Jump to content
The Emma-Watson.net Forum

Capital Punishment / The Death Penalty


Capital Punishment/Death Penalty  

22 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

What's everyones thoughts on the death penalty? Why or why not? Is it illegal in your state/country?

 

My state (Pennsylvania) still allows it. Personally I'm against it because it's not an effective way of preventing or reducing crime. It is not a deterrent--violent crime rates are consistently higher in death penalty jurisdictions. There's other factors that should be considered such as the legal apparatus designed to minimize wrongful executions. It's ridiculously expensive and abolishing it would free up taxpayer dollars to focus on law enforcement, schools, drug treatment centers, and other government institutions that help prevent crime. Life in prison (without parole) would ensure that they wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they don't have, until they rot of old age. And last but not least, it fosters a culture of violence by asserting that killing is an acceptable solution to a problem.

Edited by Bagel of Death
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, it should be outlawed. Nobody has the right to take someone's life. It doesn't justify or make you any better than the person who commited a crime. Plus it doens't really punish the person, you free him. If the person rots in his cell and what happens in the shower is the worst punishment imo.

 

In Germany there is no death penalty, but on the other hand the punishments are not strict enough either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

Lol....ppl who reject the death penalty on moral grounds yet want capital offenders to slowly rot in their cells...truly an enlightened point of view.

 

It doesn't work as a deterrent, agreed, but it can be a good way to permanently dispense with ppl who are just too...horrible? And maybe likely to continue to be so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd say death penalty to the rapists, they destroy people's life, if i were the judge i wudnt give em a fair trial, death sentence on the spot.. its illegal here tho, in my country

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd say death penalty to the rapists, they destroy people's life, if i were the judge i wudnt give em a fair trial, death sentence on the spot.. its illegal here tho, in my country

 

I agree

 

I don't think I'm better then those people in a sense that I can decide which life to take and which not, but as far as I'm concerened if you rape or kill you give up your human rights. At the end of the day the life of a person like that is less important then the life of the innocent people who you could be saving.

 

The whole point of prison is to rehabilitate and some people just can't be rehabilitated. We don't have the death penalty here and the punishments people get are stupid, everyone seems to get off extremely lightly unless their crime wasn't that bad...

 

But if the death penalty was brought back to extreme cases, then the prisons could be used for their purpose to rehabilitate those who can be rehabilitated.

 

If someone rapes or kills (unless they have a reason for killing, for example it was self defence) then they have a mental problem, but I'm not one of those people who thinks that mental problem excuses them for what they do, if anything it makes what they do worse, because I don't believe those people can get better. Therefore killing them to protect the wider population makes sense as far as I'm concerened.

 

I know a lot of people will disagree with me, but my view on this wont change, I don't see how saving the life of someone who has comminted without a doubt the most disgusting acts makes you good... However at the same time the death penalty will never be brought back here, I just hope the punishments get harsher in at least prison time. Life meaning life ect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

Lol....ppl who reject the death penalty on moral grounds yet want capital offenders to slowly rot in their cells...truly an enlightened point of view.

I don't see your point mate. Isn't someone 'rotting' in their cell if they serve a lifetime sentence? Plus I epxlained why I said that. Next time read it more carefully. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

Lol....ppl who reject the death penalty on moral grounds yet want capital offenders to slowly rot in their cells...truly an enlightened point of view.

 

It doesn't work as a deterrent, agreed, but it can be a good way to permanently dispense with ppl who are just too...horrible? And maybe likely to continue to be so?

 

Not if they get life in prison without a parole. Which means that's it, you can't get out end of story.

 

As I mentioned before, violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government becomes the bad parent who says, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

 

I also forgot to mention 2 things in my previous post:

 

There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst of our criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they pass away of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.†Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."

 

Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 30 years in the U.S., over 100 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. No matter how rare it is, the government should not risk executing one single innocent person.

 

Most governments are supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

 

I don't see your point mate. Isn't someone 'rotting' in their cell if they serve a lifetime sentence? Plus I epxlained why I said that. Next time read it more carefully. ;)

 

Exactly, if they get life WITHOUT parole that's it. You can't get out, end of story. Not to mention government sanctioned execution is still murder. Executions have no place in a civilized society, let alone a civilized government.

Edited by Bagel of Death
Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd say death penalty to the rapists, they destroy people's life, if i were the judge i wudnt give em a fair trial, death sentence on the spot.. its illegal here tho, in my country

 

I understand your sentiment, but giving the death penalty to rapists/child molestors is a logical fallacy. It's what's called an "appeal to emotion". In other words, should we execute a rapist because it feels good to do so? Because it satisfies our sense of justice?

 

I'm still against this because it would encourage a rapist to kill his victim so as to leave no witness, leading to a great increase in the number of women/children being killed.

 

Second, rape is most often a "He said / She said" crime. The accused says "She said yes", the victim says "No I didn't". That's a very weak reed on which to hang someone.

 

If we expanded the death penalty to more crimes than homicide, it would lead to even more people being wrongly executed. I don't believe you are correct in assuming what victims say about their rapist's penalties.

 

What's a Hippocrate? It is like a dog crate for Hippos?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, if they get life WITHOUT parole that's it. You can't get out, end of story. Not to mention government sanctioned execution is still murder. Executions have no place in a civilized society, let alone a civilized government.

 

So turning ppl into even bigger, useless wrecks we all have to pay for for decades is a civilized and sensible course of action?

You want to be tough, even cruel, on offenders yet you shy away from the ultimate form of sanction for fear it might later prove to be a mistake. And you as part of society were part of it.

 

You do this just for your own conscience and comfort, not for upholding some "civilized standard".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having the Death Penalty in you country, does not lead to less murders. If someones hell bent on killing somebody, they will do it without thought to any punishment they might get. If someone commits a murder or some other very violent crime, then they should go to prison for life. They should go into prison , and come out years later in a coffin. Another thing is, make it tough for them, no tv, no radio, keep them in solitary confinement, and feed them crap food. A bit harsh ? there are people about who bang on about prisoners rights. Imo, they lost those when they broke the law.

 

Just think how you would feel if someone killed a close friend or relative of yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So turning ppl into even bigger, useless wrecks we all have to pay for for decades is a civilized and sensible course of action? You want to be tough, even cruel, on offenders yet you shy away from the ultimate form of sanction for fear it might later prove to be a mistake. And you as part of society were part of it. You do this just for your own conscience and comfort, not for upholding some "civilized standard".

 

Look I'm not feeling sympathy for criminals, trust me I used to think just like you. But you have to understand that capital punishment fosters a culture of violence by asserting that killing is an acceptable solution to a problem. An eye for an eye makes the world blind, remember that?

 

I see that you're from Germany, but here in the states we have a thing called The Constitution. The death penalty violates the eighth amendment which does not allow any cruel or unusual punishments to be carried out. The death penalty is unconstitutional because it is both cruel and unusual. Death is a severe punishment. It is harsh and irrevocable.

 

Oh and you're talking about costs? Pre trial costs are much greater because, once a suspect is caught, the prosecutor must do a separate investigation into the crime, into the suspect himself, that is, does the suspect have mental retardation (if so, he cannot face the death penalty) or mental illness (he can face the death penalty). If the prosecutor decides to seek the death penalty, the trial will have two separate phases, mandated by the supreme Court, one to decide guilt, one to decide the penalty. The process of choosing jurors is much more complicated in death penalty cases. Many more pre-trial motions are filed by both sides and have to be answered. Prosecution teams use more lawyers, and where the money is available, by the defense as well. Death penalty cases take much longer to try. If the sentence is death, the prisoner will be locked up in a separate prison facility, which is generally much expensive to run and to maintain. At this point appeals begin and costs continue to mount up. It is also important to note that the overwhelming number of cases where the death penalty is not on the table end in plea bargains.

 

As an example, in New York State, the average annual cost to incarcerate someone not on death row is about $35,000 per year. On the other hand, in the years since 1995, when New York State brought back a death penalty law, 7 people were sentenced to death, none had more than one appeal and 3 had not even had their first appeal. New York shelled out well over $200,000,000 for its capital punishment system since 1995. Assuming each of the 7 men lives for 40 years the cost to incarcerate all of them for life would be under 10 million dollars.

 

If the death penalty process were speeded up, the costs would still be much higher than with life sentences and many innocent men who were on death row for years would have been killed in our names.

 

The system can make tragic mistakes. In 2004, the state of Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham for starting the fire that killed his children. The Texas Forensic Science Commission found that the arson testimony that led to his conviction was based on flawed science. As of today, 138 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. I don't know about you, but that's a large amount of INNOCENT people who would've faced death. To me, that's frightening. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict.

 

Some people have argued that since the death penalty is such an important social institution it does not matter if an innocent person sometimes is sentenced to death and executed.

 

If you accept this premise, what is the maximum rate of innocent executed you can tolerate? Is it 25 percent? Is it 50 percent? Or is it lower, like 10 percent?

 

Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed?

 

People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported the death penalty in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

 

The death penalty: killing people to prove that killing people is wrong. :rolleyes:

Edited by Bagel of Death
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your sentiment, but giving the death penalty to rapists/child molestors is a logical fallacy. It's what's called an "appeal to emotion". In other words, should we execute a rapist because it feels good to do so? Because it satisfies our sense of justice?

 

I'm still against this because it would encourage a rapist to kill his victim so as to leave no witness, leading to a great increase in the number of women/children being killed.

 

Second, rape is most often a "He said / She said" crime. The accused says "She said yes", the victim says "No I didn't". That's a very weak reed on which to hang someone.

 

If we expanded the death penalty to more crimes than homicide, it would lead to even more people being wrongly executed. I don't believe you are correct in assuming what victims say about their rapist's penalties.

 

What's a Hippocrate? It is like a dog crate for Hippos?

 

no, it doesnt makes me/victims feel good, executing rapist is never enough to heal the wound or scar they left on their victims.. so i'd say, kill em, then dance on top of them and burn their remains.. and i think its still not enough.

 

that and mayb they'd think twice before doin the crime, and your statement is why we need to end rapist's life, because not only they leave em scar for life, they also doin an attempted murder..

 

and a thief will never say i did it. think about it, if she said yes it doesnt mean u can do it, i know girls always says the opposite sumtimes, yes means no, and no means yes.. and a person with a healthy mind will never jump onto a conclusion with one statement: "she said yes, so i did it"

 

thats why we have the CSI team to investigate so we wont execute the wrong person, i'd believe that the victim say, and will hold the suspect in prison until all the evidence are found, and once it has been found, and he's guilty, i guess a bullet to the head will suffice then burn the sucker

 

Hipporcate? its umm the cage they got for hippos at the zoo..

 

look, i know its not my place to kill people, but think about the victims. think bout wat if that happens to you or people close to u..

 

edit: im not saying that u should agree, we're all have our opinions, and you should stick with it, and i'll stick with mine

Edited by Ardementor
Link to post
Share on other sites

all im gonna say on this subject is...the death penalty isnt really a punishment for some criminals, it just gets them outta jail quicker, the only time a murderer should leave prison is when he/she is seriously ill and needs medical treatment. the only other time they leave is when they're in the coffin dead. BUT in prison they shouldnt get a cushy ride, they shoud me made to do manual labour, like smash up rocks to be used as hardcore/aggregate for roads. this would then be a punishment and would also pay for some of the road maintenance fees that are paid by local governments, which also pay for the prisoners to be in prison in the first place, all of the money though, essentially, is sourced from the taxpayers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am against the death penalty for one reason, I don't believe that any one person should have the power to make the decision wether someone she be killed or not. To me that just leads to a corrupt court system. I don't understand how we can allow humans to make this decision. It's just not right.

However, there are times when the death penalty is needed. I understand that to. With Osama bin laden, I get it. When the Eichman trials occurred it was needed. But, I don't think that courts should be allowed to make these decisions on all sorts of cases. There is a time and place for everything. There are spefic times it's needed, but not all the time. Because what happens when they make a mistake?

 

I also agree with a few people points on here. It doesn't seem like a good enough punishment for some people. And, I don't think it causes any less crime.

 

Another point I have to add is this. A few people mention rapists and I do have something to add on that point. My father is a phycologist and used to vist jails a lot. I am not exactly sure what he did there but he did tell me this. Rapists/molesters/ anything to do with kids. Those criminals are the lowest of the low in jail because everyone has kids. Meaning, other prisoners treat rapists and molesters the worst. They treat anyone who hurt his own or other people kids the worst. Because many of these criminals do have kids who they love, believe it or not. So in this case, deTh penalty isn't exactly a good punishment for rapists. Why not through them in jail where they will get treated terribly? That's just one added point. I don't actually know how much I agree with it or not though lol.

 

I am sort of on the fence of both sides.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, it doesnt makes me/victims feel good, executing rapist is never enough to heal the wound or scar they left on their victims.. so i'd say, kill em, then dance on top of them and burn their remains.. and i think its still not enough.

that and mayb they'd think twice before doin the crime, and your statement is why we need to end rapist's life, because not only they leave em scar for life, they also doin an attempted murder..

and a thief will never say i did it. think about it, if she said yes it doesnt mean u can do it, i know girls always says the opposite sumtimes, yes means no, and no means yes.. and a person with a healthy mind will never jump onto a conclusion with one statement: "she said yes, so i did it"

thats why we have the CSI team to investigate so we wont execute the wrong person, i'd believe that the victim say, and will hold the suspect in prison until all the evidence are found, and once it has been found, and he's guilty, i guess a bullet to the head will suffice then burn the sucker

Hipporcate? its umm the cage they got for hippos at the zoo..

look, i know its not my place to kill people, but think about the victims. think bout wat if that happens to you or people close to u..

edit: im not saying that u should agree, we're all have our opinions, and you should stick with it, and i'll stick with mine

 

Of course, I'm not attempting to 'brainwash' you or other members. I'm just merely expressing my opinion, just like you are. It's a debate, that's all. :P

 

Going back to your previous statement, I don't agree with your opinion, but I understand what you're saying. I just find the death penalty to be unconstitutional, hypocritical, a waste of money and it has been wrong in the past by executing the wrong people.

 

By the way, not all victims or families of the victim believe that capital punishment is/was appropriate punishment for their perpetrator. This link is from an article from a victims' advocate that says it very well. Here's are a couple of quotes that sum it up:

 

"I am a conservative, a victims’ advocate and a death penalty supporter. But my real life experience has taught me that as long as the death penalty is on the books in any form, it will continue to harm survivors. For that reason alone, it must be ended." and "Of the many hundreds of survivors I’ve worked with, I found most were not focused on the perpetrator literally losing their own life, but on the criminal justice system ensuring they would no longer have the opportunity to harm another person, their family or have the freedom to view anything but prison walls for the rest of their life.

 

I now believe that the death penalty must be ended and replaced with life without parole, a harsh punishment that provides victims with the swiftness and certainty they need at a fraction of the cost in terms of dollars and human suffering by homicide survivors."

 

And from Aba Gayle, a member of MVFHR (her daughter was murdered): "The district attorney assured me that the execution of the man responsible for Catherine’s murder would help me heal, and for many years I believed him. But now I know that having someone murdered by the government will not give me what I need. I beg our government not to murder in my name and, more important, not to tarnish the memory of my daughter with another senseless killing.â€

 

Many people assume that families of homicide victims are all for the death penalty. It just isn't so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported the death penalty in principle have testified that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am against the death penalty for one reason, I don't believe that any one person should have the power to make the decision wether someone she be killed or not. To me that just leads to a corrupt court system. I don't understand how we can allow humans to make this decision. It's just not right.

However, there are times when the death penalty is needed. I understand that to. With Osama bin laden, I get it. When the Eichman trials occurred it was needed. But, I don't think that courts should be allowed to make these decisions on all sorts of cases. There is a time and place for everything. There are spefic times it's needed, but not all the time. Because what happens when they make a mistake?

 

I also agree with a few people points on here. It doesn't seem like a good enough punishment for some people. And, I don't think it causes any less crime.

 

Another point I have to add is this. A few people mention rapists and I do have something to add on that point. My father is a phycologist and used to vist jails a lot. I am not exactly sure what he did there but he did tell me this. Rapists/molesters/ anything to do with kids. Those criminals are the lowest of the low in jail because everyone has kids. Meaning, other prisoners treat rapists and molesters the worst. They treat anyone who hurt his own or other people kids the worst. Because many of these criminals do have kids who they love, believe it or not. So in this case, deTh penalty isn't exactly a good punishment for rapists. Why not through them in jail where they will get treated terribly? That's just one added point. I don't actually know how much I agree with it or not though lol.

 

I am sort of on the fence of both sides.

 

they dont always get a hard life, at least not here. Yes they are the lowest of the low and even the other prisoners hate them. There is actually a bloke here who attempted to kill a famous child killer, then managed to kill a molestorer. However because of things like this the prisons actually protect the lowest of the low, if they know other prisoners will be after someone for what they've don erv they keep them seperate. Which makes sense, if we dont allow the death penalty how can we allow someone to be hurt by their peers.

an extreme case of this is the jamie bulger killers, because what they have done is unthinkable they have been protected at a great cost to the tax payer with new identities. Which has already hurt innocemt people, there has been at least one case of an innocent man being accused of being one of them, in turn making his and his families life hell, then of course when jon venables commited more crimes and put his own new identity at risk, he was given another one, again at the cost of the tax payer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they dont always get a hard life, at least not here. Yes they are the lowest of the low and even the other prisoners hate them. There is actually a bloke here who attempted to kill a famous child killer, then managed to kill a molestorer. However because of things like this the prisons actually protect the lowest of the low, if they know other prisoners will be after someone for what they've don erv they keep them seperate. Which makes sense, if we dont allow the death penalty how can we allow someone to be hurt by their peers.

an extreme case of this is the jamie bulger killers, because what they have done is unthinkable they have been protected at a great cost to the tax payer with new identities. Which has already hurt innocemt people, there has been at least one case of an innocent man being accused of being one of them, in turn making his and his families life hell, then of course when jon venables commited more crimes and put his own new identity at risk, he was given another one, again at the cost of the tax payer.

 

I agree, which is why I wrote that I am not so sure how I feel in that case. Like what's worse? Death penalty or throwing someone in jail with the knowledge that other prisoners will be violent to him? I don't know! It is such a sticky situation and it's so hard for me to actually form an opinion. I feel like every situation is so different. And there are so many different factors that play in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you can have any sympathy for violent criminals, they didn't care a jot about their victims. Some of you might think this is just sinking to their level. It may well be, but I'm sure the criminal would understand. He/she knows they have done wrong, and they will be punished, one way or another.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Personally, I do not think that the death penalty should be outlawed. It is a harsh punishment, but I do believe there are those select few who actually deserve it. There are those few who think since they killed somebody, they should get away with it. *cough* Casey Anthony *cough* But on the flip side of the coin, there is the justice system here in the United States that needs to get fixed, and quickly. People die when they actually don't deserve it, and there are others who really deserve it, but don't get it. But overall, in my opinion, I do not think it should be outlawed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should keep the death penalty.

Just having them locked up in the cell for life isnt going to work, because if they have done something sever enough to get put on death row then they are going to have no problem harming or killing fellow inmates or the prison guards.

And the tax payers shouldnt be paying to keep someone that bad alive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Joe, we are in a bad economic state right now in America and we should not be paaying for rapists and murderes livelyhood. I am a christian and I will not judge someone or say what they deserve because in my faith we all deserve the same. That being said even the Bible states that captiol punishment is right. I stand by God and my own thoughts here. There needs to be justice for those who want to go around murdering and raping. I also know for a fact that some men will do things just to get into jail. For instance a man recently robbed the bank for a dollar just to get to see a doctor because he wouldn't have been able to pay otherwise. That is unfair that we Americans pay taxes for that to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I am also a Christian so Im on the same page as you!

People seem to have lost touch with the fact that actions have consequences.

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth seems to no longer apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^Speaking on the Christianity part of it, I am Christian as well. However, the only people that ever get the death penalty are people that kill another. And people that kill will most likely go to hell, because killing isn't the Christian way. It's not what was intended for God's children.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That being said even the Bible states that captiol punishment is right.

 

It is true that there are many Bible passages (especially in the Old Testament) that support capital punishment, often for relatively mild offenses:

 

- Adultery (Leviticus 20:10)

- Blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16)

- Breaking the Sabbath (Exodus 31:14 & 15)

- Disobedient children (Exodus 21:15 & 17; Leviticus 20:9)

- Homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13)

- Not being a virgin on your wedding night (but only if you're a woman - Deuteronomy 22:13-22)

 

However, there are many passages (especially in the New Testament) that are ANTI-death penalty. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

 

So really we're not sure what The Bible's clear stance is.

 

There are many, many practical problems with capital punishment (that I just explained in my previous posts), but purely from a moral standpoint, I can't imagine that Jesus would support it. True Christians shouldn't, either. =/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...