Allowing the serious offenders to live.

[Father Heathen]

No.

That kind of thinking is not so different from "Well look what she's wearing - she was asking for it".

So you're honestly comparing wearing short skirts to theft, murder, etc.?

 

[Father Heathen]

I don't know about "moral obligation" but a reasonable society will take steps to ensure the possibility of another crime being committed is limited to the lowest possible risk. If that requires euthanizing the offender, then so be it. I have no problem with that.

I only have a problem with killing for revenge, or to appease the tumultuous, angry emotions of the victim/s, or because we think it will dissuade criminals from committing crimes, or to cause pain, suffering and anguish to the offender. Since those basically sum up the top reasons people support the death penalty, I cannot support it myself.

Aren't the assailants indebted to their victim? For example, if someone tossed a rock through your window, you would want some form of compensation for the damage. Isn't their victims owed some form compensation, even if in the form of satisfaction from vengeance? It if helps with closure and the healing process then it's worth it, right?

 

[outis]

So you're honestly comparing wearing short skirts to theft, murder, etc.?

No, she compared showing off one's hair in public to theft, murder and so forth. Don't you know the consequences of adultery? Your son does I hope but you know how youth are! If such a lowlife was inciting your son and he could lose his life and your honor over it, wouldn't you want the threat to be taken care of? Damages and vengeance are well and good but they're not going to bring your honor or your son back. That's why there are laws against women behaving like this.

 

[Koldo]

I make contract arrangements in writing in advance, so I know exactly what I will be paid and the client knows what they will get in exchange. No criminal makes a contract to be euthanized in exchange for committing a crime (although I support euthanizing pretty much anyone at their request if they have a good enough reason).

No criminal makes a contract to be punished for any crime.
If you are talking about the social contract ( which wouldn't fit in the context of your example ), i don't see why capital punishment couldn't be part of it.

 

[Poisonshady313]

No.

That kind of thinking is not so different from "Well look what she's wearing - she was asking for it".

Right... because committing murder and being a victim of rape is exactly the same thing.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Aren't the assailants indebted to their victim? For example, if someone tossed a rock through your window, you would want some form of compensation for the damage. Isn't their victims owed some form compensation, even if in the form of satisfaction from vengeance? It if helps with closure and the healing process then it's worth it, right?

As someone who supports the death penalty, I don't agree with this line of thinking.

Murder trials are The State v The Defendant, not Victim/'s family v The Defendant.

I don't think murderers ought to be executed as a means to satisfy a victim any more than condemned murderers ought to be spared because a victim has forgiven them.

Society has laws against murder. And violating those laws proves that you are not worthy of enjoying the rights and protections that are afforded to law abiding citizens, or even the perpetrators of lesser crimes.

Considering that lesser crimes are and can be punished with life sentences, I believe allowing murderers to live is akin to letting them get away with their crime.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Don't you think that deciding upon an action is also an acceptance of the potential consequences?

No.

That kind of thinking is not so different from "Well look what she's wearing - she was asking for it".

I don't believe for a moment that's where Father Heathen was going with this.

This has nothing to do with describing victimhood as the consequence of one's decision of what outfit to wear.

He's talking about the risk taken when deciding to engage in illegal activity.

If the consequence for cheating on an exam is expulsion, the individual who decides to cheat on his exam accepts that if he is caught and found guilty, he will be expelled. He might be unhappy about it, but he knew that was the likely consequence of his actions.

If the consequence for assaulting a train conductor is 7 years in prison, the individual who decides to assault a train conductor accepts that if he is caught and found guilty, he will go to prison for 7 years.

If (in any given jurisdiction) the consequence for first degree murder with aggravating circumstances is death, the individual who decides to commit this crime accepts that this may be the consequence of his actions.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Note: I am from Australia where we do not have the death penalty.

I have always been the type of person who would say I dont have the right to take away the life of another person, and nor does anyone else. I watched a movie the other week that made me think about this stance. The movie was called The Brave One and if you havent seen it...long story short...the hurters get hurt if you catch my drift.

So I wonder, is it more ethically or morally right to allow serious offenders/murders/rapists etc to live even though what they have done is horrendous and there is a big chance they could do it again? Would it be more ethically or morally right to remove them as a threat?

Consider this...What does it mean to you to not have the right to do something? And what ought to be the consequence for doing something you don't have the right to do?

 

[Poisonshady313]

The only point in favour of life sentences is that if a mistake happens ( by the judiciary ) there is still time to amend for it as long as he lives.

As long as he lives. If he is innocent and dies in prison anyway, you're left with the same result as if he were executed. And it's not as if there isn't an appeals process for condemned murderers.[/quote]

 

[Koldo]

As long as he lives. If he is innocent and dies in prison anyway, you're left with the same result as if he were executed. And it's not as if there isn't an appeals process for condemned murderers.

Correct.

 

[averageJOE]

Ummm.. The point of punishment is to punish, not to show mercy. Life sentence is way more punishing than death.

Not entirely true. People adjust to prison life and can pretty much make the best of it. Some even go there and have a better life than before. For others the only thing that changes is where they sleep. Meaning that they can do just about anything in prison that they could do out of prison.

 

[dust1n]

Not entirely true. People adjust to prison life and can pretty much make the best of it. Some even go there and have a better life than before. For others the only thing that changes is where they sleep. Meaning that they can do just about anything in prison that they could do out of prison.

Do you have a source of some prisoners saying how much better life was in prison than before prison?

 

[Alceste]

So you're honestly comparing wearing short skirts to theft, murder, etc.?

You're missing my point. Some rapists see a woman in a short skirt and think "she's asking for it". Likewise, some death penalty advocates hear of a person sentenced to death got committing a crime and think "she was asking for it."

You may be aware that certain terrible consequences are possible for your choices, but we generally don't consider them probable.

In the case of a rape victim, let's say someone who dresses up very provocatively, goes to a rough neighborhood, has too much to drink, gets into a stranger's car, etc. she's never asking to be raped. She's making a series of choices that clearly increase her risk, but may not be considering that particular risk at all, let alone "asking for it".

Likewise, a person who robs gas stations is making decisions that increase the risk of getting on the wrong side of the justice system and being punished, but they probably do not consider it likely, and no doubt they would rather not have that happen.

I'm not equating these two situations at all. I'm pointing out the logical flaws in this particular thought process: "a person who makes bad choices probably is aware of the risks, therefore that person deserves to experience the worst imaginable consequence of those choices." If that logic doesn't hold in every situation, it doesn't hold in any situation.

 

[Alceste]

Aren't the assailants indebted to their victim? For example, if someone tossed a rock through your window, you would want some form of compensation for the damage. Isn't their victims owed some form compensation, even if in the form of satisfaction from vengeance? It if helps with closure and the healing process then it's worth it, right?

I don't believe adding another dead body into the mix genuinely helps the healing process.

 

[dust1n]

Life sentences are cheaper on the state than death penalties.

 

[Alceste]

Life sentences are cheaper on the state than death penalties.

Yes, another very pragmatic point.

 

[Father Heathen]

No, she compared showing off one's hair in public to theft, murder and so forth. Don't you know the consequences of adultery? Your son does I hope but you know how youth are! If such a lowlife was inciting your son and he could lose his life and your honor over it, wouldn't you want the threat to be taken care of? Damages and vengeance are well and good but they're not going to bring your honor or your son back. That's why there are laws against women behaving like this.

You're my son and your post inflicted a loss of 280 honor points.

 

[dust1n]

Yes, another very pragmatic point.

I'm expecting a 'we should speed up the process' soon, but I'm already prepared to respond with implausibility and lack of public support. No one wants to accidentally kill an innocent person, and it's happened plenty of times before. The appeals process is a humans right, and there are hundreds of thousands of appeals, and it already costs hundreds of millions of dollars to maintain all of this as it is.

Also against the maximum security prisons in America and solitary confinement. Prisoners should be comfortable. The suffering is meant to be the reflection on the crime and lack of freedom to go anywhere, nothing more. And some were complaining about health services and college accredited classes? It's so ridiculous. Is anyone suppose to be allotted to just die of being stab or any number of possibly contactable diseases? Should anyone be complaining about helping prisoners be able to integrate back into society after prison?

Anyways, prisoners have rights but routinely discriminated against. That's not to say I'm 100% against the death penalty or anything.

 

[dgirl1986]

After some thinking on the subject I think I would probably be in support of some sort of death penalty for serious repeat offenders if no other option was available, to protect people. Jail sentences do not carry enough weight these days.

 

[McBell]

No.

That kind of thinking is not so different from "Well look what she's wearing - she was asking for it".

I disagree.
The whole "Well look what she's wearing - she was asking for it" is nothing more than a way of justifying the action they decided upon.