The Death Penalty
 

What is your opinion on the Death Penalty? I believe that it is fundamentally wrong to take a life, and that nothing can excuse it. However, I know that it is a very controversial topic, so I wondered what the views of the other forumers were...

my opinion is....

EYE FOR AN EYE!

So screw the so called 'humaine' exacutions.
if they do the crime...they should have it done EXACTLY as they did it back to them (or as close as they can....). That way...they will experence the pain and suffering they inflicted on their victims...
My reasoning for this is simple, those creeps weren't exactly 'humaine' to their victims were they? So why should they get a quick, painless death?

Mal: *looks around and decides to leave* *bolts*

So you don't believe that Rehabilitation is possible, then?

So, did that person they murdered deserved to die? Was it okay for him/her to kill that innocent soul?

I'm not to keen on the subject, but I to think it really depends on what the crime is.

[ February 07, 2002: Message edited by: MojoMan220 ]

Depends on the crime and how remorseful the accused is (ie if it was an accident). If he/she truly remorseful for what he/she has done...then yes get them help.

Well considering that it's the Death Penalty, I don't think that Un-paid parking fines count. If your getting Death, chances are it's bad.

But with these Taliban/Alkedia guys, should they get the Death Penalty? They never killed anyone, but because they are part of the group, they suffer.

No i'm againest the death penalty, killing does not stop killing what i mean by that is if a person is up 4 the death penalty because that person has killed innocent people, then the people that want him killed r just as crazy and ****ed up as he was, u r doing the egsact same thing as the murder "Killing!" It's not up to another to take another beings life away.

I think that if the person did it on perpose and isn't mentally ill or has problems like that he/she should get killed themselves. But if they are mentally ill then they should get help because their dumb.

"Let he among you who is without sin, cast the first stone." - John 8:7

While religion shouldn't be the backbone of any laws governing all people, that quote pretty much sums up my beliefs. Judgement isn't an easy thing to pass on another human being, as we haven't experienced life the way they have. It becomes serious when such judgements decide whether or not a person will live.

A society that kills its lowest citizens is a society that needs fixing. As Danny suggested, the focus should be on rehabilitation rather than retribution.

I am strongly opposed to the death penalty. What if it is proved that a person did not commit the crime of which they are accused, after they've been killed? You can't bring them back to life - God knows there's been enough wrongful executions already.

Besides, as Rach's characters always used to trumpet, "death is a release" - you kill someone, it means they don't have to do penance for their crimes. Far better for a murderer to be locked away for the rest of his/her life with no hope of ever getting out. The only constraint, I feel, is cost, but then they're meant to be locked up as a punishment, we don't HAVE to give them all the "luxuries" the Govt is accused of giving them...

I would be more inclined to be in favor of the death penalty if I had faith in the judicial system. one time in school there was a debate and the teacher picked people from the class to debate the death penalty. the people against the death penalty change there argument from "its humane" to "make 'em suffer".

No in most cases and no if the 'soul' was innocent.

The word 'soul' isn't approprite when we're talking about humans because, in my opinion, other animals also have souls. But we can't communicate with animals well enough to apply laws to them.

Some people are just totally off the deep end and deserve to die. Was Gacy defendable? Would Dohmer rehabilitate himself? Timothy McVeigh killed thousands of people, many of them children, is that exscusable? The death penalty is a deterent and a way to rid the world of the most violent and deranged threats to society. I agree that it shouldn't be tossed around and treated with disrespect, but you have to admit, sometimes the bastards have it comming to them. I think as soon as a person is giving the death penalty he or she has a maximum of one month left, then they die. If a peson can just file appeals out the ass and at the worst delay the execution for a few decades and at best weasel out on and arcade technicality, what kind of justtice or punishment is that. It can and should be done, that is enforcing the death penalty, as quickly and expediantly as possible, otherwise what kind of deterent is it?

1. Who?

2. But what if they're innocent?

3. A democratic one.

Gacy was a murderous pervert and Dahmer killed and ate people. 2 Only a handful were proven innocent by means of DNA, so as far as that goes, the Government has a pretty good track record in that. 3 Why not let people file an assload of appeals? It stops other trials from proceding, all the litigation costs a lot of money, it costs a lot of money to house a criminal on death row, and I'm sure people wouldn't mind paying less tax money to keep them alive, and lastly, do you think criminals are afraid of prison as it is now? Absolutly not! They get out years early on parole and good behavior and don't see the death penalty as what it is designed to be: A fearsome tool to make people think twice before commiting unspeakable crimes. I think it would put the fear of God in a lot of people if they thoght they would be severly penalized and killed for breaking the law.

1. Of course it's not "excusable". Nobody said it was. That doesn't make it right to take another human life.

2. If that is the case, how come America's Crime Rate is one of the highest in the world?

3. That is a harsh and cynical view to take. To quote Gandalf (embarrasedly): "Many that live deserve death. And many that die deserve life. Can you give that to them? Then don't be so hasty to deal out punishments..." It's not as literary as Sydney's quote, and it's probably wrong, since I haven't read the book in a while, but I think it is very perceptive...

4. You have that much faith in your justice system to get the verdict right first time? Maybe you're not as cynical as I thought...

5. The Death Penalty clearly doesn't work as a Deterrant, if you will see #2, and also Teal's post, which might partially explain it...

6. What about all the innocent people sent to the Chair whose cases were never reviewed? You wouldn't hear about them...

7. On average, it costs considerably more money to execute a person than to keep them in prison for the rest of their life. (Bear in mind that all sentences are shorter than this.) So the Economic Argument does not hold up...

8. Where the hell did you get this idea that Prisons are luxurious, decadent places?

9. Yes, they are. This is the whole point of Rehabilitation.

10. They ARE killed for breaking the law. America's crime rate is STILL one of the highest. Work it out...

*decides not to comment on "Fear of God"...*

I personally feel that the death penalty is a cheap way out for a murderer(or worse) i mean, a killer has his fun, slaughters some innocent people, maybe rapes a few people, ya never know...then after a brief prison stay and hearing, is put to death.
I'd rather know that they're spending every last moment of their lives behind bars. although i am all for rehabing those who can be helped, 'special cases' deserve special treatment, like the death penalty.

Dragadon, as much as i like the idea of your 'eye for an eye' plan, there's a catch...some one would have to do the deed.
most people working death row have a hard enough time flipping the switch for an electric chair, gas chamber, ect..i don't think many people would be willing to kill some one the same way they killed their victims.

Rehabilitation just doesn't work, it makes things worse. In america, anyway. A well documented case about my homeland in Minnesota shows this amply. Minnesota had more rehabilitation centers for sexual offenders than any other state, more than 60 of them. Many people simply went to a "rehabilitation" center, got out of jail early and here are the stats on what happened to these now sanctified and cured offenders. Rapists commited 3 more sexually related crimes, while molesters did 4 more sexually related crimes! Of course, sexual crimes have reached epidemic proportions in dear old "Give the rapist another chance" Minnesota. Coincidence? Me thinks not.

So even in extreme cases where rehabilitation is deemed impossible (although the methods of rehabilitation at the centers you alluded would be questionable), you're happy to throw compassion out the window?

It's been shown time and time again that the death penalty is not a deterant against crime. Shouldn't society deal with its less favourable people in a compassionate, sensible fashion rather than a barbaric "off with their heads" approach? Also, particularly directed at Statikk, aren't your opinions on capital punishment unbiblical?

Simple solution...
Have the family of the victim 'throw the switch'. It would be the vigilantes legal way a getting justice.
Now that I think about it there would be one exception...with sex offenders that just won't 'rehibilite'...cut it off...yes you know what I am taking about...castration
This is how I have it set up in my Saurian Isle stories.

Yes it does. You are looking at one specific case among many. You can't generalise like that.

You have some of the most convincing arguments Sydney, and I agree with you completly.

Don't you mean vengeance? The families of the victims in the Oklahoma bombing said they didn't feel any better after having watched the execution of Timothy McVeigh.

No 'vigilante' is someone who takes the law into their own hands, which is against the law. Allowing them to 'throw the switch' would allow them the 'legal' way to vengeance.
Course I have a major beef with how the justice system works...I mean you got offenders living in 'luxurary' in the jails, being allowed to watch TV...take collage...those sorts of things. And WE, lawabiding citizens, PAY for that! I mean...I can understand the lower offenders doing these things...(robbers and such)...but not sex offers and murderers...
ack..I got off topic...sorry...I'll shut up...

Sorry, I knew what you meant by vigilanteism, I meant to say that it would be vengeance as opposed to justice. There are many things those affected by crime would like to do to their perpetrators, but that's why laws exist to prevent them.

A vigilante usually bases themselves on vengeance. Therefore it would be vengeance, not justice if we were to allow some kind of legal vigilanteism.

Where do people get the idea that prisoners live a life of luxury? They live a foul, dirty life...

Ëxecution is wrong since it can give people the thought that killing people that you think is bad is right. It can kill innocent people and it's quite unecessary too. I can't prove my point, but I have one.

they live a life of luxary here in the States....*Growl*
heck...some criminals even do the crime on purpose so they can get back in jail...

[ February 09, 2002: Message edited by: Dragadon ]

i think that if the crime was only an injury and the person was still alive then the other person shouldn't get the death penalty i think only a murderer that has killed people more than once should deserve the death penalty.