The Death Penalty

[Always]

I think that certain crimes should be punishable by death. If you look at it, cases of domsetic violence where a father beats and sexually molests his daughter - he's only in jail for five years. I'm not saying he should die; just that certain laws should be reviewed... like the mandatory 25 years or whatever for possession of marijuana (less than an ounce). I want your opinions.

 

[Weird Harold]

The recidvidism rate for people who receive the death penalty is zero. There are crimes like premeditatied murder, multiple murder, violent rape, and repeat violent offenders that should not be given the chance to convince a parole board they have reformed.

 

[Always]

I just think there are some things you should die for. And the victim (if still alive) if they want should be allowed to carry out the sentence.

 

[TN_Vixen]

I have very strong beliefs concerning the death penalty. My train of thought rests in the fact that life is a priviledge and that priviledge shouldn't be ours to give or take. I believe there is a higher order that sets events in motion and dictates outcomes. Which outcome we are subjected to depends upon the choices we make in our lifetime.

It is not my place to take another person's life, although to be true to myself I have to say in the same breath that if someone physically hurt my son I would shoot the fucker dead on the spot and then shoot him a couple more times just for fun.

In my plan design to practice law I will gear myself towards defense because I feel that I should not be the catalyst to place penance on another human, especially if the penance involves the death penalty.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

I just think there are some things you should die for. And the victim (if still alive) if they want should be allowed to carry out the sentence.

Then the punishment would be an individual's revenge as opposed to the state's justice and we woudn't be a country we'd be a vigillante mob.

 

[Aranian]

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=12898

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mac users don't deserve to die; they need to be put in an asylum and participate in an intensive rehabilitation program.

 

[Always]

Of course, I'm anarchist, so I see things differently. I kind of like the mob scene. You know, the whole Taliban government thing.

 

[CreamyLady]

I just think there are some things you should die for. And the victim (if still alive) if they want should be allowed to carry out the sentence.

I beg your pardon; who are YOU to decide what things merit a death sentence?

No, I do not believe in capital punishment. I sincerely don't, and I respect the beliefs of those who do. However, as Harold pointed out, the recidivism rate of the executed is exactly zero. The fact is, there are people on death row who should not be there -- if they are executed wrongly, there is no appeal. My conscience will not permit me to vote for a death penalty if there is any doubt as to guilt. Can yours?

Until one can restore life, one should not take it. I do believe in punishment for the offenders, and those who think jail is a picnic are invited to take a tour. The inmates at Terminal Island get a choice: an hour of exercise, once a week, or a shower, once a week. These are not necessarily violent offenders, either.

I don't buy into the argument that we are feeding and clothing these people at the taxpayer's expense. I believe the cost to society, and individual souls, by continuing judicial murder is far higher than the monetary cost.

As for a living victim carrying out a death sentence, I'm sorry -- I can think of nothing more barbaric. Our system of justice, imperfect as it is, assigns the state to carry out the task, absolving the act of any taint of personal revenge. That, too, is barbaric, but less so than personal vendetta.

I realize I will be perceived as a bleeding heart liberal, and will get flamed. However, the idea of taking a life for a life is wrong -- it admits of no hope of repentance, redemption, or even reform. Pending an equitable application of the law in this land, I will never see how "right" it might be. It is wrong.

 

[TN_Vixen]

taking another tact... let's look at why the law was enacted origionally. The idea is to deter ciminals from commiting heinous crimes, right? It has been proven that the death penalty does not appear to deter, in addition the length of time a criminal sits on death row actually increases the amount of money taxpayers spend on inmates. So, not only does the punishment not perform it's function, but it costs us more money to carry it through.

I'm not a rocket scientist but it sounds to me like we should try something else.

btw... who gets to determine what crime is heinous enough to be fit for death as a punishment? Who draws the line, where is it drawn and by what standard?

 

[Always]

I respect your point of view on this, and maybe I should rephrase what I meant by the victim carrying out the punishment. What I meant was that the victim's opinion should be listened to by the judge and be considered. Within the boundaries of the law, I think the victim can best assess the emotional/physical/mental damage and it should be discussed with them exactly how they feel the offender should be punished. I'm not saying they get to be the judge; they just get an opinion.

 

[TN_Vixen]

God, my spelling is horrible

 

[Always]

i've seen worse, TN.

 

[TN_Vixen]

Shila, your approach seems fair but law consists of logic and doesn't allow for emotion to dictate boundaries and/or punishment. Logically, the victim- or victim's family would be basing their guidelines of punishment on emotion and therefore that method could not be supported by our system.

Life in jail would consist of more punishment than death.

 

[Jester]

It's easy to sit and say that someone deserves the death penalty. Easier than facing the actual consequences, I mean. When people debate the death penalty, it's usually a moral or academic arguement. They aren't facing the true situation at the moment.

I've said before that I think that some things that people do deserve capital punishment. I can understand relating to the emotions of a victim or bereaved family and friends. But, then I think about if I was the one who had to throw the switch or push the button or whatever. I have to wonder if I could stand there and take a person's life. The answer for me is no.

So, if I'm not willing to go and personally take this person's life, then I don't feel that I should support the penalty. I know full well that some people could and would do it, but I couldn't. It's not just ending a person's existence that gets to me, but the damage that it would cause to me as well as that person's family/friends. I would have to live with the knowledge that I killed someone. That's not to be taken lightly.

In a given situation I would probably be able to take a life in defense of myself or others, but that is split second, heat of the moment, survival stuff. That's alot different.

I understand those who support the death penalty and I respect their opinions, because it's not an easy thing. I just couldn't do it.

 

[Whispersecret]

Creamy Lady, I hear you. I understand where you're coming from, and I respect your views. However, I strongly disagree with you.

See, I believe in good and evil. Some people are evil.
Yeah, there are probably a few on Death Row who were wrongly arrested, accused, tried and sentenced. I'd say not many though. This is going to sound extremely callous and I'll probably get flamed for it, but I think that executing one person by mistake is better than allowing hundreds truly evil murdering people to continue to live.

In meting out the death penalty, my conscience would be clear if it had been proved to me "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the person was guilty. I would actually feel I had done something good. Ridding the world of an evil person is a good thing. Everyone has a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, however, if you willfully and wrongfully deprive someone else of their life, I believe that you forfeit your own. Why should a murderer still get to live after having taken someone else's? Repentance, redemption, reform? HA. Again, they forfeit that privilege when they murder.

Killing in general is bad, but not in all cases. I'm sure everyone can think of an instance in which killing someone else would be justified. (Self-defense, a policeman killing in the line of duty, etc.)

Judicial murder is an oxymoron if I ever heard one. The word "murder" implies evil intent, which the death penalty does not. The death penalty is justice. The punishment should fit the crime, and in the case of life imprisonment, that's the ultimate case of the punishment not fitting the crime.

And don't bother trying to make me feel bad for people in jail. Prison is supposed to be shitty. That's why you're supposed to avoid it. I'm not saying it should be torture, but neither should it be tolerable.

We, as a society, place penance on other people every single day. I shudder to think about what the world would be like if we just sat around and waited for the higher order to set things right.

Who gets to decide which crimes are heinous enough? Society. I'm not in the law profession, but I believe the lines are already drawn.

If someone kills my husband or anyone else, they deserve to die too.

If you murder someone, GAME OVER.





[Edited by whispersecret on 09-30-2000 at 10:10 PM]

 

[CreamyLady]

I'm not going to flame you Whispersecret. Again, I will agree to disagree.

Regarding repentance, it is not a right, conferred by society. It is, rather, a gift conferred by the Creator on human beings -- a way of realizing that they have committed a wrong, and being very deeply sorry.

No one forfeits the right to repent; no one. If they are capable of a deep contrition, they have repented.

I do believe that the taking of an innocent life is wrong, particularly if viewed in the light of expedience. The whole process devalues human life, turns us into sides of beef, and it sickens me. We all, every last one of us, have value, and we are all connected. I do believe very much in Donne's view: Any man's death diminishes me/Because I am involved in mankind;/Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

 

[Whispersecret]

I just skimmed the other thread on this topic.

What the fuck, Flagg? There is no evil, only illness? Give me a break.

Stitchface said:

If you're going to argue that line, you're accepting that the death of a few innocents is a 'price worth paying' for the greater social good. I wonder if you'd say the same thing if you were on death row for a crime you didn't commit...

Yes, I would like to think that I would. Your moral beliefs shouldn't be thrown out the window when it doesn't benefit you.

Weird Harold brought up (on the other thread) the case of a man who killed eleven other women after he'd been paroled. I firmly believe that one wrongfully executed innocent dead by governmental accident is better than eleven innocents dead by governmental accident.

 

[Whispersecret]

<hugs CL>

They can be contrite in hell, then.

 

[Aranian]

I just skimmed the other thread on this topic.

What the fuck, Flagg? There is no evil, only illness? Give me a break.

Stitchface said:

If you're going to argue that line, you're accepting that the death of a few innocents is a 'price worth paying' for the greater social good. I wonder if you'd say the same thing if you were on death row for a crime you didn't commit...

Yes, I would like to think that I would. Your moral beliefs shouldn't be thrown out the window when it doesn't benefit you.

You're intentionally misinterpreting here. His point is not that beliefs can be discarded when they arn't being best served at present, his point here is that until faced with the actual situation, some people don't have the empathy to realize the enormity of the position of that one guy we killed for "the good of the whole".

Weird Harold brought up (on the other thread) the case of a man who killed eleven other women after he'd been paroled. I firmly believe that one wrongfully executed innocent dead by governmental accident is better than eleven innocents dead by governmental accident.

Here you're assuming that execution is the only alternative to the parole system, I find this to be a distressingly narrow minded point of view.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Weird Harold brought up (on the other thread) the case of a man who killed eleven other women after he'd been paroled. I firmly believe that one wrongfully executed innocent dead by governmental accident is better than eleven innocents dead by governmental accident.

My problem with this argument is that it implies that our only 2 options are to execute murderers or allow them to be paroled. The recidivism rate for executed killers may be zero, but I'm sure it's virtually zero for those given life in prison without parole (which is a third option not mentioned).

I come down on right of center on most issues, but I oppose the death penalty for many of the reasons mentioned above. My objections are both philosophical and practical.

Philosophical: simply, I don't believe that having committed crimes, even the most brutal murders, entitles anyone (including the state) to take his life. I consider human life to be the most sacred of all things and it's the fundmental reason I want to be a doctor. (aside from wearing a spiffy white coat, of course. )

And I believe that all of us are better than the worst thing we've ever done (and not as good as the best thing we've ever done for that matter).

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending in any way the actions of criminals. People absolutely should be held accountable for their actions. They should be locked up far away and deprived of their societal rights. I simply believe our right to life isn't born of society, and as such, society may not take it from us.

I suppose maybe the best summary of my philosophy on this issue is "hate the sin, love the sinner". Some may find the distinction specious, but I don't.

Practical Considerations: Whether or not you agree with the idea of execution as a morally-permissable punishment, the inequity in the who receives execution vs. life imprisonment is undeniable. I don't remember the figures, but blacks are much more likely to be executed than whites. The difference between black-on-white murder and white-on-black murder is especially stark.

Then there's the issue of the irrevocable nature of capital punishment that CreamyLady alluded to. In the course of trying cases, mistakes will be made. Despite our justice system being weighted in favor of the accused in the belief that it's better to have the guilty go free than have the innocent punished, innocent people are convicted.

With innocent people setenced to prison time, the damage done is relatively minor (provided the injustice is later recognized and corrected). The man goes free. But as CL said, death is irrevocable. With such a punishment, there is zero room for error, and how realistic is that goal?

I understand there are strong feelings on both sides of this issue and I respect them. I haven't had a loved one killed. I can't imagine what that's like and I'm sure I'd be full of hate for the killer. It's a tough question and I don't claim to have the "correct" answer. It's just the best I've come up with so far...

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Aranian, just noticed we made the exact same argument back to back. Great minds think alike, huh?

 

[Siren]

Ok, whew, normally I avoid these threads but I cant tonite.

 

[Siren]

ONE MORE THING

 

[wolfy]

I agree Siren. Personally I think anyone with a year+ time in jail should be allowed the option of assisted suicide.
I think locking any creature up is horrible. I don't belive
in torturing people for their crimes so if they are going to
be spending life behind bars at least give them a choice.

If you had the choice of death. if you have a life sentance, then you wouldn't ever need a Death penalty really since anyone with a life sentance will die in jail eventually.You might even get quite a few people that are on death row killed alot faster hehe.

I think our prison system blows chuncks.I think drugs should
be legalized straight across the board.Maybe having govrmnt
run drug houses for the more dangerous drugs so the addicts
don't hurt other people. Putting someone in jail for smoking
pot is the dumbest thing i've ever heard of. I also think
anyone in jail that is going to freaking eventually get out
should have various training courses open to him and maybe
even jobs they can get when they have completed their
training. Jail is supposed to be to keep dangerous people
away from us. Not some form of torture system or a training
ground for minor criminals to become serious criminals.

I don't have much pity for rapists and murderers etc, but
unless they are going to be in jail forever i'd personally
like them to have something they can do with themselves
when they get out of prison other then try and figure out
a way to get back in. Also if you are convicted of
childmolestation or rape etc or a seriel killer anything
that is seriously dangerous to the general public. I think
you should be sent to an enclosed neighborhood somewhere.
Basically it's not a "jail" but it's still protected from
the general public. A town full of ex-cons. Could even be
a sort of halfway-house for ex-cons who arn't rapists etc.
Letting them get used to being outside first before they
are thrust into mainstream society. Extremly minimum
security but everyone is acounted for every day so if
someone goes missing you know right away and can start a
search for them. Oh well i've gotten of topic sorry *lick*

 

[R Nitelight]

Death Penalty

I have a great fondness for the Dennis Miller phrase 'culling the herd'.