Do You Support the Death Penalty? (5 Viewers)

[Nebuchanezzar]

^You failed to see what I was getting at in the post. The circumstances where I'd say, "hmmm, that seems fair" are so outrageous, so wild, so flamboyantly moronic that it'd never even be possible. If there was even the slightest chance that the person could be innocent (which is pretty much in every trial, really) then I don't support the idea. That's my main gripe with capital punishment, really.

Anyway, I don't really think that a war criminal such as, say, Hitler, would be any less deserving of getting a swift bullet to the head (after a lengthy, and fair trial with absolutely no chance that he's innocent) just because he confessed and acted "remorseful" That seems to rely on the idea that giving a guilty plea is a plea of remorse, which I, in my ever wordly wisdom, would say can be totally untrue.

The argument breaks down to this, or something that resembles this, the death penalty is supposed to deter murderers (which I believe is just utter bullspit, because, with or without it, in the grand scheme of things, "shit happens");

Oh, I very much agree with this point of view. My own thoughts on the matter are constructed around this thought in many ways, with the sole exception that I've already highlighted.

Also, having accidentally executed a 'prisoner', one cannot simply undo such an act against human rights and justice; thus, the risk of accidental execution of innocents precludes the use of this radical method to deal with crims (but America doesn't care, nor does China, or any 'revolutionary' country for that matter, like Cuba).

Once again, I agree.

and it is retribution to those who wrong (no, I don't believe this is a fair reason to take another human being's life - leave this to gangs, mobsters, and such people, but not the freaking system/State).

Ah, now this is where you and I differ. IF the above problems can be rectified (which is next to impossible) then I see no reason why retribution, revenge, an "ultimate punishment" (yes i'm aware how morbid that sounds) shouldn't be applied. Surely when one man, or woman has such reckless disregard for human life, then they don't deserve to live? Surely that in that case, giving them a relative slap on the wrist (compared to what they've done) is a suitable punishment. No? Well I don't have much to offer in rebuttal. Really, I believe that this is the only question regarding capital punishment that's subjective, and can't be settled in a debate. It's a matter of person beliefs about human rights. You might think it's highly hypocritical to say that someone can protect human rights by killing someone, another might say that you're hypocritical for not defending human rights to begin with. They're my scattered thoughts on the matter. But really, apart from Hussein, Hitler, Bush (and co), a select few leaders in China and North Korea and that guy from Chile, I can't think of another instance where I'd be willing to say "YES" to the matter, and even then, they're all still a little iffy...

 

[HotShot]

Studies have been done in the US that shows the states which do have the death penalty DO NOT have a lower rate of murder/assaults etc etc than states which dont have the death penalty. Thus any argument supporting the death penalty because it makes ppl less likely to harm others is simply wrong.

the whole point of the Death penalty is not to lower the crime rate! but rather to get more ppl into the death penalty.

 

[HotShot]

That doesn't even make sense.

Whats the point of the death penalty? If dont have enough people to kill?

 

[Lucid Scintilla]

Whats the point of the death penalty? If dont have enough people to kill?

Then, uh, um, like, abolish it, yeh?

Nebuchanezzar, absolutely. The viability of your points has changed my perception of the death penalty, to some degree, but still, I reckon that even if a person is to be executed on the grounds that they have so little (apparent) respect of human life, they should not be executed. (I know that doesn't make much sense; I'm trying to say that they shouldn't be, but rather be left incarcerated without chance of parole, ever.)

Now, if you support life imprisonment, think about the cost of feeding the criminals, the wardens, possible parole hearings, etc. The death penalty, while somewhat inhumane, is preferred on many levels, as is the case for life imprisonment.

 

[withoutaface]

Death penalty costs more than life imprisonment due to the lengthy appeals process.

 

[timmyh]

To the 1st part of ur post - 5 stars!Damn good argument, i support everything u have said.
However, concerning the whole

these fukkers will never rehabilitate. they are sick and deserve to rot in jail. the death penalty is way to good for them. and so many of the bastards either get no jail time or a measly 1-4 years

Damn right they are sick. However, u step into dangerous terriroty when u claim all of them are incapable of rehabilitation. It seems rapists/paedophiles have, depending on how u want to see it, a psychological/sociological problem with adhearing to one of the most fundamental principles of our society. Whilst it has been shown sex offenders do have a high rate of reoffending I do not accept they are incapable of rehabilitation. The lack of psychological and education services in gaols (certainly in NSW anyway), as well as a certain gearing to want to punish these people, as opposed to address the things that caused them to offend in the 1st place are major factors contributing to the high re-offence rate. Perhaps a more effective, and cheaper way of dealing with this problem is to attempt to understand it better in order to focus more on prevention.

 

[Lucid Scintilla]

by killing them you too would have demonstrated a "reckless disregard for human life". you can't teach people that killing is wrong by killing people

-capital punishment leads to many innocent people killed. even one is unacceptable, and it is far more than that
-capital punishment does not act as a deterrent. studies have shown this. generally crimes are either spur of the moment or the person doesn't actually think they'll get caught
-the cost of capital punishment is far greater than keeping a prisoner in prison for life

so basically if we brought it back in it would cost alot more money, inevitably end up in the deaths of innocent people, do nothing for the crime rate, and desensitise the country to barbaric murder.. all for what gain??

also, i do think prison sentences need to be harsher for rapists and paedophiles. life sentences (for their entire life not bloody 25 years like life sentences are at the moment). seriously, i understand one of the aims of punishment is rehabilitation, but these fukkers will never rehabilitate. they are sick and deserve to rot in jail. the death penalty is way to good for them. and so many of the bastards either get no jail time or a measly 1-4 years

Bolded point in question. With all due respect, ma'am, but the cost of keeping a prison incarcerated for life is much more costly than having the prisoner executed.
This could possibly be a reason why the U.S. executes pretty much anyone, instead of locking them up.

As for the rest, 'tl;dr'. Nah, just kidding, but yes, I suppose I agree with all the rest of your arguments, but it'd be so much better if you capitalized correctly.

Edit: The last point is coming from a emotional side, isn't it? It seems rational, but still... there's something a bit "wrong", for lack of a better word, with it.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

by killing them you too would have demonstrated a "reckless disregard for human life". you can't teach people that killing is wrong by killing people

You speak as if this is new information that I wasn't privvy to when I made my post. I'm well aware of this supposed contradiction, but in some cases it's the lesser of two evils. But actually, your post is quite false. Do I display a reckless disregard for human life by saying "kill the man who ordered the deaths of 6 million Jews?" Hardly. "Reckless disregard" would entail no thought or consideration of the life at hand, and that's completely untrue. My original post saw a lot of consideration given to human life, and that's why I'd only support the punishment in the most extreme of extreme cases. The people, the vile human beings who commit crimes against mass humanity show a careless, disregard for human life as if they're slaughtering ants. I, definately do not fit such a generalisation.

I think it's also foolish to assume that my own beliefs on the matter are based on all these hackneyed arguments (by the capital punishment supporters), such as the cost factor, or the convincing factor. Of course you don't convince other dictators not to kill by killing other dictators. I hope that made sense, but it's silly to assume that it would make a damned difference. No, I don't support capital punishment in these cases to convince others, I support it because if you've done something so ghastly, you deserve a damn ghastly punishment to suit the crime. You do the crime, you show such a moronic lack of care for humanity, then by golly you get what you deserve. Of course, as I've already said, there'd have to be no possibility of innocence for my to support the punishment, which is nearly impossible.

-capital punishment leads to many innocent people killed. even one is unacceptable, and it is far more than that

I agree. Read my damn post before you tell me these things, I do know.

-capital punishment does not act as a deterrent. studies have shown this. generally crimes are either spur of the moment or the person doesn't actually think they'll get caught

Ditto

-the cost of capital punishment is far greater than keeping a prisoner in prison for life

Maybe, but who really cares? Drinking seawater is cheaper than spending money on a big, fancy recycling plan, but that doesn't nessecarily make it the better option. Poor example, but you get my point.

so basically if we brought it back in it would cost alot more money, inevitably end up in the deaths of innocent people, do nothing for the crime rate, and desensitise the country to barbaric murder.. all for what gain??

Once again (for the umpteenth time), I'm not one of these looneys who yells out "DEATH TO ALL MURDERERS AND RAPISTS!" No, not at all. Take a look at my original post, or the one after lucid scintillas post and you'll get the gist of where I stand on the issue.

also, i do think prison sentences need to be harsher for rapists and paedophiles. life sentences (for their entire life not bloody 25 years like life sentences are at the moment). seriously, i understand one of the aims of punishment is rehabilitation, but these fukkers will never rehabilitate. they are sick and deserve to rot in jail. the death penalty is way to good for them. and so many of the bastards either get no jail time or a measly 1-4 years

Am I the only one who sees a massive contradiction here? In the first paragraph, you attack me because I'm showing "a reckless disregard for human life", and yet you're permitting a reckless disregard for human life here. "They're sick and deserve to rot in jail" - now there's a lot of regard for human life! If you're going to pick a side, at the very least you could stick to it, instead of hopping from one side to the other.


also, i do think prison sentences need to be harsher for rapists and paedophiles. life sentences (for their entire life not bloody 25 years like life sentences are at the moment). seriously, i understand one of the aims of punishment is rehabilitation, but these fukkers will never rehabilitate. they are sick and deserve to rot in jail. the death penalty is way to good for them. and so many of the bastards either get no jail time or a measly 1-4 years

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

So you would prefer EVERY suspect found guilty of a crime that was to face life in prisonment have this punishment suplimented with that of a Death Sentence?

Uh, no. Where exactly did you get that impression?

Regarding the second part of your post, I'm a little confused. You have a quote by me, except that it's not all by me. Half of it is what I've said, the other half is from the other guy. Can you clear that up, so I can respond (if you want)?

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Ok, ok, sorry about that then.

 

[Lucid Scintilla]

Damnit Exphate. Uh, so, how much time did you put into that, by the way?
Yes, that is an argument for practicising execution, it doesn't quite justify why it should be carried out. (Oh yes it does... damnit.)

Hold on... I'll be back...

 

[Forbidden.]

I support it for serial killers, serial rapists or mass murderers. Some people can't be reformed.

What about mental health issues as an excuse ?

 

[bshoc]

Once you have beyond reasonable doubt intentioanlly taken anothers life, you forfiet your right to your own, its the only fair way.

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

Once you have beyond reasonable doubt intentioanlly taken anothers life, you forfiet your right to your own, its the only fair way.

I can't tell if you are serious or not.

If you are, then I agree with you on something.

 

[bshoc]

I can't tell if you are serious or not.

If you are, then I agree with you on something.

 

[Optophobia]

Once you have beyond reasonable doubt intentioanlly taken anothers life, you forfiet your right to your own, its the only fair way.

Including those troops in Iraq who kill supposed "terrorists"?

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

Including those troops in Iraq who kill supposed "terrorists"?

Now you're just being facetious.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I think it's a pretty valid argument to consider when debating about killing somebody.

Once you have beyond reasonable doubt intentioanlly taken anothers life, you forfiet your right to your own, its the only fair way.

I think that there are certainly exceptions to that. For instance, if someone killed your entire family then I think you'd have more than enough reason to go after them and try to kill 'em...provided that they're 100% guilty, of course. I mean, that's pretty much exactly what you do when you apply the death penalty for murder, is it not?

 

[Optophobia]

Once you have beyond reasonable doubt intentioanlly taken anothers life, you forfiet your right to your own, its the only fair way.

Including the guy who pulls the switch to end the murderers life?

 

[UWS-Uni-Student]

No, the death penaly cannot be reveresed if the executed person is later found innocent, furthermore, I would think that the life in jail would be worse then an execution. Also with imprisonment the convicted person has a chance of reforming their life.