I never said they deserve a cruel punishment. Where did you ever get that assumption? You didn't address what I said at all. I never said life in prison is better because they have time to think. What are you talking about? Quite the straw man you got there. Either that or your you're imagining things.
I'm with James on this one. The State is already getting away with targeted assassinations of citizens who have not been convicted of any crimes.
1. I don't support murder. 2. The ends don't justify the means (i.e. "it's justice" "they deserve it" "taxes shouldn't support murderers" etc...). The problem is that rape cages need serious reform, I think I'd prefer death to living in some prisons. Since when do rapists and pedophiles deserve death? "BECAUSE THEY DO" is not a valid response by the way. False dichotemy. No-one is suggesting slapping on the wrist, saying "naughty murderer" and letting them go.
Those exonerations that have occurred recently due to DNA testing being able to be used, back when they were sentenced that wasn't a possibility yet. But now that we have that ability during trial, testing can prove without a doubt that a specific person's blood is indeed the same blood traces they find under the nails of the murder victim, as she scratched and clawed trying to save herself from being killed. Nowadays there would be almost no chance to get the same false conviction rate that we had in the days before such credible evidence. There is also security footage available on a much wider scale than there was when those being exonerated were first being tried. With the more prevalent use of security cameras comes much more credible evidence than an eye witness or two. Proof without a reasonable doubt is still neccesary, but there is much more conclusive proof available today than there was even only one decade ago. I also believe the death penalty should become more prevalent due to control of overpopulation during the next century. The fact is that our planet is becoming more crowded on a daily basis. We are running out of fresh water, land area to grow food, and mankind is drastically destroying natural ecosystems across the face of this planet on a daily basis. There is also the fact that we are living longer lives on average than we were only 50 years ago. All of this adds up and takes a heavy toll on the planet. There will come a time, very shortly that at least a third of the human species needs to be removed from the face of this planet in one way or another. They are talking about the possibility of colonizing Mars, and that seems all well and good, but I seriously doubt they will have the capability to do so with at least 1/3 of us by the time it will be neccesary. That means only one thing, a lot of people will be dying in some way. It may finally be the great pandemic they keep saying is about to happen, maybe a mutant strain of avian flu or something, it may be due to water or food shortages, who knows, but it will not be pretty. Now, if, on the other hand, there was some way to cut this mass killing off before it happens, then why not take the steps to do so? I remember when they came out with the three strikes you're out policy for repeat offenders. If you went to jail three times, you get a much steeper sentence, usually life. I say that's a good policy, except it should be death, not life, for violent offenders. Maybe a first offense should not get death penalty except for in the most extreme circumstances, true, say, for example, Timothy McVeigh, definitely death. But, if someone keeps hurting or killing people and will not stop, you can't really say false conviction all three times. And by repeating the offense, they prove that they will not reform their ways, just kill them and remove the burden from society.
I'm a supporter of the Death Penalty in the extreme cases. I can't comment with too much depth on its employment in the current justice system(s) since I'm not really a lawyer. I agree with Dissec's point because I think Death Penalty should be used as a deterrent to reduce future crime rather than a medium for victims/families of victims to channel their frustrations and desire for vengeance. I'm not a religious man, but I find it hard to understand how one person can decide the life of another person based on concepts like "Justice". I'm sure things like true Justice exists but its so hard to define what is actual Justice that it doesn't really seem worth mentioning as a reason to pursue the Death Penalty. Ultimately I feel the death penalty should be applicable to individuals where you know (with reasonable certainty) that releasing that individual will almost certainly result in certain death and destruction and even the slightest risk that they might escape is not worth taking.
[quote name='"Shizmot"'] Yeah but murderers walking the streets make for a lot more homicides. I like seeing eye dogs anyways.[/quote] Who said anything about releasing them?
DNA or security footage isn't always available in murder cases though. Yes, we have better technology, but what will happen when the next forensic breakthrough happens and we realized we wrongly convicted other people? Death isn't irreversible. And one of the reasons why you favor the death penalty is because of overpopulation? What, do men impregnate themselves in prison or something? Strange thing to say.
[quote name='"Hopglock"'] Dude you clearly have no idea of what death row is like. These guys get TV, CD players, books, exercise rights in the yard. Its not a medieval dungeon, we don't keep them confined and tortured all day. You're thinking of the SHU(segregated housing unit), that's for dangerous inmates who assault other inmates or guards. You asked what caught in the act meant so I gave an example. Maybe mass murderers arent caught every day but people who kill in broad daylight or otherwise and are captured right after the fact happen all the fuckin time. Death penalty is considered a boon by some California inmates - Los Angeles Times[/quote] Sounds like your problems aren't with them living but living so well... Why don't you lobby for fewer privileges for inmates instead of euthanizing them? We can pay for actual punishment. Or we can get cheap and let em off easy. And anywhere in between, vote.
[quote name='"UU_ood"']And you favor the death penalty because of overpopulation? What, do men impregnate themselves in prison or something?[/quote] A human being can't possibly be this retarded...
I don't think the 'death penalty' implies that it's the government killing them, since the government isn't the only possible arbitrator & executioner. With that said, I don't think the government should have any power, so we agree there. Victims shouldn't have to contribute towards their attackers' well-being, which is exactly what happens (in the current system) regardless of whether they're sentenced to death or prison time. The reason people are exonerated on death row is because the government's justice system is chock-full of corrupt kangaroo courts. Locking someone in a cage for decades is a lot less rational than the death penalty in some cases. Sometimes, the only logical options for psychopaths/sociopaths are exile or execution and sometimes exile isn't viable either since they'll just rape/kill people somewhere else.
I don't support it, when in history has killing people worked to detour people from committing whatever crime, plus we fuck up and kill innocent people time to time, just proves how dumb it is
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" Is pretty stupid imo, if you never take an eye you wouldn't lose an eye unless someone else did it to you first, and then they would be punished by having their eye(s) removed. Treat others how you'd like to be treated is more appropriate.
Why again is an execution very expensive? I think a bullet to the back of the head would work more swell. I'm for the death penalty but only in extreme cases like rape and murder of a child... Sick fucks like that don't deserve to breath any longer than their victims.
That quote is about endless retaliation in an effort for both sides to get 'even'. Because appeals are necessary and results in very expensive attorney and court fees.
Executions aren't expensive. It only costs $.90 to deliver one lethal injection. What's expensive are the 20-30 years the prisoner is kept alive and bogging the courts down with repeals. Thats why I say, 3rd conviction on a violent charge, or one incident where someone murders more than 3 people(such as Timothy Mcveigh or the Aurora shooter, or even someone that commits an armed bank robbery and executes 3 or more hostages during the robbery, then gets collared by the cops outside of the bank) should be instant death penalty, within a week. No need to wait for years for repeals, we know they're guilty. Also, any cop that kills someone in custody, or is unarmed, such as the cops that beat Kelly Thomas to death.
I thought prison was worse than death though? Wouldn't the quote actually side with the lesser form of punishment? Life in prison is no life at all. I don't see why people should have to support those who are murderers and others deserving of the death penalty. If they're going to die in prison regardless why continue to have citizens pay for them to keep living? Btw for people who quote Ghandi, remember his stance on fighting the Nazi's. "I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions... If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourselves, man, woman, and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them." Don't feel like quoting the part where he wanted the Jews to commit mass suicide, but you get the idea, the man wasn't exactly the most wise to come along.
Lets remember guys the pigs catch the criminals. Do you trust lazy pigs to do their job right? In my experience pigs go for the easy prey. Somebody gets murdered they blame it on the poor black guy. If you've ever been in trouble with the police you know that 9 times out of 10 they just throw the book at you and hope something sticks. Besides cops, lets look at jurys and all the stupid sheeple that serve on half of them. We probably all know of a case where a jury obviously got it wrong. They know how to brainwash juries now almost as well as they brainwash voters.
I used to be for the death penalty but I've changed my mind recently Mostly because of whats already been said. - Trails are not perfect and sometimes the innocent do get wrongfully prosecuted. - And because one more dead person is neither justice nor becoming of a civilized society.
The government shouldn't have the power to do anything, but these aren't good reasons to never employ the death penalty assuming we had free market arbitration/justice/court services. If you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt (in an impartial court) that someone is guilty of at least several counts of rape/murder, then the death penalty should be an option so long as that is what the victims want and what the impartial judge agrees to. The victims should not be forced to pay for the aggressor's food, shelter, water, etc. Now, if the victims want to pay for them or the victims want their aggressor to be able to beg for someone to pay for them, that's a different story. A person who is alive that not only has murdered/raped people, but will also be a burden on a society is not justice either. If you think putting people to death who have raped and/or murdered multiple times is uncivilized, how do you plan to pay for the prisons they're housed in? Will you force citizens to pay for them? Will you put them to work? Will they even be able to work enough to pay for their maximum security prison along with their food and water? Wouldn't having slave labor in the marketplace kind of distort things?