The Death Penalty Thread

Post Reply New Topic

absolutely not. it is a primitive society which executes its own citizens for any reason. an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and a life for a life results eventually in everybody being blind, toothless and dead. it seems a mediocre society only comprehends itself in the mirror, ignoring the lessons of more advanced societies which have done away with capital punishment. god help us.

Don't worry. History ebbs and flows. At some point in time, I am sure to be in the right time period. In some places, I would already be in the right time period.

In this era of extreme power conservation chemistry is quite more economical and the horrors of dying totally paralyzed and unable to communicate lie within the experience of the unfortunate person being executed and not in the view of the eager and delightedly entertained limited audience. Admittedly it's not as much fun as watching human hair burst into flame and eyeballs popping out but these things have lost a lot of their drama as films have advanced into special effects for horror and dulled our emotional reactions.

Last edited by Sand on 07 Mar 2010, 2:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

I don't really see the argument against it besides being falsely accused but what about the guilty? It's inhumane? What's humane about keeping somebody in cell for 40-50 years until they die? It's a death sentence either way. These people are sick and a danger to society, I think it's the humane thing to put them down.

We are all under a death sentence. It's just a matter of whether you have to earn your living or spend your life at the state's expense amongst unusual and interesting people who don't socially conform.

In addition to my mistrust of the judicial system with such a weighty and irreversible matter, the whole idea of the death penalty serves as the ultimate example of the flaws of democracy taken to their extremes. In essence, the condemned man is told that a bunch of other people have gotten together and decided that he did something awful, and so they've decided to kill him, so sorry. It's Franklin's two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner taken to the point of almost perfect literalness, save the eating part of course.

In the strictest definition of the term, Absolutely, yes.



The prevention of an agonising death via euthanasia of a rabid dog, or for arguments sake a rabid human, is far removed from the orchestrated wanton killing of a person with a malfunctioning, but otherwise life supportive brain.

I think that staying and rotting in prison until dying of natural death is far worse than death penalty. And I also think about execution of non-guilty people.

Then you need to imagine a society that does not revolve around vengeance and instead looks after those that cannot live safely in freedom.

I probably shouldn't have used the term "rabid". Maybe vicious dog? Rabid ends up having 2 denotations, and I meant the one not involving rabies per se.

The issue of how a psychopath is human though still seems an open question, although perhaps for another thread.

I think exile does the trick. Just kick them out of the states. Let someone else do the dirty work. It has several benefits. First, no one has to die. Second, There lives aren't paid in full by other peoples' taxes. Third, if they do it again, it will be somewhere else, who will either pay their life in full, or kill them.

I've heard that an overdose of morphine is cheap, easy and reliable, but I'm no apothecary, so I wouldn't know.

Ok, the issue is that if you started doing this, eventually other nations are going to get wise to this and refuse these people entry. Who wants to receive the murderers the US is handing out?

The only case in which we might see otherwise is if the person who would otherwise get the death penalty are useful, so if Dr. "So and So" killed somebody, Russia might take them in to put them to work. This, however, would seem to be even less just than the death penalty though.

I never said we would send them somewhere. They just wouldn't be allowed here. If no other country will except them, then they have nowhere to go but some country that has no working government. A place that won't care if they come in, because they have far worse problems than some random murderer.

Agreed. Particularly in the issue of innocents being potentially executed, or people being executed to fulfill some sense of justice. Where do we draw the line between who lives and dies also, and why?

In my state here, we have two men awaiting trial for a horrible and brutal robbery followed by beating, raping, and killing of a woman and her two daughters. The state refused to accept a plea bargain for life without the possibility of parole - and is actively pursuing the death penalty. Even though this will cost the state roughly $10 million to pursue, all at a time of budget crisis.

But, our blood lust reigns supreme. Instead of letting these two monsters rot in a jail cell, politicians and the media keep feeding this upon the state - blood lust brings ratings/readers and votes.

I don't like the death penalty. Proud to be Canadian. Go Canada!!