Is the death penalty right?

[BUDDY]

Okay but now we are just creating assertions within assertions, backing each of them up upon each other and presenting it as if it were fact. I pose that such an argument is not credible whether one lives in the US or not.

Your perception is your reality. It was my perception that the question is being asked, Is the death penalty right...legally, morally, spiritually. As my spiritual convictions do not do much to sway someone in a discussion such as this, I tried to answer it from a legal and moral point of view without mentioning religion.

I can elaborate by asking you a question, what do you think should be the intention behind the legal system with regards to criminals? I pose that it should be to prevent reoffense and rehabilitate them. The only reason I hold this position is because I am unaware of a position that holds better merit.

Good topic for a new thread as a matter of fact. Of course, with the number of geniouses that we seem to have on this forum, I wonder if it has already been started. I believe that the purpose of our legal system is to rehabilitate through punishment. How's that for a complicated answer? Just as you train a child by punishing them sometimes, so is it that we should train the convicted criminal by punishing them as well. Of course, I believe that when the criminal has committed the crime of murder, it is safe for the legal system to give up on the criminal and let him know that such action is not and will not be tolerated.

 

[c0da]

*Bump*

I've always wanted to do that.

No, I do not think the death penalty is right.

 

[Ryan2065]

Er, I think it is right =)

Makes society safer and I don't care what people say, it is a deterrent factor... Its not a huge deterrent factor (like if you were to get the death penality in your state crime wouldn't go down 50% or anything) but the fact that people do all they can to get out of the death penality tells me that it works as a deterrent...

The case that this works in is a very small case. I say it works when someone has already commited one crime and is being chased. If they believe they are going to be imprisioned for life, there really is nothing keeping them from killing people they think will turn them in if there is no death penality.

 

[Real Sorceror]

I put "don't know".
This is a whole can of worms I don't like to open. This board seems a lot more laid back than the one I'm usually on. On that board, we sling some seriously ill venom at eachother over topics like this.

 

[Valjean]

If the penalty is identical to the crime wouldn't it then be proper to execute the executioner?

What makes it wrong for one individual to kill another, but proper for a judge or small group of jurors to do the same?

Don't give me an argument from expedience. There are a lot of things we could do that would clearly be expedient, but would be considered wrong or extreme on principle

 

[Ryan2065]

If the penalty is identical to the crime wouldn't it then be proper to execute the executioner?

Nope... Laws are made by the state... The state can say that this person should die and therefore the person who kills him cannot be charged with killing him... Therefore he has not commited a crime =)

What makes it wrong for one individual to kill another, but proper for a judge or small group of jurors to do the same?

What about sueing someone who stole? Or how about imprisioning the kidnappers?

 

[Valjean]

Why is this "state" more qualified to condemn a criminal than an individual? A state is just a bunch of individuals that have monopolized power in a particular region. A state is just a gang.
At what point does the decision of a group of individuals become qualitatively different from that of an individual?

 

[Hacker]

Nope!

 

[Flappycat]

It's stupid. Killing a guy on the basis that he did the same doesn't do anything but justify the killer's behavior. And no, Ryan: look at the state-by-state and country-by-country statistics. Moralizing over this is retarded, but the Republicans are feeding you a fat lie with the claim that they're making you safer. They're probably just saying that crap to promote their old-fashioned Christo-Muslim ethic of retaliative killing, and I doubt it's based on any kind of scientific evidence or observation.

Here, I'll show documentation for what I'm claiming.

http://davecoop.net/rate.htm

Now you do some proving about this magical "deterrent effect" of yours. Put your money where your mouth is. See, I'm convinced that you're still married to the Christo-Muslim idea of retaliative killing, and I don't think you've really got any evidence to back up your claim.

 

[Ryan2065]

It's stupid. Killing a guy on the basis that he did the same doesn't do anything but justify the killer's behavior. And no, Ryan: look at the state-by-state and country-by-country statistics. Moralizing over this is retarded, but the Republicans are feeding you a fat lie with the claim that they're making you safer. They're probably just saying that crap to promote their old-fashioned Christo-Muslim ethic of retaliative killing, and I doubt it's based on any kind of scientific evidence or observation.

Here, I'll show documentation for what I'm claiming.

http://davecoop.net/rate.htm

Now you do some proving about this magical "deterrent effect" of yours. Put your money where your mouth is. See, I'm convinced that you're still married to the Christo-Muslim idea of retaliative killing, and I don't think you've really got any evidence to back up your claim.

I already said that it didn't make a huge difference in crime... Statistically speaking so many more factors go into crime that it would be impossible to show any one deterrent factor actually works (except punishment of course).

My point was that if someone ALREADY commited a crime and believes his crime is worse enough to send him to prision for life... What does he have to lose by killing someone to get away? So many people make so many deals to get out of the death penality one would suppose criminals realize it is there.

I don't think it stops a first crime, but I do think it protects the people who could turn this guy in. The situations im describing do not happen often, therefore, statistically speaking, it wouldn't show up.

Its more common sense than anything else... If someone is going to be imprisioned for life for killing people they probably are not going to care about killing more people to get away. On the other hand if they think they won't be killed but could be if they kill more people then seeing as they already killed someone its not a stretch to think that in some cases they might kill say a cop who is coming after them or something of the sort.

 

[Flappycat]

I already said that it didn't make a huge difference in crime... Statistically speaking so many more factors go into crime that it would be impossible to show any one deterrent factor actually works (except punishment of course).

Nope. Capital punishment only worsens things, according to the statistical data available to me. Here: http://canadaonline.about.com/od/crime/a/abolitioncappun.htm

My point was that if someone ALREADY commited a crime and believes his crime is worse enough to send him to prision for life... What does he have to lose by killing someone to get away?

A great deal, particularly is he's aware that people can get out on parole even if sentenced to life. A person who is convinced that he is fighting for his life, on the other hand, isn't prone to show any restraint at all. He'd also be less likely to turn himself in and prevent his act from being repeated.

So many people make so many deals to get out of the death penality one would suppose criminals realize it is there.

Oh, they're quite aware that it's there. Murder isn't a rational act, though. They may be in a rational, logical frame of mind when taken to court, but the act of killing another person is neither rational nor logical. See, the other great backers of capital punishment use the economic theory: a potential murderer might think twice if he's convinced that killing a person might cause him to get killed. The thing is, economics is based on the assumption that a person who is purchasing a good or service is in a rational frame of mind. It ceases to function properly in the case of such irrational behaviors as murder.

I don't think it stops a first crime, but I do think it protects the people who could turn this guy in.

No, it doesn't because actual executions are very rare in proportion to people who are turned in for murder. In fact, if a murderer were not sentenced to death but knew that the person who turned him in was aware of the possibility that he might have been, the person turning him in could be in more danger than ever.

The situations im describing do not happen often, therefore, statistically speaking, it wouldn't show up.

Then how is it protecting anybody?

Its more common sense than anything else... If someone is going to be imprisioned for life for killing people they probably are not going to care about killing more people to get away. On the other hand if they think they won't be killed but could be if they kill more people then seeing as they already killed someone its not a stretch to think that in some cases they might kill say a cop who is coming after them or something of the sort.

The problem with this is that, in times like these, a person is not in a rational frame of mind and does not think things through. A person who is afraid for his life is not thinking at all clearly. However, a person who is merely going to prison actually might want to seek a lesser sentence, and he certainly wouldn't want to end up getting shot dead or crippled in a pursuit if he could clear his head enough to process the thought. I really don't expect a man to be able to think anything other than "run like hell, and kill anything that gets in your way" if he thinks he could end up on death row.

 

[zombieharlot]

My friend used to have a pin that said, "Why is it that we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?"

But I personally don't really have much of an opinion. I can see it from both sides. I think the difference that the government tries to makes is, "Justice," in killing as opposed to, "Revenge."

 

[Ryan2065]

Nope. Capital punishment only worsens things, according to the statistical data available to me. Here: http://canadaonline.about.com/od/cri...tioncappun.htm

So you are saying that the death penality can have absolutely no deterrent effect but people kill others because there is a death penalty?

The removal of capital punishment from the Canadian Criminal Code in 1976 has not led to an increase in the murder rate in Canada. In fact, Statistics Canada reports that the murder rate for 2003 was the lowest since 1967 at 1.73 murders for every 100,000 population.

So in 1967 (when Canada had the death penalty) the murder rate was lower than in 2003 when they don't have the death penalty... Yes... wow... obviously the death penalty increases crime!!! No other factors are involved... Really, making rediculus claims like this only worsen your argument.

A great deal, particularly is he's aware that people can get out on parole even if sentenced to life. A person who is convinced that he is fighting for his life, on the other hand, isn't prone to show any restraint at all. He'd also be less likely to turn himself in and prevent his act from being repeated.

Heh... parole boards take into consideration the prisioners time in jail and all that other stuff. And there are crimes that one would have no chance for parole... Say someone who got away with torturing and raping a 7 year old girl.

Oh, they're quite aware that it's there. Murder isn't a rational act, though. They may be in a rational, logical frame of mind when taken to court, but the act of killing another person is neither rational nor logical. See, the other great backers of capital punishment use the economic theory: a potential murderer might think twice if he's convinced that killing a person might cause him to get killed. The thing is, economics is based on the assumption that a person who is purchasing a good or service is in a rational frame of mind. It ceases to function properly in the case of such irrational behaviors as murder.

Right... my situation gives the person a rational frame of mind... While they are running (could be for a few days) they have enough time to think through what they would do if they were cornered.

No, it doesn't because actual executions are very rare in proportion to people who are turned in for murder. In fact, if a murderer were not sentenced to death but knew that the person who turned him in was aware of the possibility that he might have been, the person turning him in could be in more danger than ever.

I was saying BEFORE he was caught.

Then how is it protecting anybody?

Er... I didn't say it never comes up... but it does come up. Police officers would probably be the ones in this situation the most.

The problem with this is that, in times like these, a person is not in a rational frame of mind and does not think things through.

Really? So someone who got away from the cops and has been able to sit for two days cannot be in a rational frame of mind and decide if he will kill cops if they come after him or not?

However, a person who is merely going to prison actually might want to seek a lesser sentence, and he certainly wouldn't want to end up getting shot dead or crippled in a pursuit if he could clear his head enough to process the thought. I really don't expect a man to be able to think anything other than "run like hell, and kill anything that gets in your way" if he thinks he could end up on death row.

Really? Again, I am saying manhunts that take a few days... Not every person who kills or rapes someone is found within an hour of the crime you know...

 

[CaptainXeroid]

I started to compose a post, then I started scrolling through the thread, realized it was a resurrect, read my post from almost a year ago, and was not surprised that my current post was almost identical to the old one.

Anyway...there are lots of good arguements on both sides, but it seems to me that the US Justice system is the biggest single factor that will keep Americans from abolishing the death penalty any time soon. There is a perception that too many guilty people 'get off' and the reailty that convicts often do not serve out their sentences.

I guess one factor that keeps from jumping off the fence to oppose the death penalty is the inability of some opponents to acknowledge that some criminals just cannot be rehabilitated. In those cases, the death penalty is the only thing that will keep them from committing more crimes.

 

[Valjean]

I guess one factor that keeps from jumping off the fence to oppose the death penalty is the inability of some opponents to acknowledge that some criminals just cannot be rehabilitated. In those cases, the death penalty is the only thing that will keep them from committing more crimes.

This conclusion seems to show a surprising lack of imagination.

 

[CaptainXeroid]

This conclusion seems to show a surprising lack of imagination.

Actually, it demonstrates a grasp of reality that most death penalty opponents are sorely lacking.

 

[Tigress]

I do not believe in killing people to show people that killing people is wrong.

 

[Valjean]

Actually, it demonstrates a grasp of reality that most death penalty opponents are sorely lacking.

You can't seriously tell me that you are intelligent enough to read and write yet cannot think of any other way to inhibit criminal behavior than to kill the criminals.

 

[CaptainXeroid]

You can't seriously tell me that you are intelligent enough to read and write yet cannot think of any other way to inhibit criminal behavior than to kill the criminals.

...So, what you are saying is that every single criminal can be rehabilitated to be a productive member of society. I don't agree, but since you believe that to be true, you are also opposed to life imprisonment because that would certainly preclude rehabilitation.

In that case, please explain how we are to rehabilitate someone who thinks it is perfectly acceptable to kidnap, rape, torture, and murder a another human being. If you can lay out a clear definitive course of action, and give me a guarantee that it will work, I will consider becoming anti-death penalty.

BTW...please tell me you overlooked my first post on this thread in which I posted conflicting thoughts on the death penalty. I would hate to think that someone intelligent enough to read and write would isolate one line from a follow up post and present it as encapsulating by entire thought process on the subject.

 

[Simon Gnosis]

Some people do indeed richy deserve execution, but I think permenant incarceration is a far worse punishment...in the long run.

So no I disagree with the death penalty on the grounds that it does not cause sufficent suffering to the child/women murdering rapist filth that truly deserve it...