Capital Punishment

[Cybercode]

As you all learned, there are two instances where criminals were put to death over night. One in Ohio and the other in Florida. Let the debating begin.

[Rawwwrr]

I'm against it.

What gives anyone the right to kill another person?


Is it because they killed someone, which you consider wrong?
How does killing them somehow become okay? Double standard.


Then there's the fact that it's cheaper to give them life in prison.
Plus the fact that many criminals really aren't fully responsible for their actions, even psychopaths aren't seeing as it's their genetics that make them do it - there's no free will involved there. Can you really justify killing someone who has at the least severely diminished free will in committing their crimes?


Plus the obvious huge issue of "What if they're innocent and you kill thm anyway?". We can never be 100% sure, at the moment we're seeing dozens of cases in this past year where 'criminals' who were executed have been proven innocent post-portem. It's no use doing it after you've already killed them! You can't bring them back!

[Jess]

I'm against it as well. So we show killing is wrong by killing killers? Killing them is too easy of a way out for them. They deserve a harsher punishment - life in prison (as long as they are definitely guilty)

and also those that are mentally ill. I don't see it right to execute them when they didn't fully understand their actions.

[soccerbo]

i have thought about this so much and i cant pick a side

[StoppingTime]

I dont disprove of the death sentence in extreme cases, but I think it is used too much.

For example, the Cheshire home invasion. (Info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders), yes its Wiki, but thats all that's needed now)

This is when the death penalty should be used. They are 100% sure who committed the crimes. They were convicted on 12 capitol felonies and 31 other counts.

Other than extreme cases like this, I'm kind of split on the issue. If they aren't 100% sure who committed the offense, it definitely shouldn't be used.
Though this quote by Jon (Donkey, Rafiki), really does make sense to me

We kill people who kill people to show others that killing is wrong

[Kuervo]

i agree ^^ with StoppingTime. i believe that it should only be use if it will be better for the good of the community.

[Dimitri]

I am sorry but my personal opinion is that an Express Lane needs put in, when convicted you need to be taken out back of the court house and put down with a shot gun, just saying....like they did with Old Yeller....

[Sleepwalking]

America lives in the past.
I believe, no matter what crime the person did, they should not be executed.
It's inhumane. Yeah yeah, they could have killed people but still.
I hate the idea that people decide whether or not to end somebody's life. They are murderers in themselves.
Then people were proven innocent after being executed. It turns my stomach what they could of been thinking. The justice system is corrupt, and execution needs to be ruled out, NOW, before anymore innocents are killed.

[kenoloor]

I researched different methods of execution in America for a paper, and what I found disgusted even a heartless bitch like me.

Hanging is still a method of execution in Delaware and Washington.
Firing squad is an alternative to lethal injection in Utah. It was last used in 2010.
Five states still have gas chambers legal.
35 of 36 states where the death penalty is legal use lethal injection as a primary device for execution.
The electric chair is not used as a primary means of execution in any state, but is "available" in many.

Just thought everyone would like to know some statistics.

It absolute disgusts me that hanging, firing squad and gas chambers are all legal in the US. I'm not a fan of the death penalty. I think it's ridiculous that the government thinks they have the right to kill people.
I also think its somewhat ludicrous that, for the most part, people who are pro-death penalty are also pro-life, and their argument is "killing babies is bad!" Right, but killing adults is totally fine. Yeah, okay.

[Jess]

I researched different methods of execution in America for a paper, and what I found disgusted even a heartless bitch like me.

Hanging is still a method of execution in Delaware and Washington.
Firing squad is an alternative to lethal injection in Utah. It was last used in 1996.
Five states still have gas chambers legal.
35 of 36 states where the death penalty is legal use lethal injection as a primary device for execution.
The electric chair is not used as a primary means of execution in any state, but is available in many.

Just thought everyone would like to know some statistics.

It absolute disgusts me that hanging, firing squad and gas chambers are all legal in the US. I'm not a fan of the death penalty. I think it's ridiculous that the government thinks they have the right to kill people.
I also think its somewhat ludicrous that, for the most part, people who are pro-death penalty are also pro-life, and their argument is "killing babies is bad!" Right, but killing adults is totally fine. Yeah, okay.

what??? hanging is still a method of execution? sick!

[kenoloor]

Sad to say, but the firing squad was last used in 2010 to kill Ronnie Lee Gardner
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Lee_Gardner)

That revolts me. But thanks for pointing that out. I'll fix it.

[Jean Poutine]

When you think "hanging prisoners" don't think about "suicide hanging", they're different. In executions, hanging breaks the neck when correctly done. It's painless. Less so when not done correctly, I suppose. When one hangs himself, one chokes. As someone who is choked out on a regular basis I can tell you that it's not fun at all.

I used to think the death penalty was the solution. We need alternative justice. We need restorative justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorative_justice).

Repressive justice should be applied only in exceptional cases, such as crimes against humanity, serial killings, and so on.

[kenoloor]

When you think "hanging prisoners" don't think about "suicide hanging", they're different. In executions, hanging breaks the neck when correctly done. It's painless. Less so when not done correctly, I suppose. When one hangs himself, one chokes. As someone who is choked out on a regular basis I can tell you that it's not fun at all.

I used to think the death penalty was the solution. We need alternative justice. We need restorative justice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorative_justice).

Repressive justice should be applied only in exceptional cases, such as crimes against humanity, serial killings, and so on.

I'm going to rep you five thousand times for this.

[huginnmuninn]

I am sorry but my personal opinion is that an Express Lane needs put in, when convicted you need to be taken out back of the court house and put down with a shot gun, just saying....like they did with Old Yeller....

yep i agree with you. it would slow the number of crimes and help with the over population in prisons.

[deadpie]

Sad to say, but the firing squad was last used in 2010 to kill Ronnie Lee Gardner
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Lee_Gardner)

Just fucking sickening. The Troy Davis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Davis) case was something that I really got into. So fucking horrible. I actually cried the night he was executed, because it just was the last straw for me. After that I lost all my respect for this country. Just fucking nasty. People all over the world, including a former president and the Pope spoke out that he shouldn't be executed, but because Georgia is a racist blood thirsty pile of shit country, it happened.

It's worse here in Texas where I live. They're not even aloud to have a last meal here, plus we've got the highest number of executions in US. This is the part where you Conservatives with your amazing Jesus loving morals start clapping.

[Levy]

Capital punishment isn't bad in my view, but is it really a good criminal deterrent? People are sent to death for extreme crimes like capital murder, which usually is a crime of passion, so do you think that the criminal is going to stand by and think that he, or she, is going to be put to death for this? But, if a person is put to death, it ensures that they will surely never kill again.

[Amaryllis]

Most of the time I think capital punishment is complete bullshit. You're teaching people not to kill by killing someone else. What right does anyone have to kill anyone, regardless of their authority? How accurate can you really be when determining the guilt of a person?

Innocent people are executed each year for crimes they did not commit or crimes that did not deserve such punishment. People wait in jails for 10 years or more before their fate is chosen, for some this is death and for others it's decades of wasted time. No matter what anyone says or whatever measures placed, humans will be humans. There are flaws in the justice system.

What are they teaching their kids here? What are we? That if someone punches you in the face, you should punch them back? That if someone insults you, you should insult them? This world is and will end up in an endless cycle of hate, anger and vengeance. Each time an offender is executed, the anger in people grow. People protest and scream in rage whenever someone is executed. This will only lead to more crimes and more hate.

Many people believe capital punishment is "retribution", but is it really? How is killing the person who killed someone dear going to bring them back to life? They're gone. You can't change that. If they're dead, they're dead. The non-existent don't give a damn. If you want someone to pay, isn't imprisonment a much better choice? But even that is debatable.

How does capital punishment make us look? It's like saying, if you fuck up, that's it. You're fucked and you don't deserve another chance. It could have just been a moment of insecurity, rage and blindness. They aren't necessarily horrible, "evil" people. They could have redeemed themselves had they been given the chance.

Like betwixt said, you can't kill people who kill people to show killing people is wrong.

[Donkey]

Legal justice should work for both the victim and perpetrators of crime. That means re-building and re-socialising criminals; for the people that commit such acts are usually the victims of their own mental illness. The punishment systems we have in place in the USA and the UK (throwing someone in jail for ten years, hope for the best - the USA being the worst with 1% of its population in prison) do not work. Greenland don't have closed prisons; they have correctional facilities. And people in Greenland are reintroduced into society and significantly less re-offend than in our countries.

[huginnmuninn]

There's no evidence that it's a deterrent at all (See here) (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-about-deterrence-and-death-penalty), and it actually costs the state and taxpayers more money to put people to death than to give them life without parole. (See here) (https://death.rdsecure.org/article.php?id=42)

they dont actually use the death penalty that much if they would increase the amount of people it might actually be a deterent.

if they executed people the smart way like a bullet or a noose it would cost a lot less money

[Levy]

if they executed people the smart way like a bullet or a noose it would cost a lot less money

It's true, if they did resort to the cheaper methods it would be financially great, after all it cost a lot of money just to keep a person in jail and not kill them.

[Levy]

The judicial process does take money, but a 30 cent bullet or a rope that has multiple uses generally cost less. The cost of life imprisonment without parole isn't something you can just overlook. You would think you can just lock them up and give the bread and water, but no.

[Levy]

Well, also it depends on the person. I tend to be more a bit more radical than the average fellow Joe. :/
The only real problem I have with the death penalty, is the chance that you condemned an innocent person to death. Aside from that, it's nice to have a deviant out of society.

[markus]

the people who execute people are no better that the people who are murders. Im pleased it doesnt happen here. Better to let them think about what they did for life and pay that way

[MisterSix]

I think it should be a case by case basis.
The reason they use methods like injection, gas chamber and electric chair is to make it easier for the executioner. Its not as easy these days to find a hangman or a firing squad. Thats why they use a machine to inject them with poison now

[Neptune]

Against. Killing a person doesn't solve anything, does it? It doesn't bring back the dead. Put pictures of who they killed in their prison rooms, all over the walls - and - make sure they remember for the rest of their life. If you're completely sure, for example, the Cheshire Home Invasion Rapes & Murders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders) - then you should put them in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives, they deserve it.

[mac42]

Capital punishment is an outdated form of punishment. Very Medieval, and kind of gruesome. I know overcrowding is an issue in the USA, but it is contradicting to fight murder with murder.

[CrashingWaves]

I think it would be worse to be stuck in jail with no hope in getting out that to just be sentenced to death.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind

[mac42]

I agree, I think it is almost worse to have to rot away in a jail cell so.. do the crime, do LOTS of time.

[jacknife]

I do not believe in objective morality, so the issue of whether the death penalty is "right" or "wrong" does not mean much to me.

For the most part, I am more concerned with the pragmatic cost-benefit analysis of issues; and while I have not studied this issue extensively, I do have a bit to say: the death penalty does little-to-nothing to avert crime; it costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them in jail for life; society gains nothing positive from executing someone who could be providing labor; and, further, it has been shown retroactively that innocent people have been executed - so how many lives have been destroyed by an ineffective means of social rehabilitation?

Though that is part of the problem to begin with - justice is seen as "getting even" (exacting punishment) rather than rehabilitating criminals to be a "good" part of society.

Having said all that, I admit I also find the death penalty disgusting in a moral sense.

[pineinchneis]

how can the us change the world when they put more people to death in 2010 than somalia, syria, iraq and bangladesh. one of the few good things about being in the eu is that we arent allowed to execute people. as a result the only country in europe with capital punishment is belarus. if the us really does feel the need for the death penalty, take a leaf from india and indonesia's books. they have the death penalty but only use it in the most extreme of circumstances (for example mass murder/masscre). Texas on the other hand should be ashamed of itself: putting over 1000 to death since the 1970s is disgraceful and not how a supposedly civilised state should behave. some of the methods used are also horrific as well: hanging, gassing and firing squad. i applaud states like illinois who have aboloshed the death penalty and the rest of the states should follow their example.

[Bath]

I think the death penalty is stupid.

It's an easy escape. Instead of getting what they deserve, they escape into nothingness, nonexistence. How lovely.

[Neptune]

how can the us change the world when they put more people to death in 2010 than somalia, syria, iraq and bangladesh. one of the few good things about being in the eu is that we arent allowed to execute people. as a result the only country in europe with capital punishment is belarus. if the us really does feel the need for the death penalty, take a leaf from india and indonesia's books. they have the death penalty but only use it in the most extreme of circumstances (for example mass murder/masscre). Texas on the other hand should be ashamed of itself: putting over 1000 to death since the 1970s is disgraceful and not how a supposedly civilised state should behave. some of the methods used are also horrific as well: hanging, gassing and firing squad. i applaud states like illinois who have aboloshed the death penalty and the rest of the states should follow their example.


Texas shouldn't be a representative of the United States but sadly, most states are like them. Most people agree with your opinion, they're barbaric with the amount of people they kill every year. In California, we currently have 713 people on Death Row, that's way too much in my opinion. How many of those are actually guilty of their crimes? But only 13 people have been executed since 1976, so, I guess, it's not really used that often. But eventually it'll be outlawed, eventually. Hopefully soon. I hope that Oregon bans it forever, and, have California and Washington follow.

[Djentleman]

CP should only be brought onto those who have definitive evidence brought out against their crime(s). Secondly if their crime is 100% proven fact and is of serious grounds, then CP should not be hesitated to be used. If they're able to do the crime then they sure as hell are able to pay the time. If a crime you commit leads the court to believe that you can't be rehabilitated, then why waste the time, money and space of the government.

However! If the person is done for something on the grounds of a witness with an illogical explanation and the evidence is scarce yet still haunting, then being locked up is a worthy solution.

[Djentleman]

Who are we to say that somebody can't be rehabilitated?



Death sentences result in far more wasted time and money than the alternative of life sentences. As for space, unless you start executing thousands a year like the PRC it'll barely make a difference.

Well if someone is a convicted serial rapist/paedophiles, what makes you think they'll change they're mind about what they fancy? Those actions are past experiences which have been brewed to boil and has flooded over resulting in their actions and foreseeable consequences.

Would you give someone a second chance after molesting, sexually abusing, raping or murdering your family member(s) or you?

Now about the death sentences being wasted time. They should just give that person under strong grounds of evidence a maximum of a week to live then do away with them. Chuck their bodies in a furnace and done. As far as I know that sounds pretty cost effective and quick.

[Djentleman]

Okay, fair point. But these prisoners shouldn't be given the luxuries they are getting today. Bread, water, rice and that's it. Square cement cell, a bog and that's it. The prisoners here have more things in their cell that some families in their homes!

[Genghis Khan]

Okay, fair point. But these prisoners shouldn't be given the luxuries they are getting today. Bread, water, rice and that's it. Square cement cell, a bog and that's it. The prisoners here have more things in their cell that some families in their homes!

What luxuries are they getting exactly?

[embers]

What luxuries are they getting exactly?

Lots of prisons give prisoners more than what's required, and sometimes it's a serious drain of money. Uh, an example thrown about a lot is prisoners being able to take/use xboxes in prison.

[Djentleman]

Lots of prisons give prisoners more than what's required, and sometimes it's a serious drain of money. Uh, an example thrown about a lot is prisoners being able to take/use xboxes in prison.

This. They're getting quality meals, huge televisions with consoles of their choice. They're getting computers with internet...

The list goes on. Prisons aren't what they uses to be. People who live on hard times find it easier to just commit a crime and be locked away with a higher quality of living they are getting

[Church]

Only war criminals and serial killers who are known to be guilty without a chance of being innocent should be put to death. No one else.

[Rawwwrr]

This. They're getting quality meals, huge televisions with consoles of their choice. They're getting computers with internet...

While this is true in some cases, be careful not to generalise. This is not the case in most prisons, and even then I have problems believing that hardened prisoners are given plasma screen TVs. It sounds like something the Daily Mail would write about, and if it sounds like something the Daily Mail would write about then I automatically believe the exact opposite to be the case.

The list goes on. Prisons aren't what they uses to be. People who live on hard times find it easier to just commit a crime and be locked away with a higher quality of living they are getting


So your alternative is KILL ALL OF THEM! Or just lower prison life quality standards? Because that's for a different thread.

[Amaryllis]

So your alternative is KILL ALL OF THEM! Or just lower prison life quality standards? Because that's for a different thread.
The alternative would be to give them the choice of life in prison or capital punishment.

While this is true in some cases, be careful not to generalise. This is not the case in most prisons, and even then I have problems believing that hardened prisoners are given plasma screen TVs. It sounds like something the Daily Mail would write about, and if it sounds like something the Daily Mail would write about then I automatically believe the exact opposite to be the case.
It depends. Were you to go to most parts of Asia - the prisons would be far from luxurious. However, there are some luxury prisons in Britain, Norway and so on. A man jailed for repeatedly stabbing his wife said he enjoyed his luxury life in prison and that he was "Better off inside".

Of course, some prisoners still have to go through the harsh conditions of traditional prisons.

But come on... Leoben Justice Centre, Steiermark, Austria.
http://sabbah.biz/mt/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/prison-leoben12.jpg
http://sabbah.biz/mt/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/prison-leoben4.jpg
http://sabbah.biz/mt/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/prison-leoben7.jpg
"Justice" centre my ass. I don't know about you but if I were them, I wouldn't be sorry I did whatever "wrong" I did.

Oxford Federal Correctional Institution
"The detainee can participate in aerobics, art, nutrition classes, and stress reduction."

Duluth Federal Prison Camp
They have a supply of musical instruments, including pianos, drums and acoustic guitars.

Montgomery Federal Prison Camp
At Montgomery FPC there’s vocational training for you to learn how to be a painter, a cook, a paralegal, and more. Well, maybe this isn't so bad. At least they'll make new lives for themselves.

Halden Prison, Norway
http://static.binscorner.com/n/norways-luxury-prison/127298072237.jpg

But...
JnY9Kxh2rP8

Only war criminals and serial killers who are known to be guilty without a chance of being innocent should be put to death. No one else.
Why "serial" killers? Wether you kill one, two or 10, you've still killed. Of course, more lives have been destroyed but no matter how many you kill, you've still killed.

That person you kill will create a ripple effect, you will hurt all of those who love them. Imagine if this man killed one person and you said "Hey, he shouldn't be put to death. It's just one!" and he kills again. What are you going to say and do then?

Well if someone is a convicted serial rapist/paedophiles, what makes you think they'll change they're mind about what they fancy? Those actions are past experiences which have been brewed to boil and has flooded over resulting in their actions and foreseeable consequences.

Would you give someone a second chance after molesting, sexually abusing, raping or murdering your family member(s) or you?
Okay, hold on hold on. Why must it be sexual?

But let's say you were raped by a pedophile - why on earth would you want him dead? He doesn't learn from it, he doesn't suffer, he doesn't feel anything - he's too busy being dead. Of course, you don't want him to hurt anyone else - but if the chances of him escaping from prison are unlikely, well, why not just give him the choice?

Generally, people who murder and harm others have some reason behind it. Does this justify their actions and make it okay, no, of course not. But should we say "Fuck it. He's hopeless! Let's just kill him off!"? No. That is completely inhumane. No one has the right to strip someone of their life. If he wants capital punishment instead of prison, sure. That's his decision. But no one can make that for him - because he's a person nonetheless.

Now about the death sentences being wasted time. They should just give that person under strong grounds of evidence a maximum of a week to live then do away with them. Chuck their bodies in a furnace and done. As far as I know that sounds pretty cost effective and quick.
o_____O

So let's say someone was getting beaten up by her relatives daily. One day, she snaps and shoots them all. Instead of helping her cope and recover from the trauma and abuse - we throw her in a fire along with all the other criminals as we see fit.

Huh.

[Djentleman]

Okay fair point. But a mark down really? In the name of a debate...sheesh.

Anyways, I agree with your points, but am still hindered by the prospect of over crowding prisons which at the end of the day are just completely reaping the tax fund. No, I don't believe everyone person should be executed, but I also don't think the possibilities should be overlooked. You saying when we caught Bin Laden, we should have just stuck him in a cell for eternity to think about all the joys that he brought us?

Wouldn't it be more inhumane to have someone suffer for the rest of their life than to rather get them rid of?

I'm going to have a couple of reds by the end of this damned debate lmao.

[Slytherin_Prince]

I'm in favour of capital punishment, actually. Some people are simply too dangerous to let live. For the greater good, sacrifices will have to be made. It's also not so much about showing that killing is wrong by killing someone, nor is it so much a deterrent. It's about justice. How are we supposed to answer to society when we allow people to live who don't deserve it in any way? Some crimes are simply too severe to be punishable by imprisonment. Besides, I've seen both the comments "But it's inhumane" and "but life imprisonment is worse, so it'll make them suffer more.". Don't they contradict one another? It's more humane to end one's life than to imprison someone for life. By using capital punishment, we therefore retain our humanity.

Most sincerely,
Robert.

[MisterSix]

What ever happened to the famous saying, "Do unto others as you would have done to you."?
The bible says that executions are fine.

[kenoloor]

What ever happened to the famous saying, "Do unto others as you would have done to you."?
The bible says that executions are fine.

The Bible says slavery is fine.

[Amaryllis]

Okay, in -no way- am I for capital punishment but Slytherin_Prince has made some good points and we should try to see it from the pro-capital punishment point of view to better understand why many feel the way they do.

We're all human, no matter what we've done. Who are we to say that certain people live and others die?
Quoting the words of a prosecuting attorney: "...there are some defendants who have earned the ultimate punishment our society has to offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances present. I believe life is sacred. It cheapens the life of an innocent murder victim to say that society has no right to keep the murderer from ever killing again. In my view, society has not only the right, but the duty to act in self defense to protect the innocent."

No, it isn't. It's about revenge. How do you think the condemned's family feels? When somebody is sentenced to death, Lady Justice's scales become unbalanced as it isn't being fair to both families. A good 200 years from now, people will look back on us and think "how could they do such barbaric things to their own people?"
It is, somewhat, about justice. Many people who have had the most important people in their lives taken from them, a son or daughter, a partner for life, a parent or old friend, want the person who wronged them dead. They think "If my daughter's life was cut short and taken from her against her will, what right does this person have to live?"

Yes, it is revenge. Is it the "right" thing to do? Perhaps not. But is it understandable? Definitely.

You're the one contradicting yourself. You say that some crimes are too severe to be punished by imprisonment, but then you say that capital punishment is more humane than imprisonment?
He isn't necessarily contradicting himself, he's simply addressing the views of those of us who are against capital punishment.

Another common argument we tend to use is "capital punishment doesn't really deter crime rates." Well, of course not. There are about 15 executions for every 18000 murders. Capital punishment truly isn't that common. Not every murderer and serial killer is put to death. It is often only used in modern day as the absolute last resort.

Executions are much more publicised when in reality, it rarely happens.

The death penalty doesn't solve anything, and it never has. It's disgusting that victim's families want the same trauma that they suffered to happen to another family and human. It's just as bad... it doesn't matter who initiated the killing. It's a practice that belongs in the middle ages and there's just far too much going on in this world already to be executing people left, right and centre. The fact that it's still being used in 2011 is beyond me.
How is it disgusting? The absolute pain, suffering, trauma and loss the victim's loved ones have to go through is terrible. They lost someone they held dear. Would you not feel angry were you in their shoes? Would you feel safe and glad if these murderers were allowed to walk free after 20 years? When your 10 year old baby boy will never reach high school? When his last moments were spent in utter fear and pain?

Capital punishment is not a common occurrence in most countries. Of course, let us hope all countries won't follow the footsteps of say - Malaysia - and make illegal drug dealing punishable by death. Now -that- is complete bullshit. If capital punishment must exist - it should only be used on people who are guilty of horrendous crimes without a single doubt of his or her guilt.

[Genghis Khan]

Essentially the arguments I've heard from people who are pro-death penalty are appeals to emotion and this notion that 'justice' is somehow served by revenge.

Obviously if you've had someone you really love taken away from you then it's understandable why you'd be in favour of it, but that doesn't mean it's justifiable.

If someone has committed murder, the way I see it there was some reason why they did it, it's unlikely it'd be a good reason, but there was something that triggered it. I know it'd take a lot of willpower on my behalf to just get up a stab a person, what's more, live with the fact that I've taken their life away. So instead of just giving up on humanity and advocating that those who've done something wrong need to be put to death, at least try to consider what lead them to do it. It could've been a bad past or a tough decision. Maybe worse things happened to them when they were young. Even though chances seem unlikely people actually do change and they should be given a second chance to redeem themselves instead of having their problems repudiated because of an emotional state of mind. Emotional states often lead to illogical decisions, the death penalty being one of them.

[Slytherin_Prince]

We're all human, no matter what we've done. Who are we to say that certain people live and others die?

It's not about that. It's simply a punishment. When the crime is severe enough, I think it's perfectly justifiable to pass judgment. The moment they committed such an act, they placed their life in our hands. Who are we to say? The judges.

No, it isn't. It's about revenge. How do you think the condemned's family feels? When somebody is sentenced to death, Lady Justice's scales become unbalanced as it isn't being fair to both families. A good 200 years from now, people will look back on us and think "how could they do such barbaric things to their own people?"


I find life imprisonment more barbaric than any form of capital punishment. And it's not about revenge. I couldn't care less about wanting to get back at the person, I would only care for justice. There's a big difference between justice and revenge.


You're the one contradicting yourself. You say that some crimes are too severe to be punished by imprisonment, but then you say that capital punishment is more humane than imprisonment?

That is no contradiction. The death penalty is the most severe form of punishment, as is stated in the law. Life imprisonment, however, is inhumane, whereas the death penalty, a quick and effective, mostly painless, death, is much more humane. It's a way to punish people who have committed the most horrible of atrocities, whilst retaining what makes us human. So I am not the one who's contradicting himself.

The death penalty doesn't solve anything, and it never has. It's disgusting that victim's families want the same trauma that they suffered to happen to another family and human. It's just as bad... it doesn't matter who initiated the killing. It's a practice that belongs in the middle ages and there's just far too much going on in this world already to be executing people left, right and centre. The fact that it's still being used in 2011 is beyond me.

You still assume it's about revenge. About wanting to inflict the same pain on another person and his/her family. It is not about that at all. It's just pure, rational, objective justice. We pass judgment based not on emotion (anger, grief), but on cold, hard facts. Some people simply do not deserve to live. Why? Because of what they have done. Their actions have made that so, not our judgment. It has nothing to do with some form of retaliation. That's preposterous. Also, it does not belong in the middle ages. It's existed for thousands of years, and it still applies to some people. I see no reason to abolish it now.

Most sincerely,
Robert.

[embers]

I find life imprisonment more barbaric than any form of capital punishment. And it's not about revenge. I couldn't care less about wanting to get back at the person, I would only care for justice. There's a big difference between justice and revenge.

Right, you find life imprisonment more barbaric than revenge. What someone may perceive as harsh won't be so to somebody else. In that sense which punishment is worse is subjective to what your own personal convictions about the matter are.

That is no contradiction. The death penalty is the most severe form of punishment, as is stated in the law. Life imprisonment, however, is inhumane, whereas the death penalty, a quick and effective, mostly painless, death, is much more humane. It's a way to punish people who have committed the most horrible of atrocities, whilst retaining what makes us human. So I am not the one who's contradicting himself.

Why are people given larger sentences for murder than they would be given for kidnapping (ie, imprisonment)?

I think that if a government is trying to promote a level of sanity, or being humane, then they shouldn't do the most hypocritical of things which is to promote being humane by doing something that's considered 'inhumane' when not done by the government.

In thinking of levels of how 'humane' it really is, think of the impacts of each sentence on not just the criminal. I'd deem it more inhumane to take a family member's life from families that do not deserve the emotional trauma in the process of carrying out 'justice' than to keep the person alive. I'd deem it more inhumane to remove any chance of redemption / revoking the decision due to a mistake in the judicial process.

You still assume it's about revenge. About wanting to inflict the same pain on another person and his/her family. It is not about that at all. It's just pure, rational, objective justice.

Consider what's more rational based on what I just said above: is it more rational to carry out justice while harming more than JUST the victim? Is it more rational to carry out an irrevocable sentence when the criminal has a chance of being innocent?

We pass judgment based not on emotion (anger, grief), but on cold, hard facts.

On the contrary, capital punishment is very much based on a system of intolerance and lack of empathy. There is no murder with a lack of motive, and the only cases which object to that are ones in which the accused are mentally ill, in which case it would simply be wrong on a whole other scale to kill them rather than send them to an institution. What lots of people in favour of capital punishment fail to understand is that in the heat of the moment, when emotions become severe, thinking becomes irrational, and is never representative of the actual character. To sentence someone to death based on something they deeply regret and recognise they should have done - ie, they are able to be reintegrated into society even without plans of reform - is in my opinion just barbaric.

Some people simply do not deserve to live. Why? Because of what they have done. Their actions have made that so, not our judgment.

Nope. Where do you draw the line and why do you draw it there?

It has nothing to do with some form of retaliation. That's preposterous. Also, it does not belong in the middle ages. It's existed for thousands of years, and it still applies to some people. I see no reason to abolish it now.

It does belong in the past. You just can't represent 'justice' if you even fail to understand how human psychology work and how people think, and base judgements on 'person did this = person deserves this' rather than look at cases on an individual basis.

Besides, the death penalty's just an absolute gateway to corruption and fascism. Most countries with capital punishment implemented use it to serve political interests that are totally besides 'justice'.

[kenoloor]

The government states that killing is wrong... but it's fine for them to do it? As I said before 2 wrongs don't make a right, and it's a double standard.

The government also says that walking up to strangers and demanding a certain percentage of their income or else is wrong, but they still do that.

[Clawhammer]

Here's my unpopular opinion: some people just need to be dead. You make the choice when you commit the crime. Of course, only in specific situations is capital punishment necessary. But I'm keeping it that simple. Don't want no pardon for the way I see it.

[kenoloor]

Here's my unpopular opinion: some people just need to be dead. You make the choice when you commit the crime. Of course, only in specific situations is capital punishment necessary. But I'm keeping it that simple. Don't want no pardon for the way I see it.

So what crimes should result in capital punishment?

[Clawhammer]

So what crimes should result in capital punishment?

Rapists, child molesters, murderers... Yes, I am aware that it gets more complicated than this. If it is proven, and they were doing so in full awareness (sobriety), then they made the choice. If under the influence of drugs or alcohol, well, that's off topic, but I don't support capital punishment in these cases.

[Genghis Khan]

Rapists, child molesters, murderers...

oh yeah people just become child molesters because they want to so it's cool to kill them obviously it's all their fault and this is justice.

[kenoloor]

Really? They obviously have a problem and they need to be rehabilitated. We can't just kill them off like their worthless.

Apparently we can...

[Clawhammer]

Ah, so I guess people don't choose their own consequences any more... If someone murdered a family member of yours, do you want them to go to a rehab which has proven fallible in past and then get off free later? If someone raped your 5-year-old little sister, would you? If they raped your mother, would you?

[bigjohnson]

i live in florida and yes we do but people to death rather quick, but we do give them there time. i belive texas is a little faster.

[huginnmuninn]

Really? They obviously have a problem and they need to be rehabilitated. We can't just kill them off like their worthless.

Its called self control... if they cant control themselves then they should be given a chance to rehabilitate if that doesnt work and they commit the crime again then death penalty. People should be given the chance to redeem themselves but if they make the same mistakes over and over well then they arent going to change.

[Djentleman]

Okay, so I'm currently reading a book on the 7 Deadly Sins by Corey Taylor. This is his take on Murderers and CP.

"If you take a life, you forfeit your own. That may be a very right wing way to view it, but to me some shit is just fucking necessary. Am I the only one in the world who can draw a conclusion that murder in the world has accelerated since the rapid decrease in executions? I think it is because there are no repercussions anymore.
If you kill someone and you get convicted, there is a good chance you will have a better life than you had before. You will get fed, you will get a bed and you will have access to an education, an exercise program and a fairly trained physician. No one lives in fear of breaking the law. We have taken the last consequence for taking a life away. The ultimate sin should have the ultimate penalty. I do not mean for those whose guilt is on the fence; this form of punishment has no room for ambiguity. I mean if you are guilty of murder beyond a shadow of a doubt, you deserve to die, period. You deserve to be taken out behind the shed and destroyed.
Murder is a violation of your human membership. Trust me: I distinguish between murder and circumstances like death on the battlefield or self-defence against abuse or other criminal activity. I am talking about premeditated, cold-blooded murder. There are people in this world who want to watch it all turn to ash and gray and there is no helping them. No form of rehabilitation will bring them back from the cool black of evil. The kind of numbness is a death inside the human soul, an exit of the compassion that helps is all do incredible things for each other. There are ghouls and there are saviours among us all. Keeping the ghouls around is a waste of time. If we hope to achieve greatness, we must prove there is punishment on this plane of existence. Stop leaving the judgments to a supposed Devine Spirit; the ignorant do not care that "God is going to send them to hell". Send them a real message: that we will not tolerate trespasses against our brothers, sisters, children, pets. Vengeance and justice are luxuries we can afford."

[Genghis Khan]

Ah, so I guess people don't choose their own consequences any more... If someone murdered a family member of yours, do you want them to go to a rehab which has proven fallible in past and then get off free later? If someone raped your 5-year-old little sister, would you? If they raped your mother, would you?

Does putting someone to death bring your sister's virginity back? Obviously anyone in that situation would feel like putting the other person to death but that's because you're in a state of mind where you cannot trust yourself to make rational choices, and as far as I'm aware it's never rational to take another person's life to either prove a point to society about how bad murder is and to fulfill retribution-oriented desires.

[Amaryllis]

Don't take it personally, Rawal :) [-]But I'm taking it personally.[/-]

oh yeah people just become child molesters because they want to so it's cool to kill them obviously it's all their fault and this is justice.
Pedophilia may or may not be a mental illness. For the sake of argument - let's say it is. Simply because they have a mental illness that attracts them to children, does not justify their actions were they to molest a child.

You cannot say it isn't all their fault - because it is. Unless a person is holding a gun to their head and saying "Fuck that little kid in the ass or I'll kill you and everyone else you love." It is their fault.

Perhaps rapists are horny, but does this mean they can put partial blame on their arousal? If a homosexual male rapes another male, can you justify it and say "It isn't all their fault because they're gay"?

After all I've told you - how could you say "oh yeah people just become child molesters because they want to" in such a sarcastic manner? Do all murderers kill people against their will?

Be 8 years old and held down, beaten and raped by an adult you were meant to trust before you make such outrageous comments.

Does putting someone to death bring your sister's virginity back? Obviously anyone in that situation would feel like putting the other person to death but that's because you're in a state of mind where you cannot trust yourself to make rational choices, and as far as I'm aware it's never rational to take another person's life to either prove a point to society about how bad murder is and to fulfill retribution-oriented desires.
Not everyone in that situation feels the need to put their abuser to death, just as not every one of them in the situation mentioned above acts irrationally and on impulse.

You clearly stated "it's never rational to take another person's life to either prove a point to society about how bad murder is and to fulfill retribution-oriented desired" but it is indeed okay to kill another for the sake of hatred, anger and/or boredom? Why do you believe these are the only reasons for capital punishment? How many people do you believe are subjected to capital punishment? Because only a dozen are out of tens of thousands.

[Genghis Khan]

Pedophilia may or may not be a mental illness. For the sake of argument - let's say it is. Simply because they have a mental illness that attracts them to children, does not justify their actions were they to molest a child.

I never said it justifies their actions, I stated that it's not entirely the pedophile's fault in so far as they probably had a bad past too, or maybe something horrible happened to them at an earlier stage that made them want to do what they do. Regardless of what caused it, the action is never justified and I'd never promote or recommend pedophilia.

You cannot say it isn't all their fault - because it is. Unless a person is holding a gun to their head and saying "Fuck that little kid in the ass or I'll kill you and everyone else you love." It is their fault.

That's a slightly inhumane approach to mental illnesses but whatever.

Perhaps rapists are horny, but does this mean they can put partial blame on their arousal? If a homosexual male rapes another male, can you justify it and say "It isn't all their fault because they're gay"?

This is assuming most paedophiles and rapists do it purely because of their arousal. They don't usually. It's more psychological than that.

You clearly stated "it's never rational to take another person's life to either prove a point to society about how bad murder is and to fulfill retribution-oriented desired" but it is indeed okay to kill another for the sake of hatred, anger and/or boredom?

Uh, no?

[Short Circuit]

Ok, so you have Capital Punishment in the US, does this make it a deterrent to criminals not to take other peoples life? NO! So what is the point of having it? How many people have been sent to the gallows, gassed, or had the lethal injection, then years down the line, have been proven innocent?

I am not in favour of Capital Punishment, but the prison services is full to breaking point, and I do not know what the alternative is.

[karl]

comment withdrawn

[Clawhammer]

Does putting someone to death bring your sister's virginity back? Obviously anyone in that situation would feel like putting the other person to death but that's because you're in a state of mind where you cannot trust yourself to make rational choices, and as far as I'm aware it's never rational to take another person's life to either prove a point to society about how bad murder is and to fulfill retribution-oriented desires.

How about to remove a threat to society for greater future benefit? Apparently the one who committed murder is the one who wanted to take another life and was irrational. It's the way the world works, men die in wars because they were a threat to the other side, people kill the wolves who kill their livestock, etc. Why should a human being, who knows the consequences and does it anyway, be an exception to this?

[Amaryllis]

I never said it justifies their actions, I stated that it's not entirely the pedophile's fault in so far as they probably had a bad past too, or maybe something horrible happened to them at an earlier stage that made them want to do what they do.

Regardless of what caused it, the action is never justified and I'd never promote or recommend pedophilia.
Pedophilia is a paraphilia. A pedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to children.

No, it is not a pedophile's fault if he or she is attracted to children. But unless the act of sexually abusing a child were cause by say, schizophrenia, and they believed god asked them to rape children, then the abuser is at fault. The difference between pedophilia and schizophrenia is pedophiles do not believe wholeheartedly that they -must- rape children.

The act of pedophilia is the problem - if a pedophile masturbates to thoughts of little girls giving him hand jobs - fine. As long as he does not act on those fantasies.

Now, if rapists who feel pleasure from the misery of children are not completely at fault because they "suffer from pedophilia". Does this mean people with Gerontophilia who rape the elderly are not completely at fault, either? And should not receive the same punishments as any other rapist?

What of Gynemimetophilia - a sexual attraction to transgender women? Menophilia? Does that justify the act of raping a woman while she's menstruating? Zoophilia? Should people who have sex with their dogs not be charged? Maybe they were fucked by dogs at an early age!

What if sexual arousal from rape were a mental illness? Does this mean all rapists should not be "treated so harshly"? Because dacryphilia does exist - it's an arousal from tears or crying. Erotophonophilia is when one is sexually aroused by murder. Oh look! Raptophilia exists! A sexual attraction to rape - and it's under the same mental disorder category as pedophilia.

If you're going to classify every bizarre thing a human being does into "mental illnesses", there would be no "criminals", only people that require help and sympathy.

Look at little girl who's been sexually abused all her life in the eye and tell her the father who didn't listen to her pleas for him to stop, the one who rendered her helpless and took her childhood away from her is going to be helped.

That's a slightly inhumane approach to mental illnesses but whatever.

This is assuming most paedophiles and rapists do it purely because of their arousal. They don't usually. It's more psychological than that.

Uh, no?
Sex by an adult with a prepubescent child is not a recent practice. Many people in the past practiced it and many cultures today still do. You are assuming all people who use children for sexual purposes are pedophiles and you are assuming people who violate children have been abused themselves. You are assuming pedophilia is a mental illness resulted from past circumstances and environmental factors when in reality many pedophiles are sexually insecure.

Do they truly even constitute a mental illness? Not unless we declare a lot of people in many cultures and in much of the past to be mentally ill.

[karl]

comment withdrawn

[karl]

comment withdrawn