Revenant
No Longer a Member
The death penalty seems just a need to satsify the mobs urge for blood, or rather, a result of the anger the mob feels. I can understand pain and the anger it produces, but I fail to see how the death penalty actually relieves pain, and especially for those who lost someone close.
One girl, raped, was of course deeply hurt, she was angry, and wished to murder the man that had done this to her. But the guy had committed suicide two days after, and she was still hurt and angry. Angry enough to want to kill. To me, this seems to illustrate that the death penalty brings no relief to those who were deeply hurt.
The death penalty also doesn't seem to do anything to deter other murders. The person who kills in hot-blood isn't thinking far in the future. A man who finds his woman with another probably isn't thinking at all rationally, and are under the complete control of their current emotions. The cold-blooded killer simply feels that he must be more careeful.
As always, justice is just a way to protect people's rights to happiness, and that to me still includes the criminals conditions for happiness. Their freedoms might have to be severely limited for the safety of others, but ending their life will do nothing to protect the conditions for other people's happiness.
Lastly, how do we know that they could've made another choice? I believe that if free will exists, it is most definitely very limited. To add to that, are people who having grown up in hard conditions, end up being sociopathic. Is it actually their fault that they lack empathy? In another case, a tumor was found pressing against the frontal cortex, the part of the brain responsible for inhibiting. So this man over time was losing control over his anger, ended up shooting three people, and then himself. The tumor wasn't discovered until autopsy.
There's so much we don't know that at least I think we shouldn't even be seriously suggesting the death penalty.
One girl, raped, was of course deeply hurt, she was angry, and wished to murder the man that had done this to her. But the guy had committed suicide two days after, and she was still hurt and angry. Angry enough to want to kill. To me, this seems to illustrate that the death penalty brings no relief to those who were deeply hurt.
The death penalty also doesn't seem to do anything to deter other murders. The person who kills in hot-blood isn't thinking far in the future. A man who finds his woman with another probably isn't thinking at all rationally, and are under the complete control of their current emotions. The cold-blooded killer simply feels that he must be more careeful.
As always, justice is just a way to protect people's rights to happiness, and that to me still includes the criminals conditions for happiness. Their freedoms might have to be severely limited for the safety of others, but ending their life will do nothing to protect the conditions for other people's happiness.
Lastly, how do we know that they could've made another choice? I believe that if free will exists, it is most definitely very limited. To add to that, are people who having grown up in hard conditions, end up being sociopathic. Is it actually their fault that they lack empathy? In another case, a tumor was found pressing against the frontal cortex, the part of the brain responsible for inhibiting. So this man over time was losing control over his anger, ended up shooting three people, and then himself. The tumor wasn't discovered until autopsy.
There's so much we don't know that at least I think we shouldn't even be seriously suggesting the death penalty.