Page 1 of 5 [ 77 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

17 Jan 2014, 3:11 pm

The only complaints I hear about when people say something negative about the Death Penalty,
is that "what if we execute an innocent?"

It seems like if we could somewhat be 100 % sure that we've got the right one, everyone would believe
Death Penalty to be the right thing.

That is frightening.

Then there's the one who use the other silly anti-death penalty excuse:
"It's a mistake to kill to prove it is wrong to kill".

There's nobody who says it is wrong to kill. There is a clear distinction between lawful and unlawful killing, executions being the lawful (and compulsory) killing.
We kill animals for eating and we kill pests to get rid of them. Inmates sentenced to death are considered pests.
Soldiers are also obliged to kill people.
So are police officers.

There's nothing wrong in killing people, as long as it is lawful killing.

What I object to is what we define as being lawful killing, the laws that people want that makes it legal/compulsory to kill other people who are defendless.

MY objection to the death penalty is very different, but nobody seems to take it any serious. I wonder why, and that's why I started this thread:

It's actually compassion to the inmate. No matter how many people' you have killed, humans should be treated humanely.
Of course, if they so wish to be killed, they should choose to get euthanasia.

People don't always know or think about that the crime they did or about to commit is wrong.
Many of them suffer from mental illnesses that impair their thinking.

Then there's the few people who commit crimes that are carefully thought out in the smallest details.
But not even those do I believe deserve to be executed, for the very reason that we are not any better than the criminal then.

In-fact, I believe the society is WORSE than the inmate, when they execute somebody, because the society is way stronger than any individual.
Executions of ANY sort is over-reactions, because the inmate is strapped to a gurney, a chair or a stick or otherwise unable to defend himself.
In case of murder, the victim may or may not have been able to defend oneself, and so you could say that the inmate should suffer the same fate, but that's not my point here:

My point is that society is so much stronger than any individual, that incarceration or anything milder than executions is already enough to punish the criminals and
also send a sufficiently strong enough message to other people who think about committing a crime.

It really doesn't matter at all wether you risk firing squad, electrocution (even more painful), or simply life-imprisonment. All of them will destroy your career or opportunities in life,
so the latter is sufficient.

When people want to execute criminals, it is not for the sake of society, not for minimizing crime, it is for one thing ONLY: Revenge.

And that makes people who vote pro-death penalty (as they did in California) just as much offenders as the ones that are about to be executed in California because of that vote, because
their very act of voting "Yes" to the death penalty (or "No" to abolish it), kills people.

That makes 55-60 % of the Califonian population killers.



TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

17 Jan 2014, 3:19 pm

Any system of justice based on petty revenge and high emotion is prone to abuse and deadly errors.



thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

17 Jan 2014, 3:22 pm

TheGoggles wrote:
Any system of justice based on petty revenge and high emotion is prone to abuse and deadly errors.


There are actually people who say that executing innocent people is merely "collateral damage" that is a neccessary thing to do, better execute 10 too much than letting one go free,
and risk humiliation.

Populist totalitarians are placing a lot of prestige in being pro-death penalty.



KagamineLen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jun 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,633

17 Jan 2014, 4:15 pm

I once had a debate with my mother concerning the death penalty.

She is very much in favor of killing people who have been stripped of all their defenses. Even more than that, she believes that people who are sentenced to death should be executed immediately and denied any appeals.

I told her about many cases where innocent people were knowingly put to death thanks to dishonest prosecutors. She responded by telling me that I was thinking in terms that were "too black-and-white".

Then I said that capital punishment was not a deterrent, because people who are so far gone that they do the things that legally warrant it are most likely going to commit those crimes anyway. She responded by trying to stuff words into my mouth and saying that I claimed there should be no legal system to begin with.

Some people get such a rush from hearing about executions that they are willing to dismiss all logic just so they can continue to feel the euphoria of seeing society's rejects being put to death. That euphoric rush is so important to them that it does not matter if innocent people get killed by the state in the process. That makes them not much different than the compulsive killers they claim to be speaking against.



Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,454
Location: Aux Arcs

17 Jan 2014, 4:39 pm

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

17 Jan 2014, 4:43 pm

I don't have an issue with executing those guilty of the most heinous crimes, they're not much different than rabid dogs. Keeping somebody locked in a cage for decades isn't any more humane than an execution imo, they're both death sentences. However, I've come to the opinion the state cannot be trusted to carry it out fairly and without error, they should not have the authority to kill.



The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,789
Location: London

17 Jan 2014, 5:02 pm

My objections to the death penalty are as follows:

1) It is wrong to kill sentient beings, except to save lives
2) The death penalty does not provide an effective deterrent, so doesn't prevent murders
3) It is more expensive than life imprisonment
4) There is no way of correcting mistakes
5) The hypocrisy element (though of course we imprison people for false imprisonment...)
6) If somebody really has committed murder, I'd rather they take the slow route to the grave.



babybird
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 62,470
Location: UK

17 Jan 2014, 5:09 pm

I've only ever read two or three books in my life time and one of them was about the English hangman Albert Pierrepoint.

It was quite interesting to see that hanging a person is quite a mathematical process.

I think it boils down to a question of physics.


_________________
We have existence


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

17 Jan 2014, 6:54 pm

thinkingpictures wrote:
People don't always know or think about that the crime they did or about to commit is wrong.
Many of them suffer from mental illnesses that impair their thinking.

Then there's the few people who commit crimes that are carefully thought out in the smallest details.
But not even those do I believe deserve to be executed, for the very reason that we are not any better than the criminal then


^This.


I do not believe in absolute free will, and therefore I cannot agree with the death penalty. My take on incarceration is one where only those who cannot live safely amongst us are removed from free society. This removal is not a punishment per se rather it is a safeguard, and therefore life behind walls should not be hard and deprived of stimulation. Inmates who cannot for whatever reason treat others with a level of respect should be removed from the general institution population. Incarceration should not allow these people to carry on their behaviour against each other. I agree that if one wishes to die then euthanasia could be an option. All other criminals would be better served with home detention and specified routes to and from shops, school and work etc. this can be easily achieved with modern tech and the funds to runs this system would come from the reduced prison budget.


thinkingpictures wrote:
The only complaints I hear about when people say something negative about the Death Penalty,
is that "what if we execute an innocent?"

I often use this argument, not because I actually agree with it but rather it is something people who want the death penalty can begrudgingly acknowledge. I usually frame this argument along the lines of "you cannot have the death penalty until we have an incorruptible judicial and political system" Mostly people can accept this. You do however come across those who feel that the death of innocents is an acceptable price to pay for "keeping society safe", with such people all one can do is hope they remove themselves from the gene poll before they get a chance to reproduce.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

17 Jan 2014, 7:51 pm

Which would you prefer: (1) That we become a nation of "Murderers by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized executions being committed on behalf of "We The People", or (2) That we become a nation of "Dungeon Masters by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized life sentences without possibility of parole on behalf of "We The People"?



TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

17 Jan 2014, 7:56 pm

Fnord wrote:
Which would you prefer: (1) That we become a nation of "Murderers by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized executions being committed on behalf of "We The People", or (2) That we become a nation of "Dungeon Masters by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized life sentences without possibility of parole on behalf of "We The People"?


I wouldn't mind if we reformed the justice system to bring about some accountability. Perhaps judges and prosecutors should be barred from seeking higher public offices (mayor, governor, senator) to discourage a conflict of interests. They shouldn't be allowed to affiliate themselves with any political party or movement either. There should be way higher standards for judges at the very least, because right now they'll let just about any mouth-breather put on a robe. And police/detectives need to be held accountable when they fail to do their jobs (which happens way more often than you might think).



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

17 Jan 2014, 8:05 pm

Fnord wrote:
Which would you prefer: (1) That we become a nation of "Murderers by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized executions being committed on behalf of "We The People", or (2) That we become a nation of "Dungeon Masters by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized life sentences without possibility of parole on behalf of "We The People"?


Put like that no option is preferable, but what do we do, allow pathological nutjobs the freedom to run around doing whatever the want? At least a system of non vindictive incarceration with the ability to prove that it is unwarranted prevents this.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


thewhitrbbit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,124

17 Jan 2014, 8:45 pm

I have no problems with the death penalty when:

1.) There is clear evidence of guilt, such as DNA.

2.) The crime is deserving (rape, murder)

I have compassion, for the victim. If you choose to rape and murder someone, you pay for it with your life.

I'm tired of how much compassion we give to people who rape and murder, yet ignore the victims.



TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

17 Jan 2014, 9:06 pm

thewhitrbbit wrote:

I'm tired of how much compassion we give to people who rape and murder, yet ignore the victims.


I keep hearing this talking point, but I've literally never seen it in action.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

17 Jan 2014, 10:09 pm

thewhitrbbit wrote:
I have no problems with the death penalty when:

1.) There is clear evidence of guilt, such as DNA.

2.) The crime is deserving (rape, murder)

I have compassion, for the victim. If you choose to rape and murder someone, you pay for it with your life.

I'm tired of how much compassion we give to people who rape and murder, yet ignore the victims.


Your faith in DNA evidence is touching. In the state of Illinois they bungled such "evidence" so badly they had a five percent false conviction rate.

ruveyn



thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

18 Jan 2014, 3:05 am

Fnord wrote:
Which would you prefer: (1) That we become a nation of "Murderers by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized executions being committed on behalf of "We The People", or (2) That we become a nation of "Dungeon Masters by Proxy" by virtue of legally-authorized life sentences without possibility of parole on behalf of "We The People"?


As I wrote, euthanasia should always be an option.

And by euthanasia, I mean a humane, as painless-as-possible method to end people's life.

Getting executed is extremely painful. It is worse than than any method an individual could possible illegally kill another individual.

Getting strapped to a chair and having low voltage going through you to burn you up from the inside is extremely painful.
Sources: I've read the last, unofficial words from inmates in the chair. They were screaming in pain.

Aside from that, I also believe in minimizing imprisonment. Mentally ill criminals should be locked up in mental health facilities instead.
However, I do see some ethical troubles concerning the use of euthanasia on mental health facilities... But I think it could be worked out with a variety of laws and regulations and the
emphasis on the inmate/patient's own free will/choice.

Quote:
I'm tired of how much compassion we give to people who rape and murder, yet ignore the victims.


How does having compassion with the inmate ignore the compassion for the victim?
Also, how does executions bring back the dead? And how does it undo the rape committed?