Capital Punishment

Nope, never said we should, either. I'm saying that what drives us to establish whatever laws and our perception of weather they're right or wrong are inevitable to what makes us human.
In this case, it's hard for many people to define what common sense might be, if they rely on the higher ups for guidance.

It's even harder to recognize when you abide by a definition OF common sense, and that your ideals fail to be confirmed or accepted as legitimate by other folks.

I don't believe we can ever change in this repsect, but I still don't give up. :)
 
The death penalty, I am against in all instances. It's a useless, barbaric punishment that should be abolished. There's no excuse for taking another's life, whether it be "legal" or not, it should not be allowed. Besides, it doesn't help to change, just cull the human population of felons. Put them on the front lines in the war in Iraq or something, then at least they're doing something useful.
 
Walter C. Dornez said:
The death penalty, I am against in all instances. It's a useless, barbaric punishment that should be abolished. There's no excuse for taking another's life, whether it be "legal" or not, it should not be allowed. Besides, it doesn't help to change, just cull the human population of felons. Put them on the front lines in the war in Iraq or something, then at least they're doing something useful.
Click to expand...
Yeah... But if they did something bad enough to get a death sentence, why wouldn't they shoot teammates in the army in order to get away? And besides... What you're saying is, replace a death sentence with another possible death sentence.
 
LupineVoid said:
Yeah... But if they did something bad enough to get a death sentence, why wouldn't they shoot teammates in the army in order to get away? And besides... What you're saying is, replace a death sentence with another possible death sentence.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. Replace a pointless sentence to death to a possibility of life, they'd probably come out with a different outlook on the value of human life, too.
But then again, there is some scum that really cannot be changed, no matter how much people try to.
Capital punishment isn't an issue I feel very strongly on, seeing as how it doesn't mean anything to us in the UK.
 
Exactly my point. Replace a pointless sentence to death to a possibility of life, they'd probably come out with a different outlook on the value of human life, too.
But then again, there is some scum that really cannot be changed, no matter how much people try to.
Click to expand...

That's why I say it's much better to sentence them to life in prison. Cause sometimes they use prisoners to build roads and such and generally they make them do something positive for society, they can be exploited in a way.
 
Capital punishment should only ever be used in extreme cases when the verdict reached is 100% cirtain.
I see the point of the people that say capital punishment is wrong, but try telling that to the vitims of the crimes families ( im talking about serious crimes like murder).
More than lightly the victims life would of been destroyed by the crime, which is bad enough but then the victim paying, through tax, for the criminal to live in relative comfort , whilst being re-educated and them to go through therapy for there problems. And the criminal will only locked up for an average of 5 years. It just doesnt sit right with me. I pay through tax for people like Ian Huntly to sit in prison and grow fat.
Personally i think that if you have been 100% proven to violate another humans human rights then you forfit yours.
 
True. It intimidates (at least, so the theory goes) potential criminals and in so doing (again, by theory) prevents crime.
I don't know the stats, but...I don't think that works very well. xD
 
I'm all for the death penalty, though it would be better if there was a bit of inhumane torture involved
Click to expand...
i dont think so. in pakistan they have the eye for an eye law, which means the method you killed someone is how you are killed, there was a guy who strangled his victims then put there bodies in acid,
so thats what they did to him, which is wrong.
im for the death penalty, of you kill someone you deserve to die, however if the person who is to be executed is someone beneficial to society ie scientist, philosopher they should begiven life as they can then be helpful to society
 
^ albeit at a heavy price, of course, I'm assuming.

And I also have to say that for some reason I think that the eye for an eye law is the fairest law there is. But hey, I don't live there.

In the U.S. there are more protections for the criminal than there are for the victim, so surely there must be something wrong with that, but when taken in context, it just says that the system is all for giving the accused as many chances of proving himself or herself innocent and at the same time upholding that commitment to equality that we hear about.
 
albeit at a heavy price, of course, I'm assuming.
Click to expand...
you could get a cure for cancer, and ted bundy was helping the FBI with cases, but for your average killer, they deserve to die.

as for eye for an eye, its not right for someone to be strangled then dipped in acid infront of a million people
 
The amount of money that could be saved by using capital punishment would be incredible. Our taxes are what pay for prisoner's meals, clothing, and prison expenses.

I also believe that the death penalty should be more inhumane, in order to bring about more fear. If I really wanted to kill someone, and the only thing I'd be worried about facing is a pinch of a needle...? That's not much to be afraid about.

One argument nowadays is that people have been wrongfully sentenced to death, which I can now counter with: DNA. Many of thoise that were wrongfully imprisoned YEARS ago are now being freed by DNA evidence. But any criminals, especially those who have committed homicide, are put away with undeniable evidence.

I do not believe in reform when it comes to serial murderers or serial rapists. There is nothing that will save them, and I merely see them as a waste of life.

Really, I think that those on death row should be used for scientific experiments, just, something that would act to better intimidate criminals.
 
people deserve to die with dignity not experimented on by some wanna be dr mengele.

and there are much better ways of saving tax payers money.
 
Counter-argument:

Well, consider this. Did the victim of the killer die in honor and glory? No?
Eye for an eye. Fairest deal you can get out of government. I also wouldn't think that a killer who dipped his victim in acid deserves any such honor in the first place.

Counter-counter-argument:

The above may be true, but the sentiments of the people may be against the eye for an eye concept. Despite the fact that it might be more fair, it's also potentially horrible.

But I think that punishment should be more inhumane. Maybe the eye for an eye theory can implant itself in capital punishment after all. Basically, you treat the criminal in the way he treated his victim (i.e. when he killed the victim) , meaning inhumanely. But his capital punishment won't be receiving the same fate as the person he killed in the first place.

In short, punishment should be harsher, and I mean very harsh, in an attempt to discourage future criminals.
 
I heard it costs way more to execute a criminal than to keep them behind bars for life. And having crueler ways of execution won't deter crime. You think in other parts of the world where torture exists that everyone is clean and law abiding? No.

Murder is obviously wrong but I think as others stated, killing them is the easy way out for them. We can't say they'll burn in hell because we don't know if hell actually exists (I believe it doesn't) so keeping them for life in prison would work better. Chances are they'll be in solitary and go insane anyway.

And child murderers are especially vulnerable in a prison. Normal prisoners will probably go vigilante on their butts and kill them without corrections officers even knowing.
 
Well, to be realistic here, that brings up the question:

With crime rates at least where they are, and they could possibly increase, where do we find places to keep criminals?
Do we create new prisons to keep them in? Sure we can.
How do we intend on paying for new prisons?
If we can, are we willing to live incredibly close to prisons?
 
Pyreflyer said:
I heard it costs way more to execute a criminal than to keep them behind bars for life. And having crueler ways of execution won't deter crime. You think in other parts of the world where torture exists that everyone is clean and law abiding? No.

Murder is obviously wrong but I think as others stated, killing them is the easy way out for them. We can't say they'll burn in hell because we don't know if hell actually exists (I believe it doesn't) so keeping them for life in prison would work better. Chances are they'll be in solitary and go insane anyway.

And child murderers are especially vulnerable in a prison. Normal prisoners will probably go vigilante on their butts and kill them without corrections officers even knowing.
Click to expand...

You heard incorrectly.
EXECUTING a prisoner does not cost money. It's keeping them ALIVE for the ten years that they're on deathrow, with their continued appeals and lawyer and council expenses. THAT'S what makes it more expensive.

If we got rid of the average TEN YEAR death row waiting period, it would cost MUCH less for the tax-payer.

And if you don't believe me about prisoners costing a lot of money, here's an example taken from a study done at the Universiry of Oregon:

"Oregon taxpayers now spend roughly the same money to incarcerate 13,401 inmates as they do to educate 438,000 university and community college students. But spending on prisons is growing at a faster rate than education and other state services."

And if you still don't believe me that prisoners cost a lot of money, here's more statistics, from JP Morgan, back in 1996. This is just 1996, when America had a low crime-rate, and we didn't have the inflation we have now:

"In 1996 we taxpayers spent $933 million to operate the state prisons and an additional $550 million to repair and build more. That's almost a billion and a half of your tax dollars. To you that means about $1900.00 for each adult in the state.

Half way through the year there officially were 33,939 prisoners captive in the state joints. Do the division and you discover that you spent $43,700.00 a piece to keep state prisoners locked up.
For a lot less money, you could leave the guy on the streets paying taxes and hire an escort to follow him around all day. Plenty of people would be willing to escort a single convict all day long for $120.
We surely do spend the fortune, but it's not for prisoners. It's for prisons. It costs $61,797.000.00 for us to have the luxury of possessing each prison."

Long story short:Lessen the amount of people in prison, particularly those in for life sentences, by using capital punishment, and save a lot of money for law-abiding, tax-paying citizens.
 
Hmmm

I do believe that violence only creates more violence. Killing someone won't just change the facts, it won't erase the painful memories or cover up the bitter truth. Yes, prisons are overrun nowadays, seeing that crime is raising to alarming percentages with each year.

Applying Capital Punishment, well as a strong believer of God, I think that only God can give and take life. What if we sentence a prisoner to death and later on discover that he or she wasn't guilty? We can't bring him or her back, can we? Where's the sense of justice in it?

Again, Justice is blind, sinners and innocent people are judged equally, and even fake evidence can ruin anyone's life.

Sentencing a prisoner to death just because they made an unforgivable crime won't make us any better than that prisoner, still I know it's hard to forgive and forget, no one ever remembers those words, yet do they deserve any mercy? That's up to each individual's opinion. Eye for an eye, kill and get killed. The one who lives by the sword dies by it. In the world that we live in, we are all full of death.
 
EXECUTING a prisoner does not cost money. It's keeping them ALIVE for the ten years that they're on deathrow, with their continued appeals and lawyer and council expenses. THAT'S what makes it more expensive.
Click to expand...
prisioners are allowed to appeal, if they arent there is something wrong with the justice system.

But I think that punishment should be more inhumane
Click to expand...
in the middle ages they had inhumane executions, society has moved on from repulsive techniques of execution

Well, consider this. Did the victim of the killer die in honor and glory? No
Click to expand...
perhaps not, but they say 2 wrongs dont make a right. executing a prsioner the same way they commited a crime brings the state down to their level, which you cant have. givin someone a lethal injection is a very different from strangling someone with your own hands, that makes the execution personal, but it should remain inpersonal, just a job.

as for the cost of prsioners serving life, there are much easier ways to lower taxes then by killing some prisioners. like get rid of the 3 strike law, you can get 400 years for stealing glue.
 
While I'm not against the death penalty, there is something that I have to comment on:
Contra Fates said:
I also believe that the death penalty should be more inhumane, in order to bring about more fear. If I really wanted to kill someone, and the only thing I'd be worried about facing is a pinch of a needle...? That's not much to be afraid about.
Click to expand...
Consider, though, that most murders aren't pre-meditated and are mostly temporary breakdowns in which you lose control and maybe lash out at someone, or grab the closest thing to you, resulting in the death of the person the receiving end. If you lose enough control to murder someone, when you're in that state of mind, one of the last things that you'll be thinking about are the consequences - particularly, "Oh, I shouldn't kill him, I might get a lethal injection!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top