Are You Against the Death Penalty and Why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

foxtrot3d

Banned
The death penalty always seems to be some sort of hot debate these days but I've never really understood why, I support the death penalty and while I consider myself a fair and rationale person I could never quite understand arguments against it that call for abolishing the practice altogether. Now, that doesn't mean I don't think the process could be improved, obviously I don't think people with mental defects should be executed for their crimes and neither should minors or non-violent offenders but in general I fully support executing fully adult violent offenders (meaning murder).

The consistent arguments I hear against the penalty is #1 It's immoral because life is sacred and #2 because innocent people sometimes get executed. I completely disagree with point #1 as I don't believe life is anything special that has to be protected at all costs, I see nothing wrong with executing a convicted murderer or serial killer. As far as #2 goes while it may be that an innocent person could perhaps be executed I don't think that is a reason to abolish the entire practice.

So are there any Gaffers here that are against the death penalty and want to explain why? And, am I wrong in not seeing any problem with executing a person?

EDIT/UPDATE Gaf (4/26/2014):

For those coming into this thread late.

I have now changed my view on the death penalty, I am now opposed to the practice. This discussion helped a great deal in causing me to change my position and come to this view. In the end, if we really can imprison a person for life and remove them from society pursuing anything further, such as death, cannot be justified by anything other than some sort of desire for vengeance.

So there you have it Gaf you changed my view.
 
As far as #2 goes while it may be that an innocent person could perhaps be executed I don't think that is a reason to abolish the entire practice.
Click to expand...

i think we have discovered the problem here.
 
I'm only against it because it costs more money from the state to excute someone than to just throw them in the clink for life* (I still don't understand this). Otherwise, I'm fine with it, there are cases where it can be justified.

*You can tell me this is wrong, I'll admit I've never done much research in it, its just what I was always told during my criminal justice classes by many different professors.

Edit: But yes, you need to be damn sure they are the culprit. Finding out someone was innocent after being executed is a travesty.
 
I'm against it as I don't feel anyone should have the right to take another person's life after a prolonged period of consideration when they offer no threat to society

I completely understand why others agree with it though
 
daviyoung said:
Killing someone because we don't like them doesn't teach us anything.
Click to expand...

Are we supposed to learn something from convicted prisoners? Punishment is not a learning process, we execute people because society has no longer deemed them necessary to live in our society. They agreed to the social contract we all live in and violated it by choosing to murder others, as such society has the right to permanent remove them.
 
I'm against it because:
  • Life in prison is more of a suitable real punishment, life behind bars without parole. Rot in jail.
  • Some innocents falsely get accused guilty.
  • The legal costs and appeals are more costly.
  • Some execution methods are not ''instant''
 
foxtrot3d said:
Are we supposed to learn something from convicted prisoners? Punishment is not a learning process, we execute people because society has no longer deemed them necessary to live in our society. They agreed to the social contract we all live in and violated it by choosing to murder others, as such society has the right to permanent remove them.
Click to expand...

Living in a society is a learning process. I don't think it's up to us to decide when to just say "fuck it, off with his head!" when we've already come so far.
 
I am not against the death penalty at all, but I think it is has to be re-examined (used more often/less often depending on the case of course) and the method of death re-evaluated. I think that in most cases, the prisoner should choose how to die. Not everyone wants old squirts or old sparky. I think that death would be a more fair punishment to some crimes than say solitary for life, which in some cases is more cruel and unusual than death.
 
For it in theory, against it in practice. The current probability that innocent people have been and will in the future be executed is absolutely a justification to never use the death penalty. One state sanctioned execution of an innocent person easily outweighs a million blood thirsty murderers being killed. It's not even close.
 
Against. Keep the fella in life in prison if you are so afraid of him. Killing someone is just a way for people outside the prison to feel better in short term. Kinda like sweep the dust under the rug and avoid to see what is wrong and try to fix the problem that would cause such crimes.
 
I'm not against it as a concept. Some people deserve to die if they have committed certain acts. They've forfeited their right to live.

However, I'm 100% against it in practice. It's practiced in a discriminatory and uneven manner (it disproportionately punishes minorities), the methods of execution are poorly regulated and inhumane, and the risk of executing even one innocent person is reason enough to abolish the practice altogether.

You can't take it back. At least if someone is sentenced to life in prison, they can be released and get compensated monetarily.
 
Yes, the death penalty is basically human sacrifice to appease our bloodlust. We like to feel that justice has been served, but it's actually just impotent revenge. (If you doubt it, just watch how many people shriek for the torture and execution of especially vile offenders.) Killing criminals doesn't reduce crime or undo any specific crime, and the death penalty actually incentivizes murder to remove witnesses. Also, the state really ought not to hold the power of life and death over its citizens. Innocent people can and have been killed by the system. One mistake is one too many, and more than one has been made.
 
daviyoung said:
Living in a society is a learning process. I don't think it's up to us to decide when to just say "fuck it, off with his head!" when we've already come so far.
Click to expand...

There is always a point where you just have to say fuck it. Those serial killers that kill upwards of 20 people before getting caught? Kind of hard to justify re-integrating them into society and while life in prison would be a better punishment there is never a 100% chance that you can keep them behind bars for ever.
 
i'm against it simply because it costs way more to put criminals on death row

i don't have any serious moral objections, and i would argue that it's actually more merciful to sentence somebody to death rather than a life in jail. though, in texas alone, more than a handful of innocent people were put to death... so it's obviously time to put the practice to rest
 
foxtrot3d said:
Are we supposed to learn something from convicted prisoners? Punishment is not a learning process, we execute people because society has no longer deemed them necessary to live in our society. They agreed to the social contract we all live in and violated it by choosing to murder others, as such society has the right to permanent remove them.
Click to expand...

Society also has no use for most homeless people. Or most old people. Or most people. So... yeah. You might never wanna use that line of thinking ever again.
 
I believe in a rehabilitation-based criminal justice system.
I think we should strive to appeal to the better elements of humanity, ideally, not to satisfy our animal instincts, which i think revenge is part of.

I understand the desire for revenge, even to the extent of death penalty, but i don't think we should base out higher moral structure on such visceral desires.

I think the "you could end up executing an innocent person" argument has some validity, but implies that in a case of 100% certainty, death penalty would be a viable solution, which i find to be wrong.

--
The only case of death penalty i'd accept is one where the mere presence of someone or something alive, is causing physical harm to others, so if one day a Super Villain that emits toxic radiations so strong that can't be stopped were to be born, then i'd grant the exception as a valid reason to kill.
 
I am against it. Because I see death as an easy way out, and I don't think killing killers prevents killings. I also don't believe in an after life, so I feel they should pay in this one (and be removed from society). I'm also not into the whole an eye for an eye thing.
 
daviyoung said:
Killing someone because we don't like them doesn't teach us anything.
Click to expand...

Wasting resources on someone who isn't going to change doesn't help us either.

There's a whole lot of dead weight in society because people are against doing what needs to be done.

Charles Foster Kane said:
I am against it. Because I see death as an easy way out. I also don't believe in an after life, so I feel they should live their lives deprived of freedom to pay for what they did. Also not into the whole an eye for an eye thing.
Click to expand...
So you would rather tax payers keep some scumbag in prison for some petty "he deserves to suffer" instead of oh i dont know..keeping that money so they can make next months rent or feed their family
 
I'm neutral on it. I would like to see it restricted more such that it is only used in slam dunk cases where there are multiple witnesses, serious forensic evidence, and/or video evidence.

But if it went away that would be fine too.
 
I think one man should not decide on live/death of another man. Bad enough that it happens constantly but we don't have to institutionalize it.
 
foxtrot3d said:
As far as #2 goes while it may be that an innocent person could perhaps be executed I don't think that is a reason to abolish the entire practice.
Click to expand...

A justice system should be designed to protect innocent people. Not just protect them most of the time.
 
foxtrot3d said:
As far as #2 goes while it may be that an innocent person could perhaps be executed I don't think that is a reason to abolish the entire practice.
Click to expand...

But we could avoid executing innocent people by abolishing the practice. That's a good thing! And we can still have life sentences to keep dangerous criminals locked up for the rest of their lives.
 
I'm for it in extreme cases only. Normally I would rather have them rot in jail.

My sophomore year in college my professor showed us a video of an execution by electrocution. Words can't even describe how awful it was. I wouldn't wish that on anyone who truly deserved it, even though electrocution is no longer practiced.
 
Sorian said:
while life in prison would be a better punishment there is never a 100% chance that you can keep them behind bars for ever.
Click to expand...

If it means never having to stoop as low as killing because "fuck it" I'll take my chances with these serial murderers orchestrating the greatest prison break of the millennium.

Omega Rex said:
There's a whole lot of dead weight in society because people are against doing what needs to be done.
Click to expand...

Some things can be removed without worrying about the effects of that removal. But not all things. It's not that simple.
 
I used to be fully in favor of it, now I am fully against it. I honestly can't say why exactly, other than there is too much of a chance of someone innocent being killed (IMO even .0001% is still too much of a chance) but even saying that, it implies a "but I'm ok with a guilty person being killed" which I don't think I am.
 
Omega Rex said:
Wasting resources on someone who isn't going to change doesn't help us either.

There's a whole lot of dead weight in society because people are against doing what needs to be done.
Click to expand...

Except that there are more resources wasted in the execution process.
 
We just need to make the moon space Australia and send them all there.

No need to cutoff contact, we can give them skype
 
Personally, I'm for it in limited circumstances

-absolute proof of guilt
-zero chance of rehabilitation

I'm against life without parole and would abolish that before the death penalty. Feel life in bars without any chance of getting out is too barbaric a punishment- killing them is more humane.

I would bring firing squads and hanging back (firing squads for honorably discharged veterans due to tradition) because they are more humane methods of execution.
 
yes. i find it very troubling in a system that makes plenty of mistakes. even if it was perfect i still find it distasteful, if you commit a double murder at twenty are you still the same person at sixty five. maybe, but not necessarily. i don't like just giving up on people and saying fuck it let's permanently end them, no takebacks. i'm very glad the uk currently prohibits capital punishment.
 
Pau said:
The way it's handled in the U.S. is pretty damn racist.
Click to expand...

lol The US is extremely racist but pulling the race card here is a stretch.

daviyoung said:
If it means never having to stoop as low as killing because "fuck it" I'll take my chances with these serial murderers orchestrating the greatest prison break of the millennium.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but when dealing with someone who has so little regard for human life, I'm not going to worry about "stooping" to their level. Yeah, 99% of people won't escape from a mamimum security prison but that 1% may go on to kill another innocent when that could have been prevented and there comes a point where the moral high ground isn't worth people's live. It's like batman, great hero, but everytime the joker kills someone, that is 100% on bats at this point.
 
Coriolanus said:
Society also has no use for most homeless people. Or most old people. Or most people. So... yeah. You might never wanna use that line of thinking ever again.
Click to expand...

Way to take my comment to the extreme, I did not say I support execution because certain classes of people are useless. I said that criminals have violated the social contract and as per that contract society has the right to remove them permanently from the collective. I wasn't ware old or homeless people were seriously violating the social contract.

EDIT:

Wait, I see my mistake I said "necessary" to live in society, that wasn't the right word I meant "worthy" or "capable" in other words society doesn't see them fit to live amongst the collective due to the crimes they have committed.
 
No.

1. The government should not be in the business of killing people that present no direct threat to anybody.

2. It's more expensive than keeping them in prison.

3. We learn nothing from executing people when as a society, we should try and do everything we can to prevent atrocities from happening again.

3. There's no guarantee that you will always execute the right person and it's not like you can undo the process. Wrongly imprisoned people can still be released.

4. Someone has to actually go through the act of the execution and I don't think that's a burden that should be placed on anyone.

5. It's not really possible to do it in a humane way consistently. See the recent example of a botched execution along with the fact that drug companies are no longer willing to export lethal injection drugs to the US.

6. The government should not be in the business of killing people that present no direct threat to anybody.

It serves no purpose whatsoever to anyone except for satisfying bloodlust.
 
As far as #2 goes while it may be that an innocent person could perhaps be executed I don't think that is a reason to abolish the entire practice.
Click to expand...

Uuuuuhhh what? Avoiding killing innocent people seems like a perfect reason to not do something. The best reason perhaps.

I'm against it because it's ineffective as a deterrent, it's permanent, there's no hope for rehabilitation or aquittal, and because killing people is barbaric and shouldn't be practised by the state unless truly necessary.

It's also very expensive due to the intense legal process, which is absolutely necessary to prevent innocent being killed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The Why Files
26
550
Diatribe1974 replied
The Death of Snow White - Exclusive Trailer (2025)
20
968
Major Insano replied
Why are people buying iPods again?
2
84
2K
nightfly replied
Why are mods deleting threads with no explanation?
14
508
Plies replied
Neuroscientist claims evidence of post-death brain communication
36
570
Hudo replied
Top Bottom