The issue with the death penalty and Developmental Disorders

Page 1 of 2 [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

24 Mar 2024, 10:05 pm

People with mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders are more likely to be victims than being perpetrators. There may be correlation between some mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders, but it's rare.

The issue with the death penalty/capital punishment, mixed feelings about the death penalty/capital punishment and the fact that four percent of people on death row might be innocent.

Another issue of the death penalty/capital punishment and Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders of intellectual development.

The supreme court ruled that it is considered unconstitutional and is considered cruel and unusual punishment to put people with Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders of intellectual development to death.

My question is to what extent, and they don't specify the severity of Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders of intellectual development. And the issue is that people with mild Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders of intellectual development might understand right from wrong and might be able to defend themselves in court and in comparison to people with moderate, severe or profound Intellectual Developmental Disorders or Disorders of intellectual development.

What I am trying to explain is that symptoms of Intellectual Developmental Disorders or Disorders of intellectual development can be mild, moderate, severe or profound. Just outright making it unconstitutional to put people with Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders of intellectual development to death is too broad.

It would make sense to do case by case evaluation, and for example, if the murder with mild Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders intellectual development knows right from wrong and can defend themselves in court, then they should get capital punishment. If Intellectual Developmental Disorder or Disorders of intellectual development is more severe, then it should be unconstitutional to put them to death.

Another problem is that even some people without intellectual impairment also have other Neurodevelopmental Disorder.



Let me ask a moral question, as a hypothetical scenario.

As a hypothetical scenario, let's say there was a person with Mosaic Down Syndrome that became a murderer and he knows right from wrong and is also intelligent. Should such a person be given capital punishment or death penalty?

You see where I am getting at?

You see how hypocritical the law for the death penalty or capital punishment sounds?

It's common for people with Down Syndrome to have Intellectual Developmental Disorder, but there are some people with Down Syndrome that have average intelligence, however there are still mild developmental delays when it comes to intelligent people with Down Syndrome.

That is just one example, there are different genetic disorders that cause developmental delays and can also be the causes of intellectual impairment.

I am on the moral dilemma when it comes to putting people with developmental delays in general to death row, even if some of them are not intellectually impaired.

Also the question is about people with severe mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders, especially disorders with psychotic features, the question if they should be prevented from being put to death row I'd the criminal behavior is explained by serious mental disorders or disorders with psychotic features.


Sources:

https://innocenceproject.org/innocence- ... 20innocent.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21058775/



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,795
Location: Hell

25 Mar 2024, 9:39 am

I’m strongly opposed to the death penalty even for people who are guilty and don’t have developmental disorders. It seems wrong to murder people for…murdering people. Apart from the inmate who is sentenced to death, I’m also concerned about the effect that could have on people who participate in the state-sanctioned murder. It can’t be good.


_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven — Satan and TwilightPrincess


FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 9:52 am

TwilightPrincess wrote:
I’m strongly opposed to the death penalty even for people who are guilty and don’t have developmental disorders. It seems wrong to murder people for…murdering people. Apart from the inmate who is sentenced to death, I’m also concerned about the effect that could have on people who participate in the state-sanctioned murder. It can’t be good.


That makes sense. I wonder if you can explain it a bit more? Your point is interesting.

It sounds a bit confusing to call capital punishment or death penalty a murder, because it is legal in some states and in some countries, but it looks childish.

Eye for an eye justice doesn't make sense, you would not want to go to a similar level as the murderer and there should be better justice, like a prison sentence, just in case that person was found to be innocent, because bringing a person to life is irreversible.



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,795
Location: Hell

25 Mar 2024, 9:58 am

Many countries have inhumane laws. It doesn’t make them any more okay. I think it’s confusing (perhaps a euphemism) calling killing someone “capital punishment” although I suppose it depends on your perspective. In my opinion, “murder” is intentionally killing someone, so “capital punishment” would fit that description. Other people see things differently though.


_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven — Satan and TwilightPrincess


FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 10:06 am

TwilightPrincess wrote:
Many countries have inhumane laws. It doesn’t make them any more okay. I think it’s confusing (perhaps a euphemism) calling killing someone “capital punishment” although I suppose it depends on your perspective. In my opinion, “murder” is intentionally killing someone, so “capital punishment” would fit that description. Other people see things differently though.


That makes sense, I have a similar agreement as you. I just see it a bit differently, I am sorry!

What I meant to say that the homicide can be wrong, but not be murder if it is legal such as in some states and some countries, such as eye for an eye justice and it is just childish, but I agree it should be murder.

Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,795
Location: Hell

25 Mar 2024, 10:13 am

FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder. I think we could be desensitized to it to a certain extent if we live in places where it’s allowed.

In my opinion, the intentional taking of a life is murder. It doesn’t matter if it’s legal. Some countries have sanctioned stoning and other things I don’t want to mention as punishment. It’s not any more okay or less harmful for the government to do it than for a random person to.


_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven — Satan and TwilightPrincess


blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,787
Location: United Kingdom

25 Mar 2024, 10:21 am

I would support capital punishment for the most serious offenders if there were a way to ensure that there were no errors in ending the lives of innocent people who have found themselves wrongly accused of a serious crime for whatever reason.

Keeping a person in prison for decades costs the tax payer a lot of money, even for just a single individual and doesn't account for the devastation that the crimes of the perpetrator has caused the families of the victims of their crimes, to suffer.

Unfortunately, prison time seems to be the only system that works to allow for the wrongly accused to be able to have a chance of being reinstated in terms of their social position of innocence, should new evidence exonerate that person, or if/when they are released from prison.



Last edited by blitzkrieg on 25 Mar 2024, 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 10:21 am

TwilightPrincess wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder. I think we could be desensitized by it to a certain extent if we live in places where it’s allowed.

In my opinion, the intentional taking of a life is murder. It doesn’t matter if it’s legal. Some countries have sanctioned stoning and other things I don’t want to mention as punishment. It’s not any more okay or less harmful for the government to do it than for a random person to.


That makes more sense. You do have a good point that counties would view it as murder than countries that legalized capital punishment or death penalty. I am just a bit confused, because some countries have legalized laws that are not right, and countries that have the right laws. That is why I think when it comes to causes like the insanity defense for example, it's very complex, because right from wrong is subjective, because not all countries have the same laws.

I hope you know what I mean.



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,795
Location: Hell

25 Mar 2024, 10:23 am

FranzOren wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder. I think we could be desensitized by it to a certain extent if we live in places where it’s allowed.

In my opinion, the intentional taking of a life is murder. It doesn’t matter if it’s legal. Some countries have sanctioned stoning and other things I don’t want to mention as punishment. It’s not any more okay or less harmful for the government to do it than for a random person to.


That makes more sense. You do have a good point that counties would view it as murder than countries that legalized capital punishment or death penalty. I am just a bit confused, because some countries have legalized laws that are not right, and countries that have the right laws. That is why I think when it comes to causes like the insanity defense for example, it's very complex, because right from wrong is subjective, because not all countries have the same laws.

I hope you know what I mean.
I feel like we’ve gradually been working towards more humane laws throughout history although there’s obviously a lot of variation depending on your location. In Bible times, stoning people to death was commonplace. I fully expect capital punishment to be outlawed completely at some point in the future.


_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven — Satan and TwilightPrincess


FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 10:28 am

blitzkrieg wrote:
I would support capital punishment for the most serious offenders if there were a way to ensure that there were no errors in ending the lives of innocent people who have found themselves wrongly accused of a serious crime for whatever reason.

Keeping a person in prison for decades costs the tax payer a lot of money, even for just a single individual and doesn't account for the devastation that the crimes of the perpetrator has caused the families of the victims of their crimes, to suffer.

Unfortunately, prison time seems to be the only system that works to allow for the wrongly accused to be able to have a chance of being reinstated in terms of their social position of innocence, should new evidence exonerate that person, or if/when they are released from prison.


It's very complex and we don't live in the perfect world, as four percent of people in death row might be innocent and there is a moral dilemma on executing people with developmental delays to death row, even if some of them are not intellectually impaired. The system is not perfect, because the laws only state that people it it cruel and unusual punishment to put people with Intellectual Developmental Disorder to death, and the question if it should include anyone with developmental delays, even if they are not intellectually impaired.



BillyTree
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2023
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 577

25 Mar 2024, 3:35 pm

TwilightPrincess wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder.


The point he's making is that "murder" is a legal term, not a word you can define in your own way.


_________________
English is not my first language.


TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,795
Location: Hell

25 Mar 2024, 4:28 pm

BillyTree wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder.


The point he's making is that "murder" is a legal term, not a word you can define in your own way.

It’s not just a “legal term.” It’s a word that’s defined in different ways depending on the specific dictionary and culture. In my opinion, “murder” is the intentional taking of a human life whether it’s state-sanctioned or not. I CAN use words in whatever ways seem appropriate to me.


_________________
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven — Satan and TwilightPrincess


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,300

25 Mar 2024, 4:45 pm

FranzOren wrote:
I am on the moral dilemma when it comes to putting people with developmental delays in general to death row, even if some of them are not intellectually impaired.

Also the question is about people with severe mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders, especially disorders with psychotic features, the question if they should be prevented from being put to death row I'd the criminal behavior is explained by serious mental disorders or disorders with psychotic features.


I think on advice from a forensic psychologist, a judge is supposed to apply diminished responsibility in the above scenarios.
https://capitalpunishmentincontext.org/node/77467

However the law is not applied in an equitable manner.
https://theappeal.org/rodney-young-supr ... h-penalty/



FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 6:20 pm

cyberdad wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
I am on the moral dilemma when it comes to putting people with developmental delays in general to death row, even if some of them are not intellectually impaired.

Also the question is about people with severe mental, behavioral or neurodevelopmental disorders, especially disorders with psychotic features, the question if they should be prevented from being put to death row I'd the criminal behavior is explained by serious mental disorders or disorders with psychotic features.


I think on advice from a forensic psychologist, a judge is supposed to apply diminished responsibility in the above scenarios.
https://capitalpunishmentincontext.org/node/77467

However the law is not applied in an equitable manner.
https://theappeal.org/rodney-young-supr ... h-penalty/


That actually makes sense.

I will go read two articles that you sent me, it's very interesting.



FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 6:22 pm

BillyTree wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder.


The point he's making is that "murder" is a legal term, not a word you can define in your own way.


I think I understand what she means now.



FranzOren
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2019
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,290

25 Mar 2024, 6:24 pm

TwilightPrincess wrote:
BillyTree wrote:
TwilightPrincess wrote:
FranzOren wrote:
Murder by definition is illegal. I am going by strict definition, I am sorry!

It depends on your definition. Perhaps people from countries who do not engage in “capital punishment” would be more likely to view it as murder.


The point he's making is that "murder" is a legal term, not a word you can define in your own way.

It’s not just a “legal term.” It’s a word that’s defined in different ways depending on the specific dictionary and culture. In my opinion, “murder” is the intentional taking of a human life whether it’s state-sanctioned or not. I CAN use words in whatever ways seem appropriate to me.



This explanation makes more sense, I think my view changed a little bit as well to improve. Although I have similar agreement as you, my view of it was a bit different, I am sorry!