Do you believe in the Death Penalty?

[Raz]

Hey Raz... hi, its me... Raz.

Why, hello there, Raz!

 

[Sulkdodds]

Abolish prisons and get reform centers.

No. Rehabilitation don't work, foo'! There's almost no difference (2% or something) in the reconviction rates of custodial and community penalties. Rehabilitation is shaky at best - in many cases, people just don't change - and you run the risk of falling down a slippery slope towards bad treatment, drugs testing, experiments and scary sinister behaviour correction centres that turn people into mindless drones.

I don't believe the death penalty is a good idea:

PURELY MORAL REASONS:

- what if you convict the wrong person? It has happened. Innocent people have been held in prison for years and years without ever being released. Be a bit of a tragedy if you had killed them, wouldn't it?

- I don't believe we should ever kill anyone for their crimes - it's true that some deserve, perhaps, to die - but we should make it a universal thing NOT to kill people (if you see what I mean).

- I strongly believe that 'an eye for an eye' is wrong if taken literally and that two wrongs do not make a right.

TECHNICAL REASONS!

- One of the main arguments for the death penalty is deterrance: ie, with such a harsh penalty people are less likely to comit crimes. However, this clearly doesn't work or at least there's no evidence for it. Not only does it fail to take into account that a lot of crime is committed on the spur of the moment, on the assumption that the criminal will not be caught, or while drunk/mentally ill/insane, but there's also no evidence whatsoever of the death penalty having any real effect. Consider: in 1965, the death penalty in Britain was abolished. Crime rates stayed exactly the same, and indeed have risen since then (although admittedly that can't really be linked).

- RETRIBUTION! Now sure, this works (I believe criminals should be punished, yesh, but there's lots of debate over whether or not prison is a worse sentence than death - considering how many people commit suicide while in prison, this one's a meh. Besides, if you die - heaven and hell notwithstanding - you're not actually able to think about your crimes any more. It could be argued that a life in a cell contemplating what you've done and the fact that you're going to be in said cell for a very long time would be better than death.

- PUBLIC PROTECTION! Admittedly the death sentence protects the public from the murderer (who is dead) but it can be argued that decent prisons do this just as well, and that if you sentence an innocent person to death, that's not protecting them very well.

 

[kirovman]

Do you believe in the Death...

I always think it's going "Do you believe in the Death Star?"

 

[Beerdude26]

The death penalty should be possible, but applied loosely. Not like "OMG YOU KILLED SOMEONE YOU DESERVE DEATH PENALTY!!!!1111ELEVEN". It should be like this :
"You're going to jail for 15 years. See you then "
Then after they get out and they commit another, then we can say :
"OMG YOU KILLED SOMEONE AGEN YOU DESERVE DEATH PENALTY!!!!1111ELEVEN"

That's the base.

Now, if the murderer killed the first person accidentally, he should get a milder punishment (Depending on the circumstances). If he killed the second accidentally too, he should get the standard jail sentence or slightly heavier depending on the circumstances OR death penalty if he shows no remorse at all.

If the murderer killed the first person on purpose, he should get standard jail sentence, and if he killed the second accidentally, he should get the standard jail sentence, or slightly heavier depending on the circumstances OR death penalty if he shows no remorse at all.

If the murderer killed the first person on purpose, he should get standard jail sentence, and he killed the second one on purpose too, he should get death penalty or if he is very remorseful, the standard jail sentence, only quite heavier.

If the murderer killed a third person, handle it as if he killed only the second time, but raise the jail sentence significantly.

etc.



Off-topic :

I always think it's going "Do you believe in the Death Star?"

Same lol

 

[Muffin Man]

I always think it's going "Do you believe in the Death Star?"

lol. and even though i still think that rapists and murderors (yes my spelling sucks, oh well) should be totrured, that would probably not sit well with a lot of ppl blah blah blah, at least don't just lock them up and feed them and crap, make them do something. THey are further hindeing society and wasting tax dollars sitting in jail. make sweat shops or something and put them in them and make them work long days and go to sleep and wake up and do it again. I would hate that way more then sitting on my ass all day and it would at least accomplish something. but i still think the torture thing would be cool for people on death row who are obviously guilty, id laugh my ass off hearing about that.

 

[swiss]

Making convicts work in sweat shops would still waste "tax dollars", the government would have to pay for constant security for ex-murders working in shops. Also i doubt the public would like the idea of convicts working for society- people want dangerous convicts to be kept away.
Prisons work as a detterent to crime (to a certain extent), and ensure dangerous offenders are prevented from offending again.

 

[Muffin Man]

I'm not talking about just ex murderurs, im talking all cons (even though this is about the death penalty) and it wouldnt make the situation any worse, they already have guards, they already feed them, if they make something why no lock the doors from the outside, chain them to desks, give like 4 guards shotguns, believe me they could make it work, and they could just put the sweatshop inside they prison walls anyway, i personally think it would be much better.

 

[baxter]

I firmly believe that the death penalty does not deter violent crime nor does it fit the punishment for violent crime.

Having seen such monsters as Myra Hindley suffer a long and slow painful death behind bars, with no chance of freedom, no chance of release and no hope.
I firmly believe that violent criminals should not be given the easy option of the death penalty; they should suffer for the rest of their miserable lives....... without their freedom and for the rest of their wasteful and meaningless lives…… devoid of the same freedom that we all take for granted.

 

[Muffin Man]

plues those scrawny male muderurs and big offenders most likely will meet a big guy named bubba and become a man bitch, eait it! though i still think life imprisonment needs to be changed a little, or imprisonment in general. Its been proven that after being in jail and just sitting there for a long time, not having too worry about food or money, it can change you effectiveness in the real world. and NO i am not bacing this on shawshank redemption, i have seen it myself in papers, in the local news, we've had debates about it in social studies. i mean some of these convicts if they are really good get plasma tv's for their cells, i mean hell, i dont have a plasma tv and i never hurt anybody.

 

[Flyingdebris]

i believe in the death penalty, but only for human monsters

the child killers, serial rapists, serial killers, and other twisted freaks who live to bring harm on to others.

 

[ComradeBadger]

I firmly believe that the death penalty does not deter violent crime nor does it fit the punishment for violent crime.

Having seen such monsters as Myra Hindley suffer a long and slow painful death behind bars, with no chance of freedom, no chance of release and no hope.
I firmly believe that violent criminals should not be given the easy opinion of the death penalty, they should suffer for the rest of their miserable lives without their freedom for the rest of their wasteful and miserable lives…… devoid of the same freedom that we all take for granted.

Agreed.

 

[Muffin Man]

child killers and child rapists get ripped to shred in prison by inmates, believe me i wouldnt give them death penalty, inmates arent bound by the laws of imprisonment. by that i mean in US with the cruel unusual punishment crap... those are shit laws in consideration of lifers/death rowers

 

[Reaktor4]

short answer: yes.

 

[Jintor]

The death penalty maybe reduces crime in the specifics, but i doubt that it reduces crime in the long run.

 

[swiss]

Some people have said they believe in the death penalty for really nasty people eg child killers/ serial rapists etc.
I would probably agree....except for one problem; that is I think that executing an innocent person is one of the worst things a government could do.
Even though you can have death row, and appeals and everything, it still happens (not every1 on deathrow in America is guilty).
Imagine...being a completly innocent person in the wrong place/ wrong time, and facing the electric chair/ injection for nothing....

 

[ríomhaire]

No, I do not believe in the death penalty

 

[The Monkey]

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.
-Mohandas Gandhi

 

[Solaris]

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.
-Mohandas Gandhi

I belive its:

An eye for an eye would make the whole world blind.

 

[15357]

Execution contributes to population control (I sound too evil now...), reducing crime in specific areas, and contributing to social order.


So, yes.

 

[Gargantou]

It does?
Well, let's go execute people that loiter our streets.
That'll certainly contribute to social order.
Or what the hell, let's have soldiers posted on every corner with AK-74s that shoot anyone who dares break any lil law, I mean seriously, then we'll get the ultimate social order, and no-one'll dare commit any crimes, so that fully justifies turning the country into a dictatorship!

 

[kirovman]

I don't believe in it purely from the point of view that mistakes are made and previously guilty people have been found innocent after new evidence emerged.

While I do believe there are certain criminal members of the populace who are just a menace to society and have precious little rights to share this earth with us, there's always going to be innocent people being executed by the death penalty.

Also, I don't think the death penalty should be considered on the basis of vengence, which is such a draconian concept.

Also - interesting point of discussion - how should we treat, for example, someone who murders one, but discovers the cure for cancer?

 

[The Monkey]

15357 scares me.

 

[kirovman]

15357 scares me.

Destroy the damned thing...before he grows any larger!

 

[Sulkdodds]

Or feed him so much he explodes in a shower of gore...like in that Monty Python sketch.

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.
-Mohandas Gandhi

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves us eyeless and toothless?"

 

[The Monkey]

"An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind."
Google hits: 11,200

"An eye for an eye would make the whole world blind."
Google hits: 3,530

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves us eyeless and toothless."
Google hits: 0

 

[Sulkdodds]

Well...I guess I can attribute that quote to myself!

Or I got the wording wrong.

 

[DeusExMachina]

I believe everyone should get the death penalty. As in everyone on this planet. Right now. Should get it.

 

[kirovman]

I believe everyone should get the death penalty. As in everyone on this planet. Right now. Should get it.

That's shouldn't be a problem...

*Kirovman unleashes superplague*

 

[Icarusintel]

I believe everyone should get the death penalty. As in everyone on this planet. Right now. Should get it.

QFT
this place f*cking sucks and so do the people, I think it's about time to move on *runs and hides in bomb shelter*

 

[Muffin Man]

I believe very strongly in vengance, if somebody killed my friend, id find a way to get his face in a meat grinder. and yeah, too many ****ing retards on this plant, time to pull the plug.

 

[Sulkdodds]

this place f*cking sucks and so do the people, I think it's about time to move on *runs and hides in bomb shelter*

Coward. Go down with the goddamn ship.

*Kirovman unleashes superplague*

Stop doing that! It's getting ridiculous!

 

[kaikisjew9]

i dont believe! and i dont believe in war either..

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.
-Mohandas Gandhi

Gandhi's method of not responding to attacks doesn't work when the hostile one actively wants to kill more. The quote made sense in his situation with the British, but you can't apply it to everything like that. An eye for an eye in the criminal justice system is fitting, wheras it doesn't have to be assault for assault, etc, it means a sentence fitting the commited crime. Not a too harsh sentence for something that doesn't deserve it and not a too light sentence for something that does deserve a harsh one.

I don't believe in it purely from the point of view that mistakes are made and previously guilty people have been found innocent after new evidence emerged.

While I do believe there are certain criminal members of the populace who are just a menace to society and have precious little rights to share this earth with us, there's always going to be innocent people being executed by the death penalty.

This is why it should exist, but not for every case and such. People tend to argue the issue like it's one way or another. It can be delivered in a way where that's not going to be an issue.

Also, I don't think the death penalty should be considered on the basis of vengence, which is such a draconian concept.

What has suddenly made it a draconian concept? It's the entire basis for the justice system in the first place. It has everything in fact to do with the word justice. It's why we say 'bringing somebody to justice.'

Also - interesting point of discussion - how should we treat, for example, someone who murders one, but discovers the cure for cancer?

As the murderer they are. Good deeds don't redeem someone.

 

[gick]

I don't believe in it purely from the point of view that mistakes are made and previously guilty people have been found innocent after new evidence emerged.

While I do believe there are certain criminal members of the populace who are just a menace to society and have precious little rights to share this earth with us, there's always going to be innocent people being executed by the death penalty.

Also, I don't think the death penalty should be considered on the basis of vengence, which is such a draconian concept.

My thoughts exactly. By executing people, the state/society becomes just as bad as the criminals themselves.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

My thoughts exactly. By executing people, the state/society becomes just as bad as the criminals themselves.

They don't because they aren't taking an innocent life. They are delivering justice, which is one of the assigned roles of the state.

 

[Sulkdodds]

And what if you get the wrong person?

 

[Absinthe]

Since when did execution become the only way to deliver justice to these people.

**** these vague talking points, seriously.

 

[gick]

They don't because they aren't taking an innocent life. They are delivering justice, which is one of the assigned roles of the state.

I suppose it depends on how you define justice. Wiktionary sez:

Justice
1. The state of being just or fair
2. the ideal of fairness, esp. with regard to the punishment of wrongdoing (justice was served)
3. punishment of a person who wronged one (to demand justice)

But then again:

Injustice

1. Absence of justice
2. Violation of the rights of another

Which is what you get when you kill somebody.


EDIT -

**** these vahue talking points, seriously.

Oooops that was pretty vague. Sorry.

 

[Vigilante]

Yes. Kill them all.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Which is what you get when you kill somebody.

You could argue that imprisonment is a violation of their rights to, holding them without their will. But when convicted, they lose those rights.

Since when did execution become the only way to deliver justice to these people.

**** these vague talking points, seriously.

It's not the only way, but it's a fitting for the crimes it's given to and it's fairly efficient.