• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why the proper use of Death Penalty is good

“Vengeance is a strong and natural emotion. But it has no place in our justice system.” These are words spoken by Bud Welch, a man whose daughter was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing. I must say, I agree with him.

First of all, there is no evidence that the death penalty prevents future murders and if anything, it brutalizes society and increases the likelihood of more people being murdered. Interestingly enough, states in the US that do not employ the death penalty have lower murder rates than states that do. And if we compare the United States to other countries, the US with the death penalty has a higher murder rate than the countries of Europe or Canada, which do not have the death penalty. Additionally, most of the people convicted of murder are not likely to kill again if released back into society. Killers such as the Manson family are rare. Most people who commit murder do it only once, and are often under the influence of drugs and alcohol. I’m not saying these people shouldn’t be punished, what I am saying is that if they are sentenced to life imprisonment without parole, both the safety and moral structure of society can be preserved.

Killing is never right or justified, not even if its intent is to punish a murderer. To murder a murderer is just stooping down to the murderer's level. Retribution is just another word for revenge, and allowing executions only sanctions killing as long as it’s a form of “pay-back,” not to mention that those who are sentenced to death are often not the worst offenders, but merely those with the fewest resources to defend themselves. Almost all who face the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney and are often poorly represented by the state.

Let’s not forget the innocent. Not even our justice system is perfect. Since 1973, at least 88 people have been released from death row after evidence proving their innocence emerged. In other words, for every seven people we have executed, we have found one person on death row that is actually innocent. I don't feel comfortable with that statistic. In addition, a recent study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors, and when retried, 80% of the defendants were not put to death after all, and 7% were completely acquitted. Also, things outside the justice system can cause errors. Witnesses may lie, and DNA testing, something that has only been around for the past few decades, has proven many people on death row innocent. Wrongful executions are a preventable risk. By substituting a sentence of life without parole, we meet society's needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irreversible punishment.

Finally, in the history of the death penalty, 158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, whereas only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim. It seems as if the death penalty counts white lives as more valuable than black lives. We cannot endorse a punishment that has such high racial discrepancies.

Just as we don't rob someone who has robbed us, we shouldn't kill someone who's killed. The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment and violates the Constitution.

Overall, life imprisonment is better.

Sorry this turned out so long.
 
loverofpeace said:
“Vengeance is a strong and natural emotion. But it has no place in our justice system.” These are words spoken by Bud Welch, a man whose daughter was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing. I must say, I agree with him.

First of all, there is no evidence that the death penalty prevents future murders and if anything, it brutalizes society and increases the likelihood of more people being murdered. Interestingly enough, states in the US that do not employ the death penalty have lower murder rates than states that do. And if we compare the United States to other countries, the US with the death penalty has a higher murder rate than the countries of Europe or Canada, which do not have the death penalty. Additionally, most of the people convicted of murder are not likely to kill again if released back into society. Killers such as the Manson family are rare. Most people who commit murder do it only once, and are often under the influence of drugs and alcohol. I’m not saying these people shouldn’t be punished, what I am saying is that if they are sentenced to life imprisonment without parole, both the safety and moral structure of society can be preserved.

Killing is never right or justified, not even if its intent is to punish a murderer. To murder a murderer is just stooping down to the murderer's level. Retribution is just another word for revenge, and allowing executions only sanctions killing as long as it’s a form of “pay-back,” not to mention that those who are sentenced to death are often not the worst offenders, but merely those with the fewest resources to defend themselves. Almost all who face the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney and are often poorly represented by the state.

Let’s not forget the innocent. Not even our justice system is perfect. Since 1973, at least 88 people have been released from death row after evidence proving their innocence emerged. In other words, for every seven people we have executed, we have found one person on death row that is actually innocent. I don't feel comfortable with that statistic. In addition, a recent study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors, and when retried, 80% of the defendants were not put to death after all, and 7% were completely acquitted. Also, things outside the justice system can cause errors. Witnesses may lie, and DNA testing, something that has only been around for the past few decades, has proven many people on death row innocent. Wrongful executions are a preventable risk. By substituting a sentence of life without parole, we meet society's needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irreversible punishment.

Finally, in the history of the death penalty, 158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, whereas only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim. It seems as if the death penalty counts white lives as more valuable than black lives. We cannot endorse a punishment that has such high racial discrepancies.

Just as we don't rob someone who has robbed us, we shouldn't kill someone who's killed. The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment and violates the Constitution.

Overall, life imprisonment is better.

Sorry this turned out so long.
Click to expand...

All very good points... however, let's take for instance, Joseph Duncan. He savagely murdered 3 people, in order to kidnap 2 children, molested the little girl and killed the little boy, his 4th victim. Pre-meditation HAS to be a factor in this. People DO plan to kill, and I firmly believe that if left to society, will kill again. And an FYI... Duncan was not high or drunk.

States without the death penalty MAY have lower murder rates, BUT aren't they suffering also with prison overcrowding? Like it or not, that is a growing issue within the United States, in ALL prisons.

The Manson family... they're not rare. Look at the serial killers that have come since Charlie...Once they get the taste of murder, they cannot and will not stop... And once they're caught... they have movies made about them, documentaries, news stories. We've given fame to degenerates, even up until their execution. Perhaps, and JUST perhaps, if we've given victims of these crimes just as much air time/print time... would the impact be felt? I believe so. There is power in the words of a victim, and the victims are often left silenced by the very society charged with "speaking" for them.

Finally, in the history of the death penalty, 158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, whereas only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim. It seems as if the death penalty counts white lives as more valuable than black lives. We cannot endorse a punishment that has such high racial discrepancies.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm

Above is the DOJ statistics on death row and executed inmates through 2003. Those executed and/or sentenced to death row are listed by sex AND race, and white leads both categories. I find using the "race" card to give creedence to arguments tasteless. Racism exists.. YES.. on both sides of the coin.

Among inmates under sentence of death and with available criminal histories:
-- nearly 2 in 3 had a prior felony conviction
-- about 1 in 12 had a prior homicide conviction.

Just one more thing to pay close attention too... 2 in 3 with a prior felony conviction? 2,501 of those on death row are already convicted felons. And 303 have already committed 1 act of murder. So is it the death penalty that's not a deterrant? Or is it the fact that these criminals are able to get out in the first place, to re-offend?
 
debate_junkie said:
All very good points... however, let's take for instance, Joseph Duncan. He savagely murdered 3 people, in order to kidnap 2 children, molested the little girl and killed the little boy, his 4th victim. Pre-meditation HAS to be a factor in this. People DO plan to kill, and I firmly believe that if left to society, will kill again. And an FYI... Duncan was not high or drunk.

States without the death penalty MAY have lower murder rates, BUT aren't they suffering also with prison overcrowding? Like it or not, that is a growing issue within the United States, in ALL prisons.

The Manson family... they're not rare. Look at the serial killers that have come since Charlie...Once they get the taste of murder, they cannot and will not stop... And once they're caught... they have movies made about them, documentaries, news stories. We've given fame to degenerates, even up until their execution. Perhaps, and JUST perhaps, if we've given victims of these crimes just as much air time/print time... would the impact be felt? I believe so. There is power in the words of a victim, and the victims are often left silenced by the very society charged with "speaking" for them.

Finally, in the history of the death penalty, 158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, whereas only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim. It seems as if the death penalty counts white lives as more valuable than black lives. We cannot endorse a punishment that has such high racial discrepancies.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm

Above is the DOJ statistics on death row and executed inmates through 2003. Those executed and/or sentenced to death row are listed by sex AND race, and white leads both categories. I find using the "race" card to give creedence to arguments tasteless. Racism exists.. YES.. on both sides of the coin.

Among inmates under sentence of death and with available criminal histories:
-- nearly 2 in 3 had a prior felony conviction
-- about 1 in 12 had a prior homicide conviction.

Just one more thing to pay close attention too... 2 in 3 with a prior felony conviction? 2,501 of those on death row are already convicted felons. And 303 have already committed 1 act of murder. So is it the death penalty that's not a deterrant? Or is it the fact that these criminals are able to get out in the first place, to re-offend?
Click to expand...

You too make some very good points.

I agree, Mr. Duncan was a very evil man, who committed treacherous acts and deserves to be punished. And you have no argument that he wasn't under the influence of something. However, that is one case and he is in the minority. No doubt about it that some murders are premeditated, however, I still feel that most murderers will not do it again. Most murders are done out of passion, spur of the moment, or if they are premeditated, usually the killer just wants to get that person. Murderous sociopaths really are rarer than you may think. Yes, they are the ones that get the hype and the media attention. Yes, they are the ones we always hear about. No, we never hear about the others. But what story are people more likely to listen to on the news? Your average Joe getting drunk and killing someone in a barfight, or the tragic tale of Mr. Duncan's victims?

You bring up prison crowding. I do not disagree. Prisons are crowded. But it's not because we haven't put enough killers to death. It's because we send too many people to jail who don't really need to be there, like people who have bounced a few cheques, and kids who were caught with marijuana on them. (I personally feel that drug users should go to rehab; drug dealers on the other hand, are another story) I would rather see killers rot in jail and have a few cheque bouncers and tax evaders out picking up trash, then hog the jails with these lesser offenses and then feeling we have to stoop to the murderers' level in order to punish them. And I'm not aware of the prison overcrowding situation in other countries.

Yes, we have given fame to horrible murderers, and by executing them, they get even more fame. They die as a martyr. People can even watch them die - by lethal injection. If you asked someone on the street to name a killer who has been put to death by the government, they will answer without hesitation. However, if you ask them to recall the names of innmates sitting on life imprisonment, I doubt they would be able to come up with something. Clearly, the death penalty gives these murderers even more fame, contradicting your statements.

Your race statistics are very interesting, however they only speak for one year. I'm sure that if we looked at the death penalty overall, we'd still see that more blacks were executed than whites.

You still haven't addressed the point that the death penalty is murder. You also don't address the point that most of those facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. Or the fact that one out of every seven people we have executed have actually been innocent. Which is a bigger risk: killing someone who is completely innocent; or, having them sit in jail, so at least if they're later proven innocent they can go out and restart their life? I think that murder is wrong anytime, and being able to seek revenge or put potentially evil people to death is not a good reason to commit murder ourselves. Don't think that I feel we should put murderers back on the streets. I only feel that their best punishment is sitting in prison for life. That way, we can uphold justice in the most fair and compassionate way possible.
 
Morally, this is a big issue, since we are all responsible in some little way for what our government condones. So I'd say that morally, we are safer off not whacking any criminals.

Materially,

does this affect any large portion of the country? Does it put food in anyone's belly, does it guard our shores?

Next time you get fed up with this debate, remember that 99% of everyone's life is determine by how much money they have, and that's not such a bad thing.
 
loverofpeace said:
You still haven't addressed the point that the death penalty is murder. You also don't address the point that most of those facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. Or the fact that one out of every seven people we have executed have actually been innocent. Which is a bigger risk: killing someone who is completely innocent; or, having them sit in jail, so at least if they're later proven innocent they can go out and restart their life? I think that murder is wrong anytime, and being able to seek revenge or put potentially evil people to death is not a good reason to commit murder ourselves. Don't think that I feel we should put murderers back on the streets. I only feel that their best punishment is sitting in prison for life. That way, we can uphold justice in the most fair and compassionate way possible.
Click to expand...

I will concede the death penalty is state sponsored murder. I still believe however, that in the end, the death penalty IS punishment, because I've watched numerous documentaries on death row inmates, and in the end, as their executions near, they get it. They didn't think about what they did, ending the life of another person for whatever reason. Now their life is about to end, and the reality is they themselves are going to die. There is the rare exception to that rule..those who kill, and go to their death still as belligerent as they can be.

There COULD be merit to life in prison if it meant justice is served. But too many prisons have become of the "country club" mentality. I don't see the need for pool tables, tv's etc in prison. If it's supposed to be punishment, make it punishment. Don't make it "home". AND... perhaps toughening statutes. Make life in prison... life in prison. Judges have the discretion in sentencing to life in prison with or without parole. Life without parole would ensure none of em get out. Remove that distinction, and I may be on board!
 
debate_junkie said:
I will concede the death penalty is state sponsored murder. I still believe however, that in the end, the death penalty IS punishment, because I've watched numerous documentaries on death row inmates, and in the end, as their executions near, they get it. They didn't think about what they did, ending the life of another person for whatever reason. Now their life is about to end, and the reality is they themselves are going to die. There is the rare exception to that rule..those who kill, and go to their death still as belligerent as they can be.

There COULD be merit to life in prison if it meant justice is served. But too many prisons have become of the "country club" mentality. I don't see the need for pool tables, tv's etc in prison. If it's supposed to be punishment, make it punishment. Don't make it "home". AND... perhaps toughening statutes. Make life in prison... life in prison. Judges have the discretion in sentencing to life in prison with or without parole. Life without parole would ensure none of em get out. Remove that distinction, and I may be on board!
Click to expand...

No doubt the death penalty is punishment. Just the wrong kind. Cruel and unusual, if you will. We don't know if the prisoners have thought about what they've done, and if you feel that these ones facing execution certainly haven't, well maybe it's because they haven't had enough time to think about their crime because they are to be executed before they've had an adequate chance to think. Maybe they're too busy thinking about their own death. What are these documentaries you have watched? I love documentaries, and if there's a few out there that give insight to the death penalty, I'm sure they would be very interesting.

I'm not sure about all this talk about prisons becoming "country clubs." All I know is that I'd sure as hell rather be at a real country club than in jail. I also don't see a problem with feeding our prisoners. As for cable TV and such, I'm sure it's not in the individual cells. And I doubt that inmates can run around all day and do whatever they want. I'm sure they spend most of their time locked up. Maybe I should go visit a prison and check it out. Settle these myths/facts once and for all....

And don't you think that people can change? I do feel that people can regret what they've done and I think they can become a whole different person after spending several decades in prison. I'm not saying we should let them out, but letting them play a couple games of pool a month is fine with me. Trust me, I am sure that the jail isn't so comfortable that it "feels like home." But I'm sure that the inmates get so used to it, that it eventually does become their home, since they have nothing else.

And of course life imprisonment should mean WITHOUT PAROLE. I can't believe I didn't make that clear earlier!
 
Umm...two fallacies were stated-1.) Prisons are country clubs, and 2.) Judges have descretion. Both are false in most cases. In the prisons are country clubs area, you are thinking federal prison. In the case of murder, it is basically always a state prison. They are horrible, foul and don't ever offer good rehabilitation (but I won't digress into that right now). Trust me, the ones in California are so horrible.

The judges have descretion depending on the state to sentence. But in most cases I hear about, they do not, I repeat, do not break from what the jury requests unless there is an extreme circumstance.
 
For epistemological reasons, the death penalty is always wrong.

That's because, no matter how sure you are, you might be deceived or mistaken. That's the nature of existence here on earth.

Unless you're God, you might have the wrong guy.

For this reason, we must try never to inflict an irreversible penalty on anyone.

It's playing God. You can't do it.
 
It is part of the human psyche to seek revenge against enemies and transgressors. The philosophy of “tit-for-tat” is well documented by religious and historical reference. The Old Testament recognized the “eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth” - to do otherwise would be against human nature, and the Bible, for all of its superstitious nonsense, at least portrays man as he is. Only in the New Testament does Christ preach to turn the other cheek; but then he was an unworldly philosopher. Revenge gives us the illusion of evening the score; but the sad truth is that by taking revenge, we have only added to the debit column.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom