The Death Penalty

[Ron]

Well, when I talk about this, I have child rapers/murderers in mind.
I don't know how it is where you live, but I don't think there are many countries in the world where those animals are popular in jail.
Wouldn't it be less cruel and unusual to put them out of their misery a.s.a.p.?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Ron@8 July 2003 - 11:18
Well, when I talk about this, I have child rapers/murderers in mind.
I don't know how it is where you live, but I don't think there are many countries in the world where those animals are popular in jail.
Wouldn't it be less cruel and unusual to put them out of their misery a.s.a.p.?

I would tend to agree; societally based laws also seem to dictate a need, or, in the case of the death penalty, an imperative for society to avenge itself for the diminishment suffered at the hands of murderers; some would argue this is the more merciful option.

Again, though, while the rapers and murderers of children are not treated at all well by other inmates, prison rape is the exception rather than the rule; the situation is at once much more violent, but much less frequent than portrayed on television.

That is not to say it does not happen; merely that it is not an everyday occurrence.

I am not speaking here of the issue of consentual homosexual activity.

[dlingeverything]

I live in TX, yes the biggest death penalty addict.

I totally object to the death penalty.

It is murder and murder is in no circumstance
a "right" thing to do.

I'm not sure but this is not an effective detterent for
criminals. There's got to be some studies out there.

I dont understand how anyone can condone this

[j2k4]

Originally posted by dlingeverything@8 July 2003 - 11:42
I live in TX, yes the biggest death penalty addict.

I totally object to the death penalty.

It is murder and murder is in no circumstance
a "right" thing to do.

I'm not sure but this is not an effective detterent for
criminals. There's got to be some studies out there.

I dont understand how anyone can condone this

There are many, many studies, all of which amount to much less than the issue requires to be certified "resolved."

[Riddler]

Even 'qualifying' a statement such as; 'I don't believe in death as punishment'...with a statement such as; 'except in certain cases'...illustrates the labyrinthian nature of the law process and the unpredictability of human emotion which contributes to the making of laws. What may be perceived as an imprisonable offence to some, would surely be seen as warranting the harshest form of justice to others. The only individual without a voice in the matter is the victim of a violent crime ( resulting in death ). IMO, this is why it is impossible for a uniform policy regarding capital punishment to be realized.
I think every reasonable person would agree that killing is wrong, no matter what the situation. However, given the scenario I put forth earlier, even reasonable people have an emotional breaking point where what we firmly believe, in moments of calm reflection and sober thought, is seriously challenged in moments of personal tragedy and extreme stress.
So, I will put forth another realistic twist to the scenario of losing a loved one to the hands of an individual who's own regard for the lives of others is apparently on a level below yours and mine...........
What if the individual, even though every person in the room including the judge and jury were convinced of his/her guilt, did not receive any punishment due to the frailties of the law, or perhaps the skill of his/her highly paid defense team. Would you still be disinclined to avenge your loved one's death with the death of the perpetrator as he walked down the courtroom steps, grinning at the cameras and informing the media throng that he was going to " celebrate with a few beers across the street---you're all invited ! "
Would you still be able to go home and sit down for dinner with your wife tomorrow and say; " Oh, well....we gave it our best shot and it didn't work out. Damn, but those lawyers were good weren't they ? "

( please forgive the flippant tone of the last part of this reply.....It does serve a purpose and is quite intentional. )

[Rat Faced]

There are no conclusive studies.

Im torn on this one, really.

On the "moral highground" im dead against it, obviously.

There are so many miscarriages of justice, that the risk of killing one innocent.....


On the other hand, as has been said...Death is often the "Easy way out" for these people, especially Child Killers. Why make it easy for them?

Then there is the practical issues.....why the hell should I pay for these people to live? It takes a lot of money to keep someone in jail, why the hell should my taxes go towards it? This may be "mercenary" but im sure its relevant.....i'd rather the money went to Schools and Hospitals.



On the balance, i'll stick with my consiance im sure, if a referendum is ever called....and vote against it. Especially as the money would only be wasted some other way...never seems to end up where its needed.

Now to await JPauls flame

[PinkPig]

I absolutely believe that the death penalty is wrong.

1) There's no guarantee that anyone is guilty
2) Even if they are, killing isn't the answer. It costs more (under US legal systems) to execute someone than to keep them in prison for their lives, and I'd say that the latter is a pretty awful punishment in itself.
3) We don't know what death is - thus the death penalty is an unknown sentence, and thus entirely unfair.

I think I'm pretty fortunate to live in a country where the death penalty has been abolished for years - I really believe that all US states should do the same. Just as American men should stop keeping guns.

[Ron]

What if a convict ASKED to be executed.......?

[Riddler]

Originally posted by PinkPig@8 July 2003 - 12:33


1) There's no guarantee that anyone is guilty
2) Even if they are, killing isn't the answer. It costs more (under US legal systems) to execute someone than to keep them in prison for their lives, and I'd say that the latter is a pretty awful punishment in itself.
3) We don't know what death is - thus the death penalty is an unknown sentence, and thus entirely unfair.

Well PinkPig, I can understand your point of view, and once again, I'm not supporting the controlled killing of human beings but I must offer you an alternate look at your response. Just for the sake of discussion, you understand.

1) What if you witnessed it with your own eyes ?
2) I don't have the numbers handy, but I have my doubts that that is the case.
3) If it is an unknown sentence for the perpetrator of the crime, then it is also an unknown result for the victim....so logically, would that not be fair after all ?

[Ron]

Originally posted by PinkPig@8 July 2003 - 21:33
1) There's no guarantee that anyone is guilty
2) Even if they are, killing isn't the answer. It costs more (under US legal systems) to execute someone than to keep them in prison for their lives, and I'd say that the latter is a pretty awful punishment in itself.
3) We don't know what death is - thus the death penalty is an unknown sentence, and thus entirely unfair.

I think I'm pretty fortunate to live in a country where the death penalty has been abolished for years - I really believe that all US states should do the same. Just as American men should stop keeping guns.

In answer to that:

1) What if a person is caught redhanded, and spontaneously confesses?
2)Some killers are nothing more than predators. Locking them up would only expose other, less violent prisoners, to their mercy.
3) Death could be seen as the end of all bodily functions, so it's not unknown.

In Belgium, a recent study showed that there are 16 guns on 100 people. (USA had around 90/100, I believe)
Might be nice to know for criminals. They should have less fear of "professional injuries" over here.