The Death Penalty

[The Empire]

You people are missing a few important points though:
1) You can't give the state the right to do something we as individuals doesn't have the right to do.
2) We can never be 100% sure that someone is guilty of any specific crime, and since a death sentence can't be undone once executed, it's not acceptable in a civilized nation under rule of law.
3) Penalties as a deterrent doesn't work since all criminals intend to not get caught and if they succeed, the penalty they COULD have been sentenced to doesn't mean shit.
4)Preventive and progressive social policies at an early stage to eliminate poverty and to promote equality and cooperation is both cheaper and more effective than any justice system once the crimes has already been comitted.

I still recognize the fact that there are individuals that is too dangerous to other people to be allowed freedom but there are ways to handle them that doesn't make us just as monstrous.

[kor]

You people are missing a few important points though:
1) You can't give the state the right to do something we as individuals doesn't have the right to do.
2) We can never be 100% sure that someone is guilty of any specific crime, and since a death sentence can't be undone once executed, it's not acceptable in a civilized nation under rule of law.
3) Penalties as a deterrent doesn't work since all criminals intend to not get caught and if they succeed, the penalty they COULD have been sentenced to doesn't mean shit.
4)Preventive and progressive social policies at an early stage to eliminate poverty and to promote equality and cooperation is both cheaper and more effective than any justice system once the crimes has already been comitted.

I still recognize the fact that there are individuals that is too dangerous to other people to be allowed freedom but there are ways to handle them that doesn't make us just as monstrous.

1. The Supreme Court is in place to make sure people's rights are upheld. They pass judgment on those that violate them. You violate them and you should be punished.

2. Going to war for no reason in a "civilized" country under rule of law is not acceptable, but places do it. And yes you can sometimes say someone was 100% guilty. If the burden of proof is shown I think it is acceptable.

3. Rehabilitation doesn't work either.

4. LOL! No comment.

Bottom line. You take a life, you deserve to have yours taken. Having the death penalty does not make you monstrous.

[j delight]

i am not agenst the death penalty for any it unmoral or any of that bs i just think that they are getting the easy way out i would rather watch the sob rot in prison for the rest of their life in a small cell by themself

Not a bad idea but why pay for it?

If the crime is bad enough I am for it.

It should not be a question of economics when it comes to taking a life.

I'm still for the death penalty in principle, but until the justice system can do a better job of establishing guilt, then I am against it in practice.

Yeah, Texas, I'm talkin' to you.

[Myroria]

1. Sure you can. If the state had all the rights of the individual, it is termed "anarchy" - i.e., without the state having some sort of HIGHER AUTHORITY, there would be no state. I'm a hardcore libertarian and I know that.

2. I totally agree with you. I mean, if Hitler was caught, there always is that possibility he didn't kill 6 million Jews, Roma, and gypsies and break up millions of families. I mean, just like Charles Whitman might not have been guilty of shooting and killing 14 people, even though he was the single person in the clock tower holding a sniper rifle and left a suicide note taking all blame.

3. Did you ever see A Clockwork Orange? They cured him, alright.

4. Again, I totally agree. I mean, stealing - oops, taxing the people out of their own kroners or whatever it is over there so that some criminal can be in a nice bed in a nice cell with TV and plenty of room is sooooooooooo much cheaper than buying 5 two kroner bullets.

[The Empire]

A bullet actually cost between 5 and 7 crowns (rifle calibers) but that's completely beside the point.
The ONLY people who MIGHT have any right to execute a death sentence would be the victim itself, or their closest relations, nobody else. And in that case it's vengeance, not punishment.

And no, there is NO way to be 100% sure since we can't read minds and most often weren't there.

Rehabilitation does work in most cases, provided the socio-economic circumstances that lead up to the crime has changed.
Sexual offenders are different, and so is serial killers, they must be kept locked away permanently due to the nature of their mental condition.

And myro, you obviously COMPLETELY missed what I said in point 4), read it again.

[Feniexia]

Rehabilitation does work in most cases, provided the socio-economic circumstances that lead up to the crime has changed.
Sexual offenders are different, and so is serial killers, they must be kept locked away permanently due to the nature of their mental condition.

But now, the question is: isn't it more "humane" to simply kill someone than to lock him up for all of the rest of his life? Besides, after all, the result is nearly the same when you want to get them away from other people but is much cheaper.

The ONLY people who MIGHT have any right to execute a death sentence would be the victim itself, or their closest relations, nobody else. And in that case it's vengeance, not punishment.

Doesn't the Sharia handle it like this? Well, we all (should) know how good it works today...
While you really got some good points in a few other posts, I strongly disagree with this one.


I, for one, support the death penalty; some people just deserve it. I mean, it's not like you get the death penalty for stealing chewing gums (ok, in China you might, but China's different), but for taking away someone's life (outside of a war, but as China war is different). And usually, there is not really much justification for doing so.

[Myroria]

No, that's Singapore.

[Trey]

i am not agenst the death penalty for any it unmoral or any of that bs i just think that they are getting the easy way out i would rather watch the sob rot in prison for the rest of their life in a small cell by themself

Not a bad idea but why pay for it?

If the crime is bad enough I am for it.

It should not be a question of economics when it comes to taking a life.

but until the justice system can do a better job of establishing guilt, then I am against it in practice.

Yeah, Texas, I'm talkin' to you.

Agreed.  On the test of constitutionality, it passes.  Morally...I don't know.  But seriously...if you're already going to kill them, what's the fuss about "cruel and unusual punishment"?  This is going to sound crass, but wouldn't throwing them out of a plane work equally as well?  I'm just saying that you shouldn't act like you want to be humane to someone when you're already killing them.

[Miller18]

Agreed.  On the test of constitutionality, it passes.  Morally...I don't know.  But seriously...if you're already going to kill them, what's the fuss about "cruel and unusual punishment"?  This is going to sound crass, but wouldn't throwing them out of a plane work equally as well?  I'm just saying that you shouldn't act like you want to be humane to someone when you're already killing them.
[/quote]


This is so true, it is after all the the death penalty, why be so PC on how it is done.

[Myroria]

I'm not saying I disagree with you. But I think the idea is that "At least we're not stooping down to their level.". People generally believe that even if you're a horrible murderer, torture is wrong. But, I'm a moral relativist, so don't ask me about morals unless you want a long speech about how morals are entirely decided by the society.

[The Empire]

You re-read number 4 yet myro? number 4 is supposed to PREVENT the crimes, meaning the efforts are made before a crime even occurs and is aimed at the cause of most common crimes wich is socio-economical inequality and a sense of not beeing able to influence or improve one's own life situation without breaking the law.

I have a hard time deciding if I'm completely against it or not. As for the humanistic part, yes it's questionable if life-long incarceration is more humane than execution, but on that I would like to say that it should be prison or mental institutions but that euthanasia for physically healthy prisoners/patients should be allowed for such peope that is too mentally dissabilitated that they are a danger to others if they are allowed to roam free.

[Myroria]

No, I haven't re-read number four, because I don't argue with people who have broken the law in several countries.

[Space Raider]

You bet it is!

[The Empire]

eh? who has broken the law in several countries?

[Feniexia]

eh? who has broken the law in several countries?

Maybe people who download MP3. The MAFIAA will come for all of us!