner. All you critics of the death penalty, what is your stand on killing innocent babies that are unborn and have never been to trial? I would like your justification for the millions upon millions of babies that are SLAUGHTERED. How can you with ANY kind of a conscience believe that abortion can be justified in ANY circumstance. Is it SAVE the SCUMBAG, kill the innocent because they are 'in your way of having a good time.' Don't go there with 'life of the mother, incest, or rape' because that counts for LESS than 1% of the total abortions. :mrgreen:

 

[shuamort]

:roll: Well folks, face the fact. An executed, proven, convicted killer, rapist, child molester, will never have that opportunity again because some liberal judge thought his life sentence was too much or that he had been a 'model' prisoner.

Did you miss my article Jack? It said that judges CANNOT decide the death penalty. That's a supreme court decision. (A liberal supreme court decision :rofl ) The decision's up to the jury.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Dude... This is a DEATH PENALTY THREAD. This place has whole section devoted to your disgust for abortion.

I share your prolife view, though I must wonder how you are okay with one type of killing but completely abhorred to another.

Pick one.

I think Life in in a federal *blank*-you-in-the-*blank* prison is worse than life. Plus it's cheaper to keep them alive than it is to execute them.

 

[Jack Dawson]

Prove to me it is cheaper to feed them for life. My other pet peeve is they should have an opportunity for three (3) appeals in 18 months and if NOT reversed the execution should be carried out.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

In our system a year in a half is no where near enough time for 3 appeals.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7#financial facts

There's your proof. Enjoy.

 

[carolyn-]

In my opinion, death penalty should be given to serious crimes such as murder. A murder for another murder.

First-degree murder (or murder in the first degree, or colloquially, murder one) refers to
premeditated murder, or murder which occurs after some degree of reflection by the murderer. This reflection can be years or less than a second.
Second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter refers to
murder done without thought in the heat of the moment, or in some states after "adequate provocation", or
Third-degree murder, also known as manslaughter,
occurs without the specific intent to kill, but usually after an act of criminal negligence or some other act resulting in a person's death.

Source: http://www.free-definition.com/Murder.html

First-Degree murder should be given the death row. Death penalty can only be justified when there is no other way to prevent the creation of new victims.

Moreover, proper death penalty should be given. We should only allow lethal injections, not electric chair or hanging. Lethal injections allow for the convict to not feel any pain, and die just a few seconds after.

However, this brings another argument. If Death Penalty is said to deter crimes especially murder, then why can the government give out death penalty? It is like, the society cannot administer murder, but the government can.. :lol:

 

[bushrules91]

I strongly believe in the death penelty and frankly i think it should be used more often. If a murderer kills a person they should have to feel more pain than there victim did when they were killed. This new "painless" executions are just a bunch of bull. I dont understand why they should get the nice quick death when the person they killed had to suffer until the very end. Poeple tell me that we should not be the ones to decide who goes and who doesn't only god. well i just just tell him it wasn't his decision either. If they ended the life of an inocent and not in self defense then they should not have the gift that god gave them of being able to live on this earth. If you should decide to reply to this then so be it because I will NOT back down.

 

[shuamort]

I strongly believe in the death penelty and frankly i think it should be used more often. If a murderer kills a person they should have to feel more pain than there victim did when they were killed. This new "painless" executions are just a bunch of bull. I dont understand why they should get the nice quick death when the person they killed had to suffer until the very end.

Yes, but how do you know FOR SURE that they committed a crime? With DNA evidence, we've found that we've executed some innocent people. Now you want to have them tortured to death as well (not minding that that idea would definitely be unconstitutional per the 8th Amendment).

Poeple tell me that we should not be the ones to decide who goes and who doesn't only god. well i just just tell him it wasn't his decision either. If they ended the life of an inocent and not in self defense then they should not have the gift that god gave them of being able to live on this earth.

I don't believe in god, God, or any other type of deity. So don't worry about me using that excuse.

If you should decide to reply to this then so be it because I will NOT back down.

So, are you here to just pile out your views or are you here to learn from other peoples' perspectives? A closed mind is like a closed parachute on the way down.

 

[Fu_chick]

I think it's interesting how there are some individuals here who feel they must insert abortion into nearly every argument. It really is pathetic. I think abortion was even brought up in the pit bull thread. :roll: Get over it people.

Anyhoo, I have never been a big fan of the death penalty. Why?

--It costs more than keeping them alive
--We have the highest murder rate in the western world and are the country in the west that has the death penalty--deterrent? I don't think so
--Punishment--nah--it's nothing more than euthanasia. Horses being humanly put to sleep probably feel more pain.
--Justice? Most certainly not. The only kind of justice fit for someone who murders cannot be dished out on this plain of existence. Killing the killer will never bring a loved one back.
--In a free society do we really want the government deciding who lives and dies? I think not.
--How many Innocent people are put to death? I thought that it was better to let 10 guilty men go free then wrongly punish one innocent.
--A system that decides who lives and dies had better be PERFECT. The justice system is run by human beings, and therefore will never be perfect.

And this is for all you Christians--
the death penalty is NOT a very Christian thing to support. I don't care what the OT says about an eye for an eye. Not only did Christ himself stop someone from being publicly executed -(John 8:7,) but He stated the the eye for an eye thing was the old way of doing things and He was the new way (Matthew 5:38)
I really have no CLUE how Christians can support such an institution. Christians should be dead set against this, not shouting for it!

 

[shuamort]

And this is for all you Christians--
the death penalty is NOT a very Christian thing to support. I don't care what the OT says about an eye for an eye. Not only did Christ himself stop someone from being publicly executed -(John 8:7,) but He stated the the eye for an eye thing was the old way of doing things and He was the new way (Matthew 5:38)
I really have no CLUE how Christians can support such an institution. Christians should be dead set against this, not shouting for it!

Right, even a perfunctory knowledge of Kohlberg's level of moral development has this two principles at the opposite ends:

STAGE SOCIAL ORIENTATION
1 Obedience and Punishment
2 Individualism, Instrumentalism, and Exchange
3 "Good boy/girl"
4 Law and Order
5 Social Contract
6 Principled Conscience

Stage 1 doing the right thing is obeying authority and avoiding punishment. Punishment being the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" rationale.

Stage 2 authority isn't singular and development starts to see that there are many sides to every issue. Because situations are relative, one can do what they want.

Stage 3 The emphesis is still ego-centric and the person's desire to be a good person and reward is important.

Stage 4 The will is to follow society's rules in order to keep it whole.

Stage 5 Is when people start moving on from themselves and onto the society as a whole. Emphesis on basic rights and democracy begin to flourish.

Stage 6 Is the ultimate stage. It's no longer what's good for the majority but what is the most fair and just. It's the realization that "if someone slaps you on one cheek, turn the other cheek. If someone demands your coat, offer your shirt also." -Luke 6:29.

For more about Kohlberg's theory, click here.

 

[bushrules91]

Yes, but how do you know FOR SURE that they committed a crime? With DNA evidence, we've found that we've executed some innocent people. Now you want to have them tortured to death as well (not minding that that idea would definitely be unconstitutional per the 8th Amendment).


I don't believe in god, God, or any other type of deity. So don't worry about me using that excuse.

So, are you here to just pile out your views or are you here to learn from other peoples' perspectives? A closed mind is like a closed parachute on the way down.

the chances of finding an innocent person guilty is extremly low and if you dont bielive in god what are worrying abo.ut. oh yeah and if you dont bielieve in god where did we come from? If your trying to isult me for expressing my views 63

85lkj

 

[Binary_Digit]

And this is for all you Christians--
the death penalty is NOT a very Christian thing to support. I don't care what the OT says about an eye for an eye. Not only did Christ himself stop someone from being publicly executed -(John 8:7,) but He stated the the eye for an eye thing was the old way of doing things and He was the new way (Matthew 5:3
I really have no CLUE how Christians can support such an institution. Christians should be dead set against this, not shouting for it!

Nicely done!

Capital punishment is nothing more than revenge. If statistics would indicate that it actually helps prevent future homocides, I would believe differently, but it doesn't. It devalues human life by making it a trade commodity. It encourages the notion that it's acceptable for people to take comfort, and even pleasure, in the death of another human being. It's a stoop to the killer's level.

 

[bushrules91]

Nicely done!

Capital punishment is nothing more than revenge. If statistics would indicate that it actually helps prevent future homocides, I would believe differently, but it doesn't. It devalues human life by making it a trade commodity. It encourages the notion that it's acceptable for people to take comfort, and even pleasure, in the death of another human being. It's a stoop to the killer's level.

would u rather them sit in an air conditiond room getting free food watching cable tv?