31 replies to this topic

[Bone]

I've always wondered why we (USA) kill people to show that killing people is wrong.

Keeping people imprisoned for a life sentence is cheaper than going through with an execution. (Source)

With the advent of widespread DNA testing, there have already been 289 post-conviction exonerations. I think we can all agree any judicial system is fallible...is ours reliable enough to avoid take away the life of a potentially innocent person? (Source)

If it were to be proven that capital punishment is a deterrent to crime or murder, it would add a layer of moral complexity. I would be in support of capital punishment if I could be sure that it saves innocent lives. However, there is not conclusive evidence that capital punishment acts as a deterrent.

If you want convicts to suffer for their crimes (AKA revenge), I think a lifetime to reflect on their actions is far greater a punishment than quickly ending their lives. In any case, the words of Confucius speak well here: "Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves." Should our government endorse revenge over justice?

In light of these facts, I find it ethically unjustifiable to go through with capital punishment. Have at me.

[Romy]

What about that someone that picks up little children at the play ground, rapes them, kills them and keeps their skulls as trophies?
Lets assume that there is a 100% chance that it's him.

You believe people like that should live?


I know that's its an extreme case but, i do believe that the Death penalty is something we should keep around.
I believe that there are certain people that do NOT deserve to walk among the living.

I think it needs to be used ONLY in horrible cases. Then again, i'm the kind of person that believes People that rape, violate children should be castrated (without anesthesia).

[Melchoire]

I see where you're coming from but there has to be some form of justice. If some lowlife or maniac goes on a spree and kills a whole bunch of innocent children or adults the families of the victims will want to feel some justice. They feel that the criminal's life should be taken just like he/she took their loved one's. That criminal does not deserve a life if they're so quick to end someone else's without any remorse or guilt.

Take a look at this list you can see that the top two killers have murdered over a hundred children each. Do you honestly believe someone so callous and inhumane would feel remorse if they're sent to prison. Especially if they committed the murders over several years which would've given them plenty of time to think about their actions.

The second guy on the list was released in 1998 and still at large. In my opinion he should've been put to death as soon as evidence was put forth that he was without a doubt responsible for killing even just 1 little girl.

[Yung]

Why didn't you just bump one of the many other threads we have discussing this?

[Melchoire]

Why didn't you just bump one of the many other threads we have discussing this?

It's better to just start a new one than making you have to go through 5 pages of an old thread. People would be more apt to respond to a fresh discussion...

[Jewbert]

I'm iffy about this.

Better to keep them fed with a shelter, or killed and not have to go through anything again?
I think people who have done something horrible to other humans should have to experience similar actions.
I'm cold-hearted, though. You do something wrong, pay the consequences and do it in an equally horrible or worse way than what you did to the victim.

I don't really have any sympathy for people who bring it upon themselves and they KNOW what they are doing.

[Mishatu]

I'm against capital punishment. While it may seem that putting them to death is more fitting, they don't exactly suffer what they may have put their victims through. It's kinda... illegal to. I say, throw them in a dark wet dungeon and throw them some bread every once in awhile. Don't let them do anything. Just give them the bare minimum food and water to survive to their natural death.

[Melchoire]

There's also the economic side to the issue. A shit ton of money is spent to keep someone on death row but in the end I think that's totally irrelevant. These are the kind of expenses citizens are expected to contribute to because it's the same system that keeps them safe from criminals.

[Jewbert]

If they are convicted and KNOWN to be the one to do the crime, why are they kept on death row for so long?? Get rid of their asses.

&& like Mishatu said, make them suffer! Put them through some Saw shit.

[Trichomes]

I agree with you 100%, Bone. I've always been against capital punishment for all of the reasons mentioned.

I think it needs to be used ONLY in horrible cases. Then again, i'm the kind of person that believes People that rape, violate children should be castrated (without anesthesia).

What makes one murder worse than another? Deciding it's acceptable to take another human's life is pretty unjustifiable, in my opinion, no matter the motive or method.

People who commit particularly gruesome or violent crimes are obviously psychologically ill/disturbed, and should be treated as such, not mutilated or killed. It just seems so hypocritical to think otherwise.

[Melchoire]

I agree with you 100%, Bone. I've always been against capital punishment for all of the reasons mentioned.



What makes one murder worse than another? Deciding it's acceptable to take another human's life is pretty unjustifiable, in my opinion, no matter the motive or method.

People who commit particularly gruesome or violent crimes are obviously psychologically ill/disturbed, and should be treated as such, not mutilated or killed. It just seems so hypocritical to think otherwise.

Shooting someone point blank on a the subway while robbing them is not as "bad" as kidnapping someone, torturing them for several days, raping them, then finally killing them. Both are murders but in the latter scenario the killer has 0 sympathy and no problem with inflicting pain and trauma to an innocent stranger.

You can argue that someone who could do something so gruesome is not right in the head, but I would disagree with that notion. Take what Jewbert said for example, if the killer is caught and made to go through a similar ordeal as punishment, then are we just as insane as the killer was?

[Trichomes]

Shooting someone point blank on a the subway while robbing them is not as "bad" as kidnapping someone, torturing them for several days, raping them, then finally killing them. Both are murders but in the latter scenario the killer has 0 sympathy and no problem with inflicting pain and trauma to an innocent stranger.

You can argue that someone who could do something so gruesome is not right in the head, but I would disagree with that notion. Take what Jewbert said for example, if the killer is caught and made to go through a similar ordeal as punishment, then are we just as insane as the killer was?

I'd say that anyone incapable of experiencing remorse after committing a crime like that is pretty sick. So, yes.

[Melchoire]

I'd say that anyone incapable of experiencing remorse after committing a crime like that is pretty sick. So, yes.

I doubt that's how a psychologist would define it.

[Trichomes]

I doubt that's how a psychologist would define it.

I'm not saying I think convicted murderers shouldn't be held accountable or punished for their crimes because they're "insane." In fact, in most cases, I think the death penalty is an easy way out for those who truly deserve to rot in prison for the remainder of their lives. I'm just saying I disagree with the eye for an eye principle, for a variety of reasons that have already been mentioned.

Edited by Trichomes, 13 May 2012 - 08:33 PM.

[Romy]

What makes one murder worse than another? Deciding it's acceptable to take another human's life is pretty unjustifiable, in my opinion, no matter the motive or method.

People who commit particularly gruesome or violent crimes are obviously psychologically ill/disturbed, and should be treated as such, not mutilated or killed. It just seems so hypocritical to think otherwise.

I think that running someone over while you are drunk is less severe then raping someone then murdering them.

Do you not believe that Charles Manson or Anders Behring Brevik deserve to be killed?

Edited by Pikachuu, 13 May 2012 - 08:44 PM.

[Trichomes]

I think that running someone over while you are drunk is less severe then raping someone then murdering them.

Do you not believe that Charles Manson or Anders Behring Brevik deserve to be killed?

Are there any instances of someone convicted of vehicular manslaughter being put to death? There's an obvious distinction between unintentionally causing someone's death and committing murder.

I don't think it's my place, or a judge or jury's, to decide who gets to live and who should be killed.

[Blackout]

As others said, what about the others who 100% did the crime and it's proven? I dislike the fact people are able to take someones ACTUAL life like yours, and spend little as a few years in a cell. If you take an Innocent person's life away from loved ones, family, and basically the world I feel you should go through what they went through. They need to atleast keep it around for some cases. For all we know that person you killed could've grew up to find the cure to cancer and save millions of lives, become the next president, etc. I don't think people realize how much potential is gone when a person is killed, and it annoys me at the little punishment they get to learn.

[Melchoire]

I'm not saying I think convicted murderers shouldn't be held accountable or punished for their crimes because they're "insane." In fact, in most cases, I think the death penalty is an easy way out for those who truly deserve to rot in prison for the remainder of their lives. I'm just saying I disagree with the eye for an eye principle, for a variety of reasons that have already been mentioned.

Bone's reasoning + your's is:
a) you could kill the wrong person
b) it's not a deterrent
c) a gruesome killer can't be sane

Of course no one should be punished for any crime if they're innocent whether it's murder or petty theft, for that reason a murderer should only be put to death in cases where there is no doubt they are guilty. I think we can all agree with that one.

Capital punishment's purpose isn't just deterrence but mainly a way to deliver justice to the victims.

[Trichomes]

As others said, what about the others who 100% did the crime and it's proven? I dislike the fact people are able to take someones ACTUAL life like yours, and spend little as a few years in a cell. If you take an Innocent person's life away from loved ones, family, and basically the world I feel you should go through what they went through. They need to atleast keep it around for some cases. For all we know that person you killed could've grew up to find the cure to cancer and save millions of lives, become the next president, etc. I don't think people realize how much potential is gone when a person is killed, and it annoys me at the little punishment they get to learn.

You could also argue that the murderer could potentially go on to find a cure for cancer, etc. if left to his own devices in prison. I know that's a ridiculous hypothetical situation, and it sucks that the US justice system is so flawed, but the primary reason I'm against capital punishment is because I think it's unethical and hypocritical.

[Romy]

There's an obvious distinction between unintentionally causing someone's death and committing murder.

I believe that those people that do it intentionally should be killed.

[Ladida]

Why are we only mentioning crazy people who commit crimes? Down where I live, people go killing people for a couple of dollars. They run people over, shoot them, stab them, all that stuff. Back when capital punishment was a regular feature, the crime rate was way down. Now, thanks to the western stance against capital punishment, there hasn't been a person on death row in a long time. There's no deterrent to obey the law anymore other than some time in prison, and the crime rate has skyrocketed. I really do think it ought to be used when there's no doubt about the crime, much like putting a head on a pikestaff, to make people rethink their future actions.

[Bone]

Why are we only mentioning crazy people who commit crimes? Down where I live, people go killing people for a couple of dollars. They run people over, shoot them, stab them, all that stuff. Back when capital punishment was a regular feature, the crime rate was way down. Now, thanks to the western stance against capital punishment, there hasn't been a person on death row in a long time. There's no deterrent to obey the law anymore other than some time in prison, and the crime rate has skyrocketed. I really do think it ought to be used when there's no doubt about the crime, much like putting a head on a pikestaff, to make people rethink their future actions.

I don't think I can truly understand (or am qualified to evaluate) the situation in a place so different from where I live... I'm mainly approaching the problem from a 1st world Western perspective.

I'll create a proper response to the rest of this topic when I'm at a real computer.

[Kenderson]

Since it costs more to put someone to death than to let them rot in prison their whole lives, I say let them rot in prison. They'll suffer there / get beat up. Child molesters will often be killed by other inmates anyways. Even with capital punishment in place, it takes so long for them to actually put the inmate to death. In my opinion they should figure out a better system regarding the death penalty before they put it into place anyways.

[Melchoire]

Since it costs more to put someone to death than to let them rot in prison their whole lives, I say let them rot in prison. They'll suffer there / get beat up. Child molesters will often be killed by other inmates anyways. Even with capital punishment in place, it takes so long for them to actually put the inmate to death. In my opinion they should figure out a better system regarding the death penalty before they put it into place anyways.

People who are for capital punishment aren't necessarily against fair trials, hearings, investigations and imprisonment.

Until a person is proven to have committed such a heinous crime they must be treated as if they were innocent.

[Yung]

Of course no one should be punished for any crime if they're innocent whether it's murder or petty theft, for that reason a murderer should only be put to death in cases where there is no doubt they are guilty. I think we can all agree with that one.

Capital punishment's purpose isn't just deterrence but mainly a way to deliver justice to the victims.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that no one should be punished for a crime that they didn't commit, being put to death (Capital Punishment) should be reserved for circumstances in which there is indisputable evidence that the guilty person (person who committed the crime) has been sentenced.

Capital Punishment serves as a deterrent from others much more so than it is a delivery of justice, most people do not wish to die and committing a crime in which you can receive this sentence is enough to deter most people that do have the guts, see the What is Your Stance thread, from pulling the trigger.