Death Penalty

[Missa]

I've posted this question on my site, but I don't think that anyone ever reads my blog. Oh well. LOL.

My co-workers and I were recently discussing a current event, and the conversation drifted to the death penalty. My opinion is that the death penalty is little more than revenge...But, I won't say why I think that unless my explaination is called for.

Anyway, I wanted to know what YOU think of the death penalty. Is it right? Is it wrong? [B]And why do you think so...[/B]

[Morpheus]

The death penalty is right. I know of a man that would kill, go to jail, and then break out and kill again. He did so multiple times, and couldn't be stopped. He deserved to die for his actions.

[Sui Generis]

[color=indigo]

Personally I think the death penalty isn't a clear cut issue of "right and wrong." Do I find the killing of people to be right, no of course not, but do I find consequences right, yes of course so.

In my opinion the death penalty is something of a necessity in our society, because of the way we have structured it. In our lives we have written an eye for an eye, we believe the punishment should fit the action, and if the action is murder well then the punishment must then be punishment.

But as I said its a question that no one can really answer, because there are too many good and bads about it. All I can say is the Death Penalty is not as used as everyone seems to think. The good news is though the amount of innocent people is most likely on the fall with our current technology. From 2000 to now America has freed 64 of its death row inmates because with the new technology they were proven innocent.

With a death penalty a case is forced to be reviewed multiple times over a span of multiple years, and in those spans of years the technology has always gotten better, and we tend to free more and more innocent people.


The death penalty is just another punishment for what happens, hitting a person is unacceptable, but spanking a child is considered necessary to parents. Its a catch 22 that will never be solved, unless we wish to degrade the morals of our own society.[/color]

[Lord Dante]

the death penalty can be a good thing. just as long as it's not used against me!

(i know, bad joke)

it has been written since before sliced bread and microwave ovens "an eye for an eye" and such and such, but i think that what the above guy said just about covers everything.

[kaisha]

I don't really know what to say, I mean I think it can be a good thing as long as it is used according to the law. But Jesus said (yeah i'm a christain) "Love one another as I have loved you." So I don't really know.

[Gravy Train]

Every society has the right to defend itself from dangerous criminals. Where there are NO ALTERNATIVES, the death penalty may be used. However, it must be the ONLY OPTION.
In the modern world, it is nearly impossible to find a place where the death penalty is the only option.
Criminal justice has two purposes:
1.Protect society
2. Punish the criminal

There is no need to execute someone in order to protect society. The U.S. is the only "developed" country in the Western World to have the death penalty.
Only Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China execute more people per year than the U.S.

Reasons why the death penalty is bad:

1. It is not a DETERENT. States that have the Death Penaly have a homicide rate that doubles that of states that don't. When the Death Penalty is introduced in a state, the homicide rate increases. Our society sends the message that human life is not priceles by using the Death Penalty.

2. It costs more to execute a person than to incarcerate them for life.

3. If executed, a criminal is not given the chance to reform and is provided an outlet from ever reflecting on what he/she did and feeling remorse.

There is no good reason for the death penalty unless not using it would endanger society. And in the U.S., that is definitely not a good or even sensible reason.

[Lunai]

[font=trebuchet ms][color=darkorchid]I hate to say it, but living in California the death penalty doesn't mean much of anything.

A whole lot of criminals (well, perhaps not a whole lot. I avoid the news like it's the Black Plague) end up on Death Row in California.

Know how many people have actually been executed here in the last 12 years? Less than 5.[/font][/color]

[Godelsensei]

The main problem with the death-penalty is that the courts make mistakes.

Having an innocent person end up on death row is a risk that simply isn't worth it. (Life in prison is probably more of a punishment for allot of people than simply dying, anyway, though this argument is entirely relative.)

[Chaos]

No, the main mistake with the death penalty is that it takes an inmate ten years to get there, all the while taking tax-payer money to make the bastards comfortable. They should just put them in front of a firing squad and be done with it. We all gotta die sometime, right? Why not make it quick? -_-;

Seriously, it costs like a hundred thousand dollars for upkeep of an inmate on death row. Forget that, man. Just pay .47 cents for a bullet in the head.

[Baron Samedi]

[size=1]When you continue to value the life of a murderer, you are placing his life above his past victim's, his future victim's, and maybe your own. By not taking decisive action against repeat, violent murderers, you are saying that they have a greater right to life than their victims. A system that gives people too many chances is a willing accomplice to murder.

When you allow a rapist to go free, and rape once more, and then repeat the whole cycle again, you are saying that his life is more vlauable than the lives of the people he abuses.

A serial murderer or rapist is someone who has made the conscious decision to forfeit any right they have to a free life, or indeed, any life at all. You cannot say that a murderer has a right to their life. Perhaps forms of incarceration would be better...but the public view of incarceration is a lot harsher than the reality often is.[/size]

[G.D. Ryoko]

I don't think the death penalty is alright. I mean it's like the criminal is getting off easily. That they are not being punished enough. I know, I sound like a sadist but that's just how I feel. I think that criminals should just rot in jail for life for what they done.

Plus, I think that its inhumane and it isn't justified. I mean you exicute a guy because he committed capital murder but why isn't the person that put the guy to death not being killed? Are they not committing murder? The death penalty is just a silly.

Sorry for sounding immature but I'm only 16.

[Chaos]

[quote name='G.D. Ryoko']I don't think the death penalty is alright. I mean it's like the criminal is getting off easily. That they are not being punished enough.[/quote]


Spoken like a true fool. Have you ever even visited a jail cell? I've spent a few nights in the blue cage for being out too late and got picked up for fighting at a party once, and that's not fun at all. Now, imagine you're on a maximum security block, twenty-three hour lockdown, with convicted murderers, rapists, arsonists, etc. They have even more demented people on death row, and they're not afraid of much since they're gonna die soon any way. The average time spent on death row before execution is over a decade. Not only do you know you're gonna die, but you also know what you're up against. Not a pretty lifestyle at all.

[quote name='G.D. Ryoko']I think that criminals should just rot in jail for life for what they done.[/quote]

Typical underage attitude. Lock 'em up and throw away the key. Seems like it would work. Too bad we as tax-paying citizens pay for their housing, upkeep, and general living establishments. And at the rate in which people are convicted, we'd be making more and more prisons than we already have.

[quote name='G.D. Ryoko']Plus, I think that its inhumane and it isn't justified. I mean you exicute a guy because he committed capital murder but why isn't the person that put the guy to death not being killed? Are they not committing murder? The death penalty is just a silly[/quote]

Because the people that do the sentancing are voicing the law. They just represent what your parents and forefathers voted on. Plus they didn't slit a throat or pull a trigger. They happen to be, for the most part, upstanding citizens working for the government.

[quote name='G.D. Ryoko']Sorry for sounding immature but I'm only 16.[/quote]

Don't worry about it. We were all at some time. Or will be. *waves dismissively*

[Pumpkin]

[FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=1]I agree with the death penalty, but to a certain extent. Only if that person is a huge danger to society, or has escaped once from jail. I think its better to make them suffer a long harsh life in jail then to let them get off easy. It's sad, but to me, I don't think murderers are scared of death and hope that they get the injection. Its painless and they would be 'free of their troubles'. Making them wake up everyday having to think about why they are in that prison and suffer is a better punishment. But thats just me. [/FONT][/SIZE]

[Red]

[quote name='Chaos']Typical underage attitude. Lock 'em up and throw away the key. Seems like it would work. Too bad we as tax-paying citizens pay for their housing, upkeep, and general living establishments. And at the rate in which people are convicted, we'd be making more and more prisons than we already have.[/quote]

I doubt very highly there's such a thing as "typical underage attitude". ;)

You're hardly paying for a five star hotel for these people to live in. You said it yourself, prison is not the most pleasant of places to reside. As an American tax payer you're currently helping to pay $4 billion a month for the war in Iraq; peanuts compared to what you'll be paying to keep such a terrible criminal behind bars.

As the population increases, so will the amount of crimes being committed. More prisons will be required. The number of criminals in prison that aren't on death row far outweighs those that are; leaving them on 'normal' sentences would not be a massive drain on resources.

[quote]Because the people that do the sentancing are voicing the law. They just represent what your parents and forefathers voted on. Plus they didn't slit a throat or pull a trigger. They happen to be, for the most part, upstanding citizens working for the government.[/QUOTE]

Who still order the death of a person. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there other sentences that can be handed down that don't involve the penalty - regardless of crime?

Personally, I see the death penalty as entirely pointless & an easy way out. I would much prefer to see my cousin's killer face a lifetime in jail so that he might be able to think about what action he took that day, and face due punishment. Time is a very precious thing - taking it away from someone can make them at least think; releasing them from it's constraints (despite the monumental amount of time they spend on death row) is an escape, to me at least.

[Kamuro]

I do believe that some people deserve to die for things they've done, but thats the exact point I'm going to contradict right now, who actually gets to decide whether someone should live or die? if you did something wrong, would you really want your life to be in the hands of our government?

[Heaven's Cloud]

[QUOTE=Lalaith Ril][color=indigo]

In my opinion the death penalty is something of a necessity in our society, because of the way we have structured it. In our lives we have written an eye for an eye, we believe the punishment should fit the action, and if the action is murder well then the punishment must then be punishment.

[/color][/QUOTE]

[color=indigo]I am by no means picking Lalaith Ril, I just want to use this statement to point out inconsistencies in America?s (my) legal system.

If you are convicted of check fraud in North Carolina, no matter the amount, you will have a minimum of a one thousand dollar fee and eighty hours of community service. I know this for a fact because one of my old roommates stole my check book and wrote an $80 check in my name. While this was a jerk of a move by someone I thought was my friend, I would have just made him pay me back and maybe hit him?hard. Unfortunately I didn?t know he was the culprit until after the bank filed a police report, at which point it was out of my hands. If evaluated in a strictly monetary manner (including minimum wage compensation for the hours of community service worked) he paid almost $1500 for an $80 offence, and that is before lawyer fees are factored in.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, is the death penalty a fitting punishment for someone that raped and murdered a person? It definitely isn?t an equal punishment.

I guess I am in favor of abolishing the death penalty as long as it also incorporates general prison reform. Prisons have become too social, and instead of becoming a place for repentance and self reflection, it has become a school to further educate criminals in their trade.

My biggest problem with the death penalty is that the system errors. When I wrote a paper on the subject in high school seventy-five people had been killed that had later been found innocent of their crimes. Sure, that isn?t a large margin of error, but it is enough to dissuade my faith in it.[/color]

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Interesting, most interesting.

I have to admit that I've always been against the Death Penalty, even thought it's been abolished in Ireland for the better part of forty years if I remember correctly. Chaos does bring up a good point in the fact that those who state "[I]Lock them up and throw away the key[/I]", aren't facing that there is a serious cost to maintaining prisons. However I honestly feel that a society cannot claim to be civilised if it activity executes it's own citizens, no matter what their crime, and as such simply stating that "[I]Executing them is cheaper than keeping them locked up[/I]" in not a valid point.

That is not to say however that I don't believe that people who commit crimes should be just given a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again, people who do commit violent crimes should be given punishment in proportion to the crime. It is sickening to think that in my own home country a person who murders someone else will probably only face a sentence of eight years, if not less because of parole. However there is of course the fact that people are genuinely repentant for what they?ve done and that should be taken into account.

Even though I'm not in favour of the death penalty I believe that there should be mandatory minimum prison sentences for offences and that the reflect the severity of the crime, i.e. a murderer should be given at least 20 years to show that they have committed a heinous crime, though there would also have to be room for extenuating circumstances.

Yes I did waffle a lot there and to be honest I could probably sum up what I?ve said up there in a few words: No Death Penalty, but longer periods of incarceration for crimes, or make them more proportionate to the crime itself. If a person has committed serial murder and is likely to again then those people should be locked up for the rest of their natural lives and damn the cost, just because they have acted like animals does not mean we can put them down like one. [/SIZE]

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f]I agree with the death penalty, and that it should be carried out soon after the murderer is found guilty.

It should not be painless, such as lethal injection, because that would be unfair to the person who was killed. This might sound harsh, but hey peoples, an eye for an eye I say. The murderer needs to know how their victim felt when he/she murdered them. The murder needs to feel (a little) pain and fear. I say beheading, which is not too painful if done with a sharp blade. It's not as "cruel" as the electric chair, nor as "sympatheitc" as lethal injection.[quote name='Godelsensei']The main problem with the death-penalty is that the courts make mistakes.[/quote]True, so I think the only time the death penalty should be carried out is if you have good witnesses.[/COLOR]

[elfpirate]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][color=#004a6f]I agree with the death penalty, and that it should be carried out soon after the murderer is found guilty.

It should not be painless, such as lethal injection, because that would be unfair to the person who was killed. This might sound harsh, but hey peoples, an eye for an eye I say. The murderer needs to know how their victim felt when he/she murdered them. The murder needs to feel (a little) pain and fear. I say beheading, which is not too painful if done with a sharp blade. It's not as "cruel" as the electric chair, nor as "sympatheitc" as lethal injection.True, so I think the only time the death penalty should be carried out is if you have good witnesses.[/color][/QUOTE]
[b]Hey, Chabi-- what makes you so certain that lethal injection is painless? I mean, the person injected gets a vein full of poison that goes straight to their heart. I'm assuming it's not like being pumped full of morphine or something.[/b]

[b]I, for one--agree with Chabi to a point in that I believe in the death penalty, but that it is handled ever so wrongly. But it is not the method in itself that I find inadequate.[/b]

[b]The system should not be the ones taking a murderer's life... the loved ones of the victims should be able to do it ..and in whatever way seems fit to them.[/b]

[b]Then again, my perspective is a little bit biased and jaded. I personally, would like to inflict pain and death upon whomever it was that killed the people that I cared about and loved... with my own two hands. In no other way would I be satisfied-- not even if I watched the execution (performed by the state) first hand. (Yes, I realise that I sound creepy--and I really don't care)[/b]

[SunfallE]

[QUOTE=elfpirate][b]Hey, Chabi-- what makes you so certain that lethal injection is painless? I mean, the person injected gets a vein full of poison that goes straight to their heart. I'm assuming it's not like being pumped full of morphine or something.[/b]

[b]I, for one--agree with Chabi to a point in that I believe in the death penalty, but that it is handled ever so wrongly. But it is not the method in itself that I find inadequate.[/b]

[b]The system should not be the ones taking a murderer's life... the loved ones of the victims should be able to do it ..and in whatever way seems fit to them.[/b]

[b]Then again, my perspective is a little bit biased and jaded. I personally, would like to inflict pain and death upon whomever it was that killed the people that I cared about and loved... with my own two hands. In no other way would I be satisfied-- not even if I watched the execution (performed by the state) first hand. (Yes, I realise that I sound creepy--and I really don't care)[/b][/QUOTE]

I hadn't really thought about it, but I kind of agree with elfpirate that the loved ones of the victim should not only be able to do it, but in whatever way seems fit. I know that for myself personally, I would love to take the drunk driver that ran my brother off the road and do the same to him. See how he likes rolling several times and landing upside down in a river. grrrrr!

So I wouldn't say you sound creepy, in fact I can see why you might feel that strongly.

[CB Shin]

Plain and simple, the Death Penalty is not the solution here, but rather, a part of it. The philosophy of "An Eye for an Eye" was developed by Hammurabi in ancient times. I believe that we, as a modern society, have alternate solutions. There are flaws in both points, i have seen. On one hand, killing a person can be seen as immoral, wrong and sometimes, ineffective for wiping out the crime as a whole, however, on the other hand, keeping them alive is a waste of resources. No, we have to instill a type of mentality in society that will eliminate crime almost entirely. The way I see it, Crime is much like Heresy, it is not simply enough to kill the Criminal/Heretic, but to destroy the thoughts they ever had in the beginning. If one dies without realizing he did anything wrong, you can be sure that there will always be others who will commit similar crimes. The alternate solution? An extreme rehabilitation program that will teach these people shame for their deeds. Only when they have realized what they have done can they die. It may seem cruel to kill them after they are rehabilitated, but in order to ensure these crimes do not happen again, we cannot take risks. I feel no mercy for those who give none...

[Juke Box Hero]

[quote name='CB Shin']Plain and simple, the Death Penalty is not the solution here, but rather, a part of it. The philosophy of "An Eye for an Eye" was developed by Hammurabi in ancient times. I believe that we, as a modern society, have alternate solutions. There are flaws in both points, i have seen. On one hand, killing a person can be seen as immoral, wrong and sometimes, ineffective for wiping out the crime as a whole, however, on the other hand, keeping them alive is a waste of resources. No, we have to instill a type of mentality in society that will eliminate crime almost entirely. The way I see it, Crime is much like Heresy, it is not simply enough to kill the Criminal/Heretic, but to destroy the thoughts they ever had in the beginning. If one dies without realizing he did anything wrong, you can be sure that there will always be others who will commit similar crimes. The alternate solution? An extreme rehabilitation program that will teach these people shame for their deeds. Only when they have realized what they have done can they die. It may seem cruel to kill them after they are rehabilitated, but in order to ensure these crimes do not happen again, we cannot take risks. I feel no mercy for those who give none...[/quote]

Perhaps in an ideal world. The science of economics is the study of how to distribute limited resources for maximum effectiveness. Spending untold fortunes doing psych washing on countless criminals is not only unrealistic, its imbicilic. Even the mighty US of A, greatest economy to ever exist and by far the most powerful in the world (The entire EU doesn't put out as much as the Pacific Rim States), cannot afford such fripperies.

The line about someone dying without knowing his wrong, and thus others will follow in his footsteps is utter nonsense. How will Joe Schmoe's knowing what he did was wrong prevent or dissuade me from doing the same thing? Life is a action/reation game. If one decides that an action is worth the reaction, one will do it, regardless of the pyschological aspect of criminals that one has never met/interacted with.

You feel no mercy for those who give none? There is no grace in your life?

[Dirt]

[b][color=darkgreen]I'm with SunfallE and elfpirate on this one.[/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]Prison is [i]meant[/i] to be an extreme rehabilitation... and it's one that we've employed since ancient times--and it has never worked.[/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]I mean, unless you have an idea on how to change the way people think and feel, which, so far, no one does, we're stuck with prisons, max security psychiatric lockup, and the death penalty as our only options.[/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]I suppose we haven't tried some Clockwork Orange kind of crap, but... in all reality, the so-called rehab programs do their best and fail 99% of the time. [/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]You can't monitor the way that people think-- because people lie. Not all criminals are stupid--they know what the therapists want to hear.[/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]Besides, say they find a way to rehabilitate a person who is guilty of raping and murdering children... how fair would it be that they could then be free and and simply shrug off what they have done, saying "Well, that was the old me-- I'm different now".[/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]That person is entitled to live as afree person because now they've been readjusted somehow? Bah! Screw that.[/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400][/color][/b]
[b][color=#006400]If they could make someone like that "normal", I say that they go ahead and do that-- and then let the victim's family after them, because the victims were "normal" when they were murdered, too.[/color][/b]

[CB Shin]

Raid3r, would you rather let them rot in a prison cell for life, expending your tax money without even getting the satisfaction that they have fully regretted their decision? Or would you rather let them die sooner, without justice for the victims, or themselves for that matter? No, my hypothetical solution may not be realistic economic-wise, however, it has merit in the idea of justice. Would you, as a family member of a victim, want the criminal to die without repenting or attoning for their crimes at all? Though current methods are enough to sustain such individuals who have commited severe crimes, it is not enough for the majority. We will never then be able to abolish or damage the crime rate, only contain it to where it is today. Even then, it fluctuates wildly, becoming unpredictable. I am simply try to think up of alternate choices, rather than the two currently presented to us. I must admit though, I was thinking along the lines of methods from the book "1984" by George Orwell and the Inquisitions of Medieval times, although both methods were niether justified or fair, so there is some difference...

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f][quote name='elfpirate][b']Hey, Chabi-- what makes you so certain that lethal injection is painless? I mean, the person injected gets a vein full of poison that goes straight to their heart. I'm assuming it's not like being pumped full of morphine or something.[/b][/quote]True, I'm not [B]certain[/B] it's painless, I never said it was, but I assume it is much less painful than the electric chair. America has tried to make the death penalty less "cruel". First it was the electric chair, then it was the cyanide gas chamber, and now lethal injection. I also heard, thought I'm not sure, that the poison used in lethal injection is the the same, if not, similar to the kind they use to put down animals. Most of the time animals are put down to take them out of their misery. They wouldn't inflict pain on them.

I'm assuming this poison doesn't feel like fire when injected, it just stops the body from working. A poison is just an enzyme that stops a reaction from happening, in the case of lethal injection, it stops reactions neccesary for the body to live.

Anyway, I think there are disputes over subjects like the death penalty due to the fact that some people believe in God and others don't.

In a secular point of view, death is the end, and the murderer is not given a chance to change his ways, nor is he forgiven.

In a religious point of view (well some religions), although God can forgive you for your sins, you still must face the consequences of your actions. Therefore, it is better to be put to death and face your lord "pure" on the day of judgement, than to escape the death penalty and be damned to hell.

Lol, I always somehow drag religion into everything, which probably infuriates some of you. But I honestly think this is the one of the main reasons people disagree on so many topics.[/COLOR]