Page 1 of 2 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

30 Apr 2006, 6:52 am

Also known as the death penalty. How about a thread devoted to it?

As for my opinion, I don't believe the state should ever have the authority to execute its citizens. That's just asking for serious trouble. However, I believe that if someone is found guilty of murdering, raping, mutilating, or doing anything else resulting in any permanent damage to a person (outside of accidents and self-defence), the victims or surviving spouses or relatives of victims should be granted the option of executing the criminal.

Of course, this makes the executioner a coward (in my opinion) for killing a bound and unarmed person. But that's their choice. If they wish to live with that, good for them.

For this to be reasonable at all, guilt must be 100% confirmed. I suggest using THIS technology in conjunction with confessions and other evidence already used.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

30 Apr 2006, 7:12 am

I'm against. It's revenge, rather than punishment. I don't agree with you offering to let the aggrieved family kill them either.

Confine child murderers, child rapists and serial killers to prison cells for the rest of their days and don't let them out.

Also, how can guilt be confirmed '100%'? It's simply not possible (and don't start on DNA: screw ups can, do and have happened several times in the past, and in the UK too). The logical answer is simple: no death penalty.



Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

30 Apr 2006, 7:15 am

Tequila wrote:
I'm against. It's revenge, rather than punishment. I don't agree with you offering to let the aggrieved family kill them either.

Confine child murderers, child rapists and serial killers to prison cells for the rest of their days and don't let them out.

The only problem I have with keeping people in prison is that it costs money. You're literally asking the victims to keep those who harmed them sheltered, fed, watered, given medical treatment, et cetera. I know girls who have been raped. No way could I say to them "I want you to give me X% of your wages as tax to keep your rapist alive, fed, et cetera, for the next 50 years."



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

30 Apr 2006, 7:16 am

It costs more in the US to use the death penalty (appeals and so on) than it would to keep them locked up.



Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

30 Apr 2006, 7:16 am

Tequila wrote:
Also, how can guilt be confirmed '100%'? It's simply not possible (and don't start on DNA: screw ups can, do and have happened several times in the past, and in the UK too). The logical answer is simple: no death penalty.

Check the link I provided. The method has proven 100% accurate thus far. And personally I would only agree if there was a confession also.



Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

30 Apr 2006, 7:17 am

Tequila wrote:
It costs more in the US to use the death penalty (appeals and so on) than it would to keep them locked up.

That's because you keep them in special quarters for 15 years and have a huge and expensive legal system for appeals.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

30 Apr 2006, 7:30 am

Scaramouche wrote:
Tequila wrote:
It costs more in the US to use the death penalty (appeals and so on) than it would to keep them locked up.

That's because you keep them in special quarters for 15 years and have a huge and expensive legal system for appeals.


If our two countries (the UK and Australia) ever were planning on reintroducing the death penalty (except in a time of national emergency, and so on), we'd most likely use the US method. If you don't have a proper appeals process you have more screw-ups. More screw-ups means more dead innocents.

Anyway, this is all a bit of a moot point as it's not going to get reintroduced here. More people are actually against the death penalty than are for it in Britain.



Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

30 Apr 2006, 7:33 am

Tequila wrote:
If our two countries (the UK and Australia) ever were planning on reintroducing the death penalty (except in a time of national emergency, and so on), we'd most likely use the US method. If you don't have a proper appeals process you have more screw-ups. More screw-ups means more dead innocents.

That's why you need to have 100% proof of guilt, preferably with a confession. It would allow you to avoid paying for these guys for 15 years.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

30 Apr 2006, 7:35 am

Why on earth would you confess if you knew you were going to die for it? Or would you 'induce' them?



Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

30 Apr 2006, 8:18 am

Tequila wrote:
Why on earth would you confess if you knew you were going to die for it? Or would you 'induce' them?

Some people do confess their crimes. Why? Maybe they feel bad about it, maybe they're silly. I don't know.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

30 Apr 2006, 10:21 am

Anyway, back on topic, I think that we should pick the most economically efficient option and I think that not killing will usually win. Murderers, rapists, and all of those other nasty people can still make for cheap labor.



jellynail
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 151
Location: Apple Valley, MN

04 May 2006, 5:52 pm

You know, I can remember a time when you'd ask a judge or police officer or really anyone why we sent criminals to prison, and part of their answer would be something like "Well, part of the prison program is to rehabilitate prisoners back into society, give them education and training so they can get good jobs when they're released." And then they would chuckle a bit, like they knew that was never going to happen, but they felt obligated to say it somehow. I can't remember the last time I heard someone say something like that, now, even in jest. It's all about revenge now. We gotta "bring the criminal to justice."


_________________
It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. - G. K. Chesterton

http://jellynail.vox.com/


parts
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,579
Location: New England

04 May 2006, 6:06 pm

It is all about revenge If a crimanal was realy worried about the capital punishment then is states with the death penelty there should be no crime commited that would merrit it but criminals don't care so it is not a deturant as for paying for them to be behind bars I think Awesomelyglorious is right make them work for it and the bad ones have to do it forever that would be better than a quick end and I don't think they'd like it too.


_________________
"Strange is your language and I have no decoder Why don't make your intentions clear..." Peter Gabriel


jellynail
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 151
Location: Apple Valley, MN

04 May 2006, 6:20 pm

First, while I have no statistics at hand, my understanding is that once a person has been incarcerated for a significant length of time, say 20 years, they do in fact tend to go commit another crime again and get thrown back in prison. More often than they actually manage to straighten up their act.

Second, are people here actually proposing we turn prisons into slave labor camps? Boy, you thought unemployment was bad when they were just outsourcing jobs to China....


_________________
It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. - G. K. Chesterton

http://jellynail.vox.com/


jellynail
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 151
Location: Apple Valley, MN

04 May 2006, 6:31 pm

I keep imagining all the rapists and murderers inking animation cels for the next big Disney movie. ROFL. Okay, I've been up too long now.


_________________
It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. - G. K. Chesterton

http://jellynail.vox.com/


Scaramouche
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 247

04 May 2006, 6:39 pm

jellynail wrote:
You know, I can remember a time when you'd ask a judge or police officer or really anyone why we sent criminals to prison, and part of their answer would be something like "Well, part of the prison program is to rehabilitate prisoners back into society, give them education and training so they can get good jobs when they're released." And then they would chuckle a bit, like they knew that was never going to happen, but they felt obligated to say it somehow. I can't remember the last time I heard someone say something like that, now, even in jest. It's all about revenge now. We gotta "bring the criminal to justice."

1. Revenge is not a dirty word. I have no problem with it.

2. Rehabilitation generally doesn't work, especially for murderers and rapists.

3. Why focus on the criminal's rights? What about the rights of the rest of society to be free from people like that?