Death Penalty

[PowerWizard]

What do you think of death penalty? Is it justified? Yes, no - why? I think one inclines much more to accepting death penalty, if he lives in a country, where it is an accepted punishment.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Um, if he used the banhammer, you'd be banned.

Anyways, here's my post from the other thread;

I've seen some studies that say for every actual execution, several murders are prevented.

and inevitably results in the murders of innocents and the freedom of some of society's worst criminals due to miscarriages of justice.

The freedom of criminals? How so?

Anyways, I am not theoretically against it. In practicality, I'm leaning against it, because of all the problems with police, prosecutors, eyewitnesses, etc.

CR

[Vuk]

What do you think of death penalty? Is it justified? Yes, no - why? I think one inclines much more to accepting death penalty, if he lives in a country, where it is an accepted punishment.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

PS my other thread was locked and I got infracted, lolwut? Why? For criticizing death penalty and saying that if you support it you missed a few hundred years of social development? For having a firm opinion? Which of the Org rules did I break? Anyway, I hope this OP is acceptable for Banquo's Ghost. If not, would he be so kind to leave a note in the thread or edit out the stuff that contradicts his views instead of instantly pounding down with the banhammer? I've got to reply here, since he ignores my PMs. Cheers.

I believe the problem is that you attacked people, not a belief PowerWiz. You did not just say bad things about the death penalty, you said bad things about people who believe in it. Also, your post was just an attack with very little/no room left for discussion. I believe you will find that BG actually agrees with you on this, so saying that he editted it out because it contradicted his viewpoints is absurd.

[Tribesman]

Kill them all and let god sort out which ones were innocent .

[PowerWizard]

I believe the problem is that you attacked people, not a belief PowerWiz. You did not just say bad things about the death penalty, you said bad things about people who believe in it. Also, your post was just an attack with very little/no room left for discussion. I believe you will find that BG actually agrees with you on this, so saying that he editted it out because it contradicted his viewpoints is absurd.

Ummm... no I didn't attack anyone here. I attacked a political/moral view and talked figuratively in my historical example. People shouldn't take offense at such things. So if I would say (another topic), that if you support the American government that kidnaps people and hands them over to countries who specialize in torture, you are supporting an inhuman, barbarian practice, would that also be an infractable offense at the Backroom + the thread locked? Anyway, I chose a different point of view in this thread, so can we carry on with this one? Thanks.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Kill them all and let god sort out which ones were innocent .

But who will kill the killers, after said killers have killed the rest? Do try to think ahead.

Ummm... no I didn't attack anyone here. I attacked a political/moral view and talked figuratively in my historical example. People shouldn't take offense at such things. So if I would say (another topic), that if you support the American government that kidnaps people and hands them over to countries who specialize in torture, you are supporting an inhuman, barbarian practice, would that also be an infractable offense at the Backroom + the thread locked?

Sorry, but you didn't say that. You personally insulted the people who disagreed with you.

CR

[PowerWizard]

Sorry, but you didn't say that. You personally insulted the people who disagreed with you.

No, I didn't. First off, I can't insult ten millions of people personally who support death penalty for no apparent reason other than obstinately sticking to their outdated traditions. Secondly (again), I was talking figuratively in my historical example, not to be meant literally. Come on guys, chill out. Let's continue this debate.

[Vuk]

Kill them all and let god sort out which ones were innocent .

It is like saying that police should not respond to school shootings, because we may accidently inflict freindly fire while saving people's lives. Yeah, it happens, and it really is a shame, but the answer is not to stop doing what saves the lives of innocents, but to take steps to reduce "friendly-fire" by overhauling our ed-up justice system. Sure, it still could happen, just like with the best procedures and plans police could accidently hit innocents when they are saving a classroom from a school shooter, but there is always a chance of that and you should do your best to minimize the chance. Oh dear, innocents are killed in car crashez! Banz auots! hhmmmm...or try to minimize the possibility of that happening. You cannot judge something entirely because there is a chance that mistakes can be made, mistakes can be made in many areas of life that lead to innocent people's deaths. The thing to do is focus on making sure that your system minimises the possibility. The death penalty, like police responding to school shootings saves the lives of innocents, and with both of those (and driving) there is a chance innocents can die, but that does not make them bad.
I believe that every murderer and rapist should be put to death. Mainly because it will deter others from doing the same thing, and because it gets rid of the chance of repeat offenders. Another thing is, that if done correctly (unlike the messed up system we have now), it could actually save a lot of money. Give deathpenalty cases highest priority so we can work through the appeals in a few months, then give them a volley in the head. What would that cost, 32 cents per round? That is pretty cheap. Then turn their bodies over to their families to dispose of, and if they do not want them, dump them into the sea or donate them to research and medicine. If people knew that is what would happen to them if they raped someone or murdered someone, you would have a lot fewer rapists and murderers, and probably a lot fewer total deaths, both innocent and guilty.

[Tribesman]

It is like saying that police should not respond to school shootings

Reading problems

[Vuk]

Reading problems

Was I wrong then in assuming that you were being sarcastic?

[Rhyfelwyr]

I don't buy the argument that the death penalty is impractical because you can't undo it if someone is later found to be innocent. You can't give someone back 27 years of their life either. With or without the death penalty, a very, very small minority will suffer injustice and be falsely charged. However, this cannot stand as a barrier to having any sort of effective justice system on the larger scale.

People say you have to be as close as possible to 100% certain of a person's guilt before administering the death penalty, but then I would think the same applies to sentencing a person to prison. What do judges say? "Oh well, he's only going inside for a couple of years so it doesn't matter". Hmm don't think so.

[InsaneApache]

I used to be in favour of the death penalty but recent miscarriagies of justice, here in the UK, has changed my mind.

I still think scumbags like Sutcliffe and Neilson should get the chop though. Contradictory? Of course, it's part of the human condition.

[PowerWizard]

What do judges say? "Oh well, he's only going inside for a couple of years so it doesn't matter". Hmm don't think so.

Which judge said that? Quote and link the source or it didn't happen.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Which judge said that? Quote and link the source or it didn't happen.

Of course it didn't happen, that's my point. Should you not be as close to 100% certain as possibe before sentencing someone to prison?

[rory_20_uk]

Yes, that right! It's Groundhog day!

Time to dig up all those old classics again and repeat one's oft stated views again!


Ahem...

I am FOR the death penalty in principle, but not set for a specific crime. The evidence has to be something like premeditated stabbing caught on CCTV with several witnesses.

The corpse can then be used more productively as either for organ transplantation or for phase 2 and 3 drug trials.

[PowerWizard]

Of course it didn't happen, that's my point. Should you not be as close to 100% certain as possibe before sentencing someone to prison?

The same applies to capital punishment. If you can't be 100% certain of someone's innocence, how can you kill him? You simply cannot.

[tibilicus]

I've expressed my views on this in the past and most people know them.


I just find there's far to many different factors which can lead to a miscarriage of justice and that even if a criminal is blatantly guilty I still see prison as a more fitting punishment. Let them rot in a hole for 50 years, deaths an easy way out.

[Vuk]

I've expressed my views on this in the past and most people know them.


I just find there's far to many different factors which can lead to a miscarriage of justice and that even if a criminal is blatantly guilty I still see prison as a more fitting punishment. Let them rot in a hole for 50 years, deaths an easy way out.

Those same factors can lead to a miscarriage of justice with prison sentencing, and as you yourself pointed out, death is the 'easy way out'. I for one would much rather recieve a bullet in my head than spend half my life in a prison. That is just torture. I do not think that it is up to us to punish people with things like that. I think that the death penalty should be used to better society, not to get our vengance. "Vengance shall be mine sayeth the Lord"

When we try to punish people and there is a miscarriage of justice, that just makes it all the worse. I think we should have jails to hold people, but not prisons at all. They are inhumane.

[InsaneApache]

I don't know about the rest of the world but in the UK you're more likely to be murdered by someone you know. Killings by strangers are rare. Husbands, wives, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, friends.

A 'domestic' gone wrong in most instances. Now if you'd had the brothers I had, not the mention my first Mrs. you can see a reason for justifiable homicide in every case.

[PowerWizard]

Those same factors can lead to a miscarriage of justice with prison sentencing, and as you yourself pointed out, death is the 'easy way out'. I for one would much rather recieve a bullet in my head than spend half my life in a prison.

Even if you know you are innocent? Sorry, but that makes no sense.

[Furunculus]

British - for the death penalty

there are some people who i believe do not have the right to continue wasting oxygen on.

The death penalty is nothing short of barbarism. It is also exceptionally expensive, totally counter-productive and inevitably results in the murders of innocents and the freedom of some of society's worst criminals due to miscarriages of justice. Basically it's a pre-Enlightenment practice. Wait.. no. It is a notion so barbaric that in 1800BC the Hittites had collectively liberalised their capital punishment laws, reserving it for crimes against the Gods. If you support it you are developed as a early Babylonian shite cleaner.

roflmao

[CountArach]

I'm an Aussie and we got rid of the Death penalty a while back. I'm completely opposed to teh death penalty on pacifistic grounds.

[KukriKhan]

US. My country applies death penalty and I'm AGAINST death penalty.

Too big and indiscriminate a hammer to entrust to my bumbling authorities. Arrest and loss of liberty are plenty big enough sanctions for them to play God with.

That said, I am a hypocrite. Thusly: if some goon kills my wife or child, I will feel compelled to take that guy's life. Not the State; I.

[Marshal Murat]

Kukri, the US doesn't apply the death penalty. Specific states apply the death penalty, others don't. Unfair to states like Alaska, Minnesota, or Wisconsin.


I'm for the death penalty. Some criminals simply need to be put down like rabid dogs, those who've committed heinous crimes against mankind. No man, no problem. While it's effect as a deterrent are left in the air, it does create a serious punishment for those who commit a serious crime; fair.


Besides, as the Enlightened person that I am, I have realized that with the enormous population growth the world has undergone, some "culling of the flock" needs to happen. How can we support all these people with dwindling resources? So any infraction will result in the death penalty.

[PowerWizard]

I'm for the death penalty. Some criminals simply need to be put down like rabid dogs, those who've committed heinous crimes against mankind. No man, no problem. While it's effect as a deterrent are left in the air, it does create a serious punishment for those who commit a serious crime; fair.

Violence is the last resort of the incompetent.

Besides, as the Enlightened person that I am, I have realized that with the enormous population growth the world has undergone, some "culling of the flock" needs to happen. How can we support all these people with dwindling resources? So any infraction will result in the death penalty.

Even though you are joking, you are joking with genocide. Not funny.

[seireikhaan]

The death penalty, on practical terms in the US, generally doesn't work all that effectively. Amazingly enough, appeals processes cost more than simply locking them in a box for the rest of their life. And, of course, the bit that not everyone is actually guilty. Human error and such.

CAVEAT: There are rare cases of indisputable mass crimes against humanity, on the international scene, generally. If Hitler had been captured alive, he would have deserved the death penalty many times over. Others like him- Saddam, Kim Jung Il, etc.... The civil right to use the death penalty should be reserved for these very, very rare cases.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Ummm... no I didn't attack anyone here. I attacked a political/moral view and talked figuratively in my historical example. People shouldn't take offense at such things. So if I would say (another topic), that if you support the American government that kidnaps people and hands them over to countries who specialize in torture, you are supporting an inhuman, barbarian practice, would that also be an infractable offense at the Backroom + the thread locked? Anyway, I chose a different point of view in this thread, so can we carry on with this one? Thanks.

Your first thread was specifically offensive. Boil down your post and it read:

A is very bad. Even ancient society C moved past the use of A. If you still support A, you are no more "advanced" than a low-echelon member of society C. This clearly labels any supporter of A as low-echelon type. Indirect attack to any and all readers. Not permissable.

Your US Government example boils down to:

USG does evil act A. If you support USG, you are implicitly supporting A.

There is no direct component of attack on the reader. You are besmirching the USG, but that does not constitute a personal attack, only a politically viscious comment. The key here is in the 2nd example you do not define a negative personal state for the reader, only suggest that they might want to rethink things in light of your argument. Different in tone entirely.

Now, having dealt with the inevitable "why was my thread closed" riff in the nearly-as-inevitable follow on thread, please, all, DO discuss the death penalty. Further "meta" discussions on moderation should be in a thread in the BR watchtower -- the correct venue for such concerns/complaints.

Play on!

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I don't buy the argument that the death penalty is impractical because you can't undo it if someone is later found to be innocent. You can't give someone back 27 years of their life either. With or without the death penalty, a very, very small minority will suffer injustice and be falsely charged. However, this cannot stand as a barrier to having any sort of effective justice system on the larger scale.

Which is better, to spend 10 years in prison and be executed or 11 years and be released? Removing the death penalty allows for the possibility of new evidence coming to light.

[Strike For The South]

I'm pretty much pro-death, Execution, Abortion, youth-in-asia. Do it all, preferably in the same time in the same room.

I'm also willing to take it much further than most people as I consider Joe Horn a Great American

[rory_20_uk]

Which is better, to spend 10 years in prison and be executed or 11 years and be released? Removing the death penalty allows for the possibility of new evidence coming to light.

Not using the death penalty also allows this. There are some situations where guilt is certain. The recent gun rampages america has been enjoying. No doubt they did it. So only use if when certain. The fact that this might not be that often is not in itself a problem. We don't ban nukes just because we don't fire them on a weekly basis.