The Death Penalty

[MADDOG]

Flaggs "I hope you die" thread got me thinking. I would like to hear peoples thoughts on the death penalty.

In Oz, we no longer have it, and I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, there are many crimes that I feel warrant the death penalty, and I would support it for those crimes.

A few years back, a madman by the name of Martin Bryant went berserk in Tasmania and killed around 28 (Or maybe 35? Nikki? Chef?) people with a semi-automatic. There was no doubt that he was gulity, and yet he is now in prison. Still alive, still breathing, while the families of the deceased morn for their loved ones. Martin Bryant SHOULD have been put to death.

But my feeling is that if just one innocent man is condemned to death, then the system has failed. Very few people have been convicted without SOME doubt. I mean, I can't name many cases where it is clear cut.

I don't really want to get into a debate about OJ, but the man got off. As far as I'm concerned he is innocent, even though I believe he did it. But let's assume he didn't do it. If he HAD been convicted, he could very well be on death row right now.

If ONE innocent dies due to a miscarriage of justice - even one man in a thousand - then I believe that the death penalty should not be used. There is no such thing as certainty in justice, and until there is, condemning a man to die is wrong in my opinion.

So I would have to say that I am against it. What about you?

MADDOG

 

[Flagg]

That is one big can of worms you've opened there maddog. Not so long ago there was a thread about the columbine murderers that ended up talking about death penalty.

Put it this way. I was the only one to say that had they not killed themsleves they should not have been sentenced to death.

Evil does not exist. Only madness exists and madness is a disease, an illness. No matter how big the crime we cannot justify killing somebody because they are ill.

*Note* This refers to the death penalty and not to murder through revenge by an individual who is personally involved in the crime

 

[Jade]

I want to share my beliefs on this but for now I will just say this.

If you believe in the death penalty then you can't support Euthanasia (assisted suicide) and

IF you don't believe in the death penatly then it is hypocritical to support assisted suicide.

Why you ask?

Well b/c death penalty= government controlls whether you live or die....

Not allowing assisted euthanaisa= the government controlls whether you will live or die....


Scary to think about.....

 

[Rand al'Thor]

Believing in the death penalty is allowing the government to control whether CRIMINALS live or die.

Believing in euthanasia is allowing a free person the choice to live or die.

I believe in both of them. If by some terrible accident, an innocent person is executed, it is a tragedy. I would like to think this couldn't happen, but I know it can (and has). This is the price we pay for having laws... The same thing can be said for life sentences. If an innocent person is convicted and sentenced to life, it is destroying their life almost as much as with a death sentence, but we must keep life sentences for murderers... It is a touchy subject, and there will always be debate on it, but I whole-heartedly believe it is right.

Rand al'Thor
The Dragon Reborn

 

[Bliss]

Rand summed up my opinion quite nicely. Thanks.

 

[Jade]

Believing in the death penalty is allowing the government to control whether CRIMINALS live or die.

Believing in euthanasia is allowing a free person the choice to live or die.

I believe in both of them. If by some terrible accident, an innocent person is executed, it is a tragedy. I would like to think this couldn't happen, but I know it can (and has). This is the price we pay for having laws... The same thing can be said for life sentences. If an innocent person is convicted and sentenced to life, it is destroying their life almost as much as with a death sentence, but we must keep life sentences for murderers... It is a touchy subject, and there will always be debate on it, but I whole-heartedly believe it is right.

Rand al'Thor
The Dragon Reborn

Rand,

All I am talking about it government control.
I am not arguing for or against or for the death penalty I am just saying that you can't say the government should decide whether some people should die but then stay out of it for others.

Also, you mentioned it is about punishing criminals... just wanted to point out that THOUSANDS of people go to gail every year (possibly more) for crimes they did NOT commit. So, really it is not about whether "criminals" live or die, it is whether or not people we have decided are criminals.. live or die.

And on the reverse side of that... euthanasia and "non-criminals" (lack of a better term here sorry)... where do we draw the line on suicide being right or wrong... how bad does the pain and suffering have to be before it is "acceptable."?

It is a touchy issue, but not all too much for me but only b/c I don't have much experience in either issue (knock on wood!)... so please just take these for what they are.. nothing, nothing less, my opinions.

 

[Rand al'Thor]

Oh Jade, I would not want to offend or belittle the opinions of one of my biggest fans!

I am simply very vocal about some issues and I always try to explain to the best of my ability why I believe what I do. If I sound like I'm preaching, trust me, I'm not... Its just the way I am... I am going to college to be a teacher, and I tend to talk too much anyway when I get on a rant, and the two combine to make me over-elaborate everything!

And because of this, I'll try again:

Innocent people go to jail sometimes because of errors that have been made in some part of "the system." We still MUST treat these people as criminals, or the "real" criminals will not be punished. There is no way around this-- at all. Now, the debate on what kind of punishment is a different issue, but there are some parallels.

A conviceted felon is stripped from protection by the constitution in many ways (voting, etc.). They are, by definition, under control of the government and its' court system:

"The state of whatever hereby remands you to the custody of..."

Since they are under the control of the system, it IS for the government to decide whether they live or die. I'm not mentioning the innocent people convicted since I've stated that I believe they must be treated like criminals (since, in our eyes, the ARE criminals, until proven otherwise).

Now, for euthensia: I believe that the government has no right to tell me what I can or cannot do, as long as my actions do not infringe on the constitutional rights of others (therefore, a government can make a law against murder, since I would be infringing on someone's right to life). If I want to kill myself for any reason, I should have the right to do it. I don't care if it is because my dog died or I have terminal cancer-- I have the right to do what I damn well please since I'm only hurting myself.

Society knows that killing yourself because your dog died is wrong/illogical, and we try to prevent those things, just to keep the system in check. The euthenasia debate is stupid in my opinion. I really don't understand how someone can say I don't have the right to kill myself... Sure, they can try reasoning to filter out really bad reasons for suicide, but all-in-all, some people just want to be left-the-f%$k-alone.

Now, jumping back to the death penalty... I've established why I think the death penalty is OK. Now I'll try to explain why I think its OK even when innocent people get screwed.

In the American justice system, there are many rules and regulations that keep innocent people from being executed. There are many appeals the go into effect automatically when someone is sentenced to death. This delays the executions of many guilty people, but I think everyone agrees that it is a necessary step to filter out innocent people. Now, if it happens that someone IS executed, but they were innocent, no bigger tragedy can be done. It is a shame, and thank God it doesn't happen that often. I'm not sure how to reason this out with anyone, but I think that the end justifies the means in this case. I may sound hard-nosed or just plain cruel, but the price is worth the payoff, in my opinion.

Rand al'Thor
The Dragon Reborn

 

[CreamyLady]

When I can restore life to a person who is dead, then I will consider ending a life.

Pending that day, I won't do it.

 

[Rand al'Thor]

And until you can restore life to an innocent victim, I say let the punishment fit the crime.

Rand al'Thor

 

[CreamyLady]

Yes, and the death penalty requires a person to take a life, inflicting still more damage; to the spirit and society.

We are just going to have to disagree about thi.

 

[Stitchface]

The only reason people have rejected the death penalty is because of the possibility of error. If you could be 100% about every case, you should fry them.

So why don't people argue against life sentences - or ANY form of punishment for that matter - on these grounds?

Is it because these punishments are 'rectifiable'? (very weak: you can't give someone back years of their life lost in prison, and there's always the possibility that the innocence of innocent people will never be confirmed at all)

Or are people sent to prison for something they didn't do a regrettable social necessity? There will be mistakes, but we can't simply let everyone off, and locking up a few innocents is 'a price worth paying'?

 

[CreamyLady]

The only reason people have rejected the death penalty is because of the possibility of error. If you could be 100% about every case, you should fry them.

So why don't people argue against life sentences - or ANY form of punishment for that matter - on these grounds?

The possibility of error is only one reason to reject the death penalty. I, personally, think it does far more damage to society to practice judicial murder than to let a possibly guilty person live.

No, one cannot restore years of freedom to a wrongly incarcerated person, but the person is still alive. That is an apples and oranges comparison.

 

[Expertise]

Locking up innocents is a price worth paying ... unless you are one of the innocents.

I am in favor of capital punishment but only in response to a very limited number of crimes.

Since the stated ambition of most western nations is incarceration in order to facilitate rehabilitation. The persons who have committed crimes of such a vile nature that they show themselves to be beyond rehabilitation or for that matter redemption, should face capital punishment.

Simple as that to me.

 

[Bonnie Wee Lassie]

I'm kind of ify on the subject. I do feel some crimes warrent the death penalty and some don't. It would save alot of money on what we spend to keep these criminal behind bars for the rest of their lives

 

[Aranian]

This seems to be a popular BB subject.

Statistics indicate that the death penalty has no deterring effect on violent crime. It appears to be supported only by a "get even" mentality. Because justice is supposed to be a form of restitution rather than retribution, the death penalty really has no place in a justice system.

The possibility that an innocent person could be executed is another matter. I can think of very little that could be more tragic than an innocent accused of a crime which he didn't commit, stamped as a criminal, and then executed by the state.

 

[Bliss]

Statistics indicate that the death penalty has no deterring effect on violent crime.

It at least deters those who actually pass through the seemingly endless appellate process and get to sit in the fry chair. Or do those statisics include crimes committed in the afterlife?

 

[Laurel]

What Aranian said.

The death penalty is not a deterrent, is more expensive than a life sentence, and in nearly every study done is found to be woefully inaccurate. Until we have a perfect system of justice in which ALL are given proper legal counsel - until you can guarantee that NOT ONE INNOCENT PERSON will be murdered by the state, then I cannot support the death penalty.

How can you be against private citizens killing innocents, but be in favor of the government killing innocents?

If you accidentally give an innocent man a life sentence and new evidence is found to prove he's not guilty, then you can set him free. If you give an innocent man the death sentence then find out twenty years later that he's innocent, that man is dead. That's murder, my friend. And all the government does is say "oops!".

Killing is killing, whether the government does it or whether I do it. Killing a criminal does not reverse the crime, it only satisfies the same nasty vengeful urges that we abhor in criminals. A gang member kills for revenge and it's a crime. The government kills for revenge and it's justice. Yeah, right.

 

[Rand al'Thor]

I do not think the death penalty harms society in any way. I also do not believe that it is "murder." It causes a death, but is not an act of murder. I think it is just another form of justifiable killing. I don't want to sound like a monster or something, but if I was an executioner, I would feel no remorse what-so-ever.

The death penalty does deter crime... Facts and figures have been distorted by a liberal media to say otherwise. I know in Texas, someone will think twice before commiting a capital offense, because we'll shove a needle in your arm damn quick!

Rand al'Thor
The Dragon Reborn

 

[Laurel]

It at least deters those who actually pass through the seemingly endless appellate process and get to sit in the fry chair. Or do those statisics include crimes committed in the afterlife?

So we waste millions of taxpayer dollars so we can live out our revenge fantasies and for what? Life imprisonment also keep the criminal from committing crimes against society.

And suppose - just suppose - he's not guilty? Have you read the articles describing the evidence with which some have been sent to the chair? Have you seen the studies that show the death penalty to be racist, classist, and all around biased? It doesn't work as a deterrent. This isn't B.C. Rome. We're supposed to be civilized. If we get off on sitting around watching another man die, then we're no different from the criminals we claim to hate.

 

[Laurel]

The death penalty does deter crime... Facts and figures have been distorted by a liberal media to
say otherwise.

And how do you know this? Name your source, please.

 

[Skitten]

I do believe in the death penalty, there are so many appeals that the families go through and years and years of waiting for justice. There loved ones don't get a choice but the criminals do, they get the right for appeals and the family gets nothing. As for the innocent yes it is a risk but 90percent of the time they are correct and procecuting the correct person. As for the assisted suicide I do believe that a person has a right to make a decision about his or her own life. There are so many people out there who don't like to see their loved ones suffer either. So it is a hard decision I think it should be the patient and the doctors decison not the governments.


I feel this is a hard decision on either party, but why does the government get to decide what is right and what is wrong when it is our bodies and our lives. Well, that is just my opinion.

 

[Laurel]

I do not think the death penalty harms society in any way. I also do not believe that it is "murder."

Suppose a gang member kills another gangster's brother. The brother of the deceased gangster then goes and kills the first guy as retribution. By your logic, the second death is not murder because it's "justice". An eye for en eye, eh? Or does that only work when the state does the killing? If so, why?

You're also making the assumption that every single person who has been on death row is guilty, whereas numerous studies & investigations have shown otherwise (and please don't say "liberal media again 'cause conspiracy theories give em a rash ). If I kill an "innocent" person, I'm a murderer. If the state kills an innocent person, it is - by definition - also murder.

 

[Laurel]

I do believe in the death penalty, there are so many appeals that the families go through and years and years of waiting for justice. There loved ones don't get a choice but the criminals do, they get the right for appeals and the family gets nothing. As for the innocent yes it is a risk but 90percent of the time they are correct and procecuting the correct person.

So if an innocent person is killed by a criminal, the family is entitled to "justice"... What about the families of the innocent 10% you were talking about - the ones the government puts to death who aren't guilty? What do they get?

 

[Rand al'Thor]

Originally by Laurel-
"And suppose - just suppose - he's not guilty? Have you read the articles describing the evidence with which some have been sent to the chair? Have you seen the studies that show the death penalty to be racist, classist, and all around biased? It doesn't work as a deterrent. This isn't B.C. Rome. We're supposed to be civilized. If we get off on sitting around watching another man die, then we're no different from the criminals we claim to hate."

Wait just a damn minute, Laurel. I think you could do a much better job of choosing your words than that. I may support the death penalty and I may look like some tight-wad conservative, but I take offense to "If we get off on sitting around..."

I don't smile when I hear about the latest execution. Its a shame that this coutry has to have capital punishment. I feel ill thinking about the gutter-slime of human civilization that is choking this country, but they are still humans, and when we HAVE to kill them, it proves that society, as a whole, is not "civilized" at all. The only thing that makes me accept the death penalty is thinking about the person(s) that died in putting that criminal on the chopping block, so to speak.

I'll praise the day when the electric chairs go rusty and gas chambers are relics-- when we can look back on today and wonder why a country's crime rate got so out of hand that 200+ people a year had to be PUT DOWN.

I don't feel remorse when someone is executed, but I do feel pain.

Rand al'Thor
The Dragon Reborn

 

[Rand al'Thor]

Laurel--- as far as your gang analogy goes. That is not right for reasons you should see from one of my original posts. The people who are punished by the court system MUST BE CONSIDERED CRIMINALS for the system to work at all. Vigilateism will never work- there must be limits on everything, and citizens out of control are worse than animals.

Rand al'Thor
The Dragon Reborn