Death Penalty, For or Against?

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

I am not saying Murdering or Raping is good. I am just saying killing them isnt going to help anybody. If you want them to suffer, just lock them up. Smooth, I dont want to try offend you by saying this but here goes. In Smooth's case, her husband was convicted of something he didnt do. She admit's she had a hard time trying to prove him innocent, imagine what she would have been going through knowing her husband was basically murdered for being wrongly accused?

We are talking about those who were 100% proven with out a doubt guilty and/or confessed to their crimes. But like you said above, you dont want the murderer's/ rapists families (who have nothing to do with anything) to be sad at all. So lets just let them out of prison so those families don't suffer. Right?

 

[phatuis]

No, I say keep them in prison, but being inhumane about it (locking them up 24/7) is not the right way to go.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

No, I say keep them in prison, but being inhumane about it (locking them up 24/7) is not the right way to go.

But what about all those sad families?

Right.. We have to be humane to these people. They should get to enjoy their prison resort with free meals, room&board. After all they deserve it... Lets say someone committed such crimes against your whole family.. Perhaps did them to you as well but decided to let you live.. Would you want them to go to live in a place where they can get 3 meals a day, watch tv, interact with other people, work out, and do all sorts of other various activities they get to do in prison. While you and the rest of us tax payers, are the one PAYING for all of that.

Or would you rather they get whats coming to them?

 

[civilwarrocks]

Phatuis seems to be attempting to apply John Lennon lyrics to real life. The murderer did not take into account the sorrow of the victim's family nor the sorrow of their own family, should they be convicted, when they chose to kill someone. Once again, the criminal is the only one who can be blamed for their family's pain. If the murderer did not want their family to be upset by their execution, they shouldn't have could anyone. The harsh treatment & in far too few cases, execution of murderers is what keeps the murder rates from skyrocketing. If I knew I could kill someone & only go to prison for 15 years with 3 free meals a day, free cable, free exercise equipment, communication with other inmates, etc. than honestly nothing would stop me from shooting my neighbor when he complains about my dog barking. The death penalty & other harsh punishments allow us to function properly as a society.

 

[Jayglo]

Some very good points have been made. I for one am against the death penalty.

1) It is punishment enough, if not more so, to be kept in prison for the rest of their lives.

2) Killing them will not solve anything. Using murder to punish a murderer is inconsistent - killing someone to punish them from killing someone.

3) The point has been made several times that it is teaching future generations that murder, for example, is ok. Actually, by murdering the murderers essentially, this is making more of that point than not killing them.

4) Skillet made a good point that it is expensive to kill someone with the death penalty anyways, so that would be using our tax dollars anyways.



These people no doubt deserve harsh punishments - but simply putting their life to an end is actually letting them off the hook easily. Someone with that twisted of a moral base, who would commit those crimes probably don't care too much about their own lives either. Lock 'em up in a straight jacket for the rest of their lives and feed them nothing but cheap bread and water or something.

 

[Nebulous's iconNebulous]

1) It is punishment enough, if not more so, to be kept in prison for the rest of their lives.

I disagree. Basically if you kill someone, you get free room and board for life.

2) Killing them will not solve anything. Using murder to punish a murderer is inconsistent - killing someone to punish them from killing someone.

The punishment fits the crime. If you dont want to be put to death, dont kill someone. Its no secret that murderers can be executed. Im sorry but that whole if we kill them we are no better than them argument is a load of rubbish.

3) The point has been made several times that it is teaching future generations that murder, for example, is ok. Actually, by murdering the murderers essentially, this is making more of that point than not killing them.

Its teaching future generations not to be murderes or they will be punished accordingly. Not having the death sentence teaches future generations that its ok to take someone elses life, you will just get a slap on the rist.

4) Skillet made a good point that it is expensive to kill someone with the death penalty anyways, so that would be using our tax dollars anyways.

There is a lot cheaper ways to execute someone. They need to reevaluate that process.

 

[Skillet]

[quote name='Skillet']African Americans have made up 41 percent of death row inmates and 34 percent of those actually executed since 1976 but currently are only 12 percent of the general population.

Where did you come up with this statistic and what country are you saying this is for?[/quote]



http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/046/2003

-- United States of America. Download the PDF. There are also many other points in there too. It's also sourced on Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_debate (It is cite note 12)-- Which links to amnesty.org



Oh, and for murder-- Life without parole- It is a hell of a worse punishment. Make them suffer for life in the cage they dug themselves into. Who cares if they learn all of these things from prison, anyways. Life without parole generally means you're not coming out. Right..? They're dead before it matters what they learned.

 

[Kasynlie]

I don't see the sense of the death penalty. I mean, what is the point of it if the person found guilty of whatever can't suffer for this actions?

 

[Raven]

^ because the taxpayer is paying for it!

 

[Sunny]

It depends on what the crime was, and how they act in prison.

 

[Skillet]

I don't see the sense of the death penalty. I mean, what is the point of it if the person found guilty of whatever can't suffer for this actions?

^ because the taxpayer is paying for it!

Actually, the death palty costs more than life with no cahnce of parole. I've sourced that in this thread many times. The average person on death row stays there for 18 years. It IS NOT CHEAPER! Please, don't use that arguement, because I have a million sources disagreeing

 

[xneseyx]

I don't see how it would cost more, or why they keep the people in death row there for so long... why don't they just walk them down the hall already? or if it's going to cost that much money for electricity, rope's gotta be cheaper. it's not fair that these men (and women) who raped or tortured and killed or whatever they did get to die so nicely. I'll bet they weren't that nice to whomever got them in there. They should die not horrifically brutal-like, but not nearly as nicely as they have been. I believe in the death sentence.

 

[xneseyx]

Oh, and for murder-- Life without parole- It is a hell of a worse punishment. Make them suffer for life in the cage they dug themselves into. Who cares if they learn all of these things from prison, anyways. Life without parole generally means you're not coming out. Right..? They're dead before it matters what they learned.

This generally depends on what country you're from. In Canada, people usually only get a slap on the wrist and then get let out. people don't usually stay in Canadian prisons long.

 

[Bluezone777]

The cost is not about killing the person but all the court battles that can go on before you get to that point.



It's set up so they can put themselves on countless appeals and legal moves that can clog up the courts for years hell end up with the guy dying in prison before he even gets sent to death row.



Nobody cares when someone gets put to death for a crime they didn't commit till someone who they know personally that's in that position.



Death Penalty is a nice way of saying murder without saying the word so we supposed civilized people can claim to not be on the same level as killers but we are. If you support death penalty then you support murder only if it's done a certain way and place.



Doesn't change the fact that you support the death of another nor does it make you any better then those you put to death tbh.

 

[xneseyx]

I know that it's murder. Murder is stull murder, no matter who dies. But if we get these people gone, wouldn't it teach other people to not do the same thing and in the long run give us a better society? if that calls for murder, then I'm all for it.

 

[Evil Eye]

In medieval times they punished crimes in all sorts of gruesome ways, crimes were still committed though. I don't think having a death penalty would change that for us either.

 

[Bluezone777]

Seeing as it's been going on for a long long long time yet it still goes on doesn't suggest it does anything but inflict a punishment that can not be reversed which will be terrible if you find yourself as the guy who put someone down for a crime they never committed. Then you just murdered someone and will have to live with yourself for the rest of your days. That's most certainly not a person I would ever want to be.

 

[xneseyx]

I understand where you're coming from, but it's not like we're going to whip out the death sentence for petty crimes, or if there's only partial evidence. If there is a confession, or if there is no doubt that this person committed that crime are the only times it's going to happen. And it's not like someone's asking you to pull the levellr as it were. In medieval times there was only one hangman per county, right? so technically speaking there should only be one hangman today at each prison, right? No one's telling you that you have to do it.