Death Penalty

Death Penalty: For or against

  • Yes, I am for the Death penalty

    Votes: 12 26.1%
  • No, I am against the death penalty

    Votes: 27 58.7%
  • I am not sure

    Votes: 7 15.2%

  • Total voters
    46

Mycernius

The Hairy Wookie
Messages
901
Reaction score
98
Points
0
Location
Hometown of George Eliot
Ethnic group
English
I can't find any specific thread on this, but it might be relavent. Today the US has excuted its 1000 person since the death penalty was introduced. See here Another reason is that two people on the forum have mentioned that they do not agree with the death penalty on recent posts. I wonder what the general opinion of most people on this forum is? I agree with the two who said that they do not agree with it. I find the idea barbaric and doesn't really address what has happened. I think a civilised society needn't kill off those that murder or commit treason. In some cases some of these people want to be excuted and become their own martyrs like Timothy McVeigh. I think it doesn't prevent violent crimes. Most criminals commit crimes thinking that they will not get caught. Unfortunately or fortunately most criminals are not as clever as they think. A deterent will not stop these type of people. There is also a risk of getting and exectuing the wrong person. I remember watching a TV programme several years ago, an Horizon on BBC2, about a man on death row. He maintained he was innocent right up to his execution. A week later a witness was found that proved that he was innocent. She was afraid to speak up at the time because she was black and feared reprisals. Now maybe this is a European or English view on this as a lot of European countries do not have a death penalty. See Here
I also find that sites anti death penalty are based on facts and figures and ones that are pro like to use emotional response.
 
Totally against it. I'm glad here in Europe we have permanently done away with it.
 
I also find that sites anti death penalty are based on facts and figures and ones that are pro like to use emotional response.

I can't help but wonder if that has to do which emotions a crime some would deem worthy of capital punishment evokes. Murder, rape, crimes like these really dig into the most primal and base emotions in people, so I'm not surprised pro-death penalty sites use it. It's usually pretty effective.

I'm against the death penalty, but for more reasons than how barbaric it is. I barely trust the government to get my mail to me on time, let alone kill a person.
 
I'm not sure, mostly due to lack of exposure to death-penalty-related news events/cases. I'm willing, though, to become better informed about the issue.

I will say, however, that I was utterly disgusted by Malaysia's execution of Nguyen Tuong Van (BBC Source Link. Actually, looking at recent news articles, I'm not sure Malaysia's government and policies really have anything great going for them.
 
For The Cases Where.......

there is absolutely no doubt the person committed a brutal crime and should not ever be released, death is OK with me. Why should my taxes go to feed,clothe,provide medical care, (cable TV) , etc.. I'd rather spend my hard earned dollars on people who deserve help.

Frank

:eek:kashii:
 
oops accidentaly pushed for, i'm against.

It's just inhumane and a lot of other things. I rather people turn them into slave labor.
 
With the greatest respect, I do not think that the questions posed in the poll were sufficiently qualified. And surely, some qualification has to be present in a question of such importance.

I shall therefore qualify my answer.

(Sorry folks... but) I voted "in favour" of the death penalty.

With a very large, very obvious .... "BUT" .....!

My reasoning is this :

Occasionally, one comes across the really habitual, despotic, psychotic, depraved, unremorseful, disdainful, violent animal among us - who we politely refer to as a "criminal".

The sort of person who, for example, delights in beating old ladies to death ... or repeatedly rapes (for fun, or money via porn flicks ... or both ...) young children as young as eighteen months of age ... the sort of person who doesn't give a damn about the results of selling 'Crystal Meth' or 'Crack' or whatever to the ten-year olds at the local school as long as he or she makes a buck. The sort of person who will lure a fifteen-year old girl from a forum such as this one (yes!) and kidnap her, rape her repeatedly ...... you know ...

(Some of) these folks are beyond redemption!

They are filth. Scum. Not worth the effort!

Top 'em! Get rid of 'em.

BUT!


.... Don't get the wrong guy!

This is my qualification.

If the death penalty were to be imposed by (Judge) Sensuikan ....

"Beyond all reasonable doubt" would not do it. (Unreasonable doubt .... is still ... doubt!)

It would have to be "Beyond any doubt at all"

I see nothing wrong with that at all.

So ... if you're 'caught in the act', recorded on video ..... or .... I suppose, nothing else ...... (even a confession can't be relied on ... !) ...... it would be "Good-Bye cruel world"!

....... and a bloody good riddance!


ジョン
 
Frank D. White said:
there is absolutely no doubt the person committed a brutal crime and should not ever be released, death is OK with me.
Isn't there pretty much always at least some doubt?
 
I am totally against the death penalty. I think that the death penalty is just like saying murdering someone is okay just because they murdered someone.

It is the same as a popular old saying: An eye for an eye. But the only problem with that is, everyone ends up blind.

Also, it is morally wrong in my opinion, part of that coming from my Christian teachings that preach forgiveness.

P.S.-I would also vote for slave labor.
 
bossel said:
Isn't there pretty much always at least some doubt?

Pretty much .... yes!

Sometimes .... no!

(Then ... the axeman cometh ....!)

?W????
 
I am totally against. I think Clawn put it best - executing a criminal is punishing murder with murder. I don't care how barbaric a crime is, to kill that person makes us no better than them. Regardless of whether they are capable of learning that lesson, it is the responsibility of a civilised state to try to rehabilitate criminals. So I believe in imprisonment, but I think prisoners should be treated humanely regardless of the severity of their crime, and I think they should pay for their own upkeep by working.
 
Frank D. White said:
there is absolutely no doubt the person committed a brutal crime and should not ever be released, death is OK with me. Why should my taxes go to feed,clothe,provide medical care, (cable TV) , etc.. I'd rather spend my hard earned dollars on people who deserve help.

Frank

:eek:kashii:
But how much of your taxes go into the constant appeals for inmates on Death Row? Some of these can go on for years, and in some cases the offender has died of natural causes before the appeals process has been completed

sensuikan san said:
With the greatest respect, I do not think that the questions posed in the poll were sufficiently qualified. And surely, some qualification has to be present in a question of such importance.
I did think about making other chioces available, but then you could end up with a very long list, so I went for the KISS approach (Keep It Simple, Stupid). It is probably better for people qualify their responses on what can be a very complicated subject.
 
I voted not sure.

In the abstract, it is easy for me to be pro death penalty, but this month we are going to kill convicted four time murderer "Tookie" Williams in California. It is not abstract anymore. It is totally real. The guy claims to be founder of the Crips gang and claims to be rehabilitated. He has written childrens books designed to keep kids out of gangs and has been mentioned to the Nobel panel for a peace prize.

But he shotgunned a clerk twice in the back as he lay on the floor face down. He killed a husaband, wife and daugter in their house. If any man should die, it is the one that could do something like this.

Death penalty cases cost significantly more than the upkeep of one prisoner for life, even in maximum security. The death penalty also does not deter anyone from committing crimes. In the US, it's application is sporadic and random.


But on the other hand these are really really bad people who have done horrible things. It is also a valued tool to be used by prosecutors to get plea bargains, cooperation, confessions...
 
Mycernius said:
....I did think about making other chioces available, but then you could end up with a very long list, so I went for the KISS approach (Keep It Simple, Stupid). It is probably better for people qualify their responses on what can be a very complicated subject.

Yes ... now, I can see that. Your point is well made.

?W????
 
sabro said:
I voted not sure.

In the abstract, it is easy for me to be pro death penalty, but this month we are going to kill convicted four time murderer "Tookie" Williams in California. It is not abstract anymore. It is totally real. The guy claims to be founder of the Crips gang and claims to be rehabilitated. He has written childrens books designed to keep kids out of gangs and has been mentioned to the Nobel panel for a peace prize.

But he shotgunned a clerk twice in the back as he lay on the floor face down. He killed a husaband, wife and daugter in their house. If any man should die, it is the one that could do something like this.

Precisely. My heart bleeds for him. Nice guy! He should go on writing childrens' books (and making a buck) whilst your tax dollars feed him.

Ask the friends and relatives of the dead family and the clerk how they feel.

sabro said:
Death penalty cases cost significantly more than the upkeep of one prisoner for life, even in maximum security. The death penalty also does not deter anyone from committing crimes. In the US, it's application is sporadic and random.

Agreed. Agreed in all respects.

But this is not IMO a question of deterrence. The death penalty has probably never (It's absence certainly hasn't!) deterred anyone from crime. Just look at the eighteenth century - when you could be hung for stealing a bread crust!

No. This must be totally pragmatic, and a question of elimination! (Harsh ... but bear with me....).

i) Elimination of the possibility of the individual ever repeating a heinous act (in or out of prison). Game over. No risk.
ii) Elimination of the horrendous cost of supporting a complete monster alive for the rest of their (perhaps totally unproductive) life.

But bear in mind ... the qualifications of my original post apply. This applies to the completely incorrigible individual who has been caught and convicted ... with no doubt whatsoever. Therefore the first line of this quote does not need to apply; those costs are usually associated with the plethora of appeals and legal costs/fees that go hand-in-hand with them! (Often at public expense.)

With "no doubt whatsoever" - appeal would not come into the question.

Exit: Lots of lawyers making a buck on the deal.

What's the cost of actually killing (Yeah! That's what we're doing here, folks!) someone? The cost of a bullet, a few kilovolts, a squirt of gas.....? Fify bucks? Twenty? Ten? ..... $1.99?

This sounds horrible, I know. It is! It's not nice. It's not supposed to be.

....but sometimes you just have to take a deep breath, look around at the world and say ....

... Y'Know ....!


Sadly,

ジョン
 
Sensuikan San said:
Pretty much .... yes!

Sometimes .... no!
I have to go with Tsuyoiko & Clawn here, no justification for the death penalty holds enough water.

The only cases where there is absolutely no doubt would be when caught in the act. & even in those cases for me killing someone is only justified as direct self defence or in defence of others.
 
I would be totally for it but for the fact that no justice system is anywhere near perfect and the chances of executing an innocent person are just way too high.

I don't really go for the whole "Its state sponsored murder" argument. Frankly when I read about the violence and barbarity in some of the crimes commited these days I think it would be totally OK to execute some of these guys. But then I'd rather see a hundred murderers get life sentences than see a single innocent person executed by mistake.
 
I'm totally against it. Period.

The government is doing the same thing as the killer. Premeditated murder. That makes them no better than the one getting put to death, in my eyes. Besides, it's no punishment. A lifetime in solitary is much harder for someone to deal with than simply being put to sleep.

Besides, the risk is too great that you're killing someone who isn't really guilty. At least it's getting better now with DNA testing and all. Just think of all the people who have been freed from death row over their innocence proven via DNA. What if those people had been killed? It's just awful to even think about it. And think about the innocent who have died before there was any DNA tests.

The only time I justify killing someone is in self-defense. When you or someone you love's life is being threatened. Even then, I think it's better to inflict some non-fatal blow to stop someone, if at all possible.

I just value life too much. I think it's horrible to even consider killing another human, no matter what they've done.
 
Sensuikan San said:
No. This must be totally pragmatic, and a question of elimination! (Harsh ... but bear with me....).

i) Elimination of the possibility of the individual ever repeating a heinous act (in or out of prison). Game over. No risk.
ii) Elimination of the horrendous cost of supporting a complete monster alive for the rest of their (perhaps totally unproductive) life.


I can see why you think that. But, what is to stop people wanting "revenge" because of that person's death. Say that your son, brother, husband, father, mother, or other close family member committed a terrible crime, would you feel that their life should end? Or, (as I think) would you rather see them doing labor every day just so they can live in the worst place imaginable?

How about this then, if you killed the murderer, would he ever have a chance to feel remorse, to think to himself, "What in GOD'S NAME made me do that, I could be livin the good life, have a family. But no, now I'm stuck in this S*** hole for the rest of my life."

Death shows mercy, in my opinion, to those who wish to die. If a murderer knows he's going to die as soon as he kills someone, he doesn't have to worry about regret or remorse. He knows the game is over as soon as he's caught. If he escapes the law, then he's free. If he gets detained, the game ends.

With the death penalty, these people can't lose. And what would you rather play, a game you where you can't lose, or one where you probably will?
 
Im for the death penalty. If a person were to rape, murder,etc. Then they should be executed
 

This thread has been viewed 40148 times.

Back
Top