Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes.

No.

Only for certain crimes. (Name please)

[Korgus]

I'd generally be against it, but I might support it in some circumstances. I'd support it for serial killers and terrorists, if it was absolutely certain they were guilty.

[Phmcw]

I'd generally be against it, but I might support it in some circumstances. I'd support it for serial killers and terrorists, if it was absolutely certain they were guilty.

And when it come to that, what would be the point of murdering someone absolutely unable to feel any remorse or compassion.
Recently a teen killed his girlfriend for a bet, the prise was a breakfast. He simply could not feel any remorse.

That the lot of psychopaths, even though all of them doesn't become murderers. What good it is to kill them?

[ECrownofFire]

I'd generally be against it, but I might support it in some circumstances. I'd support it for serial killers and terrorists, if it was absolutely certain they were guilty.

And when it come to that, what would be the point of murdering someone absolutely unable to feel any remorse or compassion.
Recently a teen killed his girlfriend for a bet, the prise was a breakfast. He simply could not feel any remorse.

That the lot of psychopaths, even though all of them doesn't become murderers. What good it is to kill them?

From a more practical point of view, it's probably cheaper to kill someone than keep them alive for X years

[atomicwinter]

Is it ever morally right to a human being?

If you answer yes is it okay outside of war?

When said human being is absolutely no threat locked up in solitary confinement?

There is no excuse for Capital Punishment, it's disgusting.

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. It solves nothing, never will, never has.

[Realmfighter]

Nope.

That is not a good proof - there are all sorts of differing variables. Simply pulling up a page of those statistics completely abandons the scientific method.

Unfortunately, you will never be able to get a proof of that form - any two data sets will be different in so many ways, and will have so many uncontrolled variables that statistics like that are worthless.

How ever, it is better proof then "One of the Arguments in support of Capital Punishment is that it deters criminals, lets take the supporters words for that."

[Vattic]

I don't agree with capital punishment for many reasons and am glad to live in a country that doesn't have it. I am worried that, mostly because of Paul Staines, it's back in the press. There is no evidence to support it's use as a deterrent and I see it being just as likely to encourage extreme behaviour to avoid capture. Mistakes will be made and no recompense can be given. In a fair system it's not likely to be cheaper than life imprisonment. I just can't see any justification for killing someone if they're incapacitated.

[Dr.Feelgood]

Actually I am not quite sure why we don't kill children except by virtue that we say they don't have the capacity to respect the nature of the crime.

Yet don't they gain that ability at around age 7?

America doesn't execute juveniles due to our weakening values. In Thompson v. Oklahoma, it was ruled "cruel and unusual" to execute people under 16, despite the fact that children past a certain age know the consequences of their actions. The reason for the ruling was "evolving standards", when in reality it was because our system was growing soft. What makes a 15-year-old monster different from a 30-year-old murderer convicted of the same crime?

Wallachia under Vlad Țepeș' rule, Athens under Draco's laws

I can't believe you're actually using Vlad the Impaler (i.e. the historical basis for Dracula >_>) and the guy who gave us the word "draconian" in an argument.

Like... Yeah, you do anything and you're going to have a stick shoved through your anus so far that it exits through your mouth.  But that isn't justice.  That's disgusting.

Vlad's actions may be repugnant to us now, due to changing values, but it doesn't change the fact that it worked. He took control during a gruesome time of rampant corruption and constant invasions from the Turks. And he wiped out the cancer that was destroying his society. He eliminated the corrupt nobles and made death the penalty for most crimes. Not only did crime nearly disappear overnight, but the Turks were too terrified to provoke someone who would create a forest of impaled corpses from his own citizens. Unfortunately, his society returned to rampant corruption and crime when he died. The other societies I mentioned had similar successes. It may be hard for some to admit, but gory deaths deter crimes. I wished we televised executions and used more graphic methods of death, such as a return to electrocution or gas. All methods of execution can potentially cause excruciating pain, even lethal injections, so I see no problem with it.

Here is the thing. When do humans cease being human? when they do inhuman things? Why would a human do an inhuman thing unless by its very nature inhuman acts are within human ability?

Certain acts, when committed, make you irredeemable. Monstrous individuals deserve nothing, but disdain, and the same acts inflicted upon them. America has tried rehabilitation and it failed. And there's no point in housing more filth in our incredibly overcrowded prisons.

[SalmonGod]

That type of outlook combines the worst elements of Rorschach and Ozymandias.

"All morality is absolute or weakness.  All punishment is absolute or weakness.  I am strong because I sacrifice my empathy to the cold, harshness of reality to prevent the onset of chaos."

I don't see strength in this.  I see laziness and narcissism.  The world is so simple when it's black and white, and a person can do no true wrong when all cruelty can be hand-waved into self-promotion by framing it as a response cold, hard reality that they have happened to have the grit to match blow for blow.  You're not even accountable to yourself with that attitude.  It's self-cultivated sociopathy.

[Leatra]

In my experience, death penalty is only applied when the goverments tries to shut up communists, socialists, leftist and alike. Goverment WILL use it to reduce hope and raise their authority. If you lived in 1980 in Turkey (during the military coup) you would what I mean.

People who think this should be public to make sure everybody takes a lesson, do you want to see stuff like these in your country everyday?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Revenge is not a good thing.

[Flying Dice]

Frankly, the death penalty has so few just applications and so much potential for corruption and misuse that I see no reason to allow it, not only because of the all too common executions of innocents who have been wrongfully convicted, but also because it plays a key role in the establishment and preservation of totalitarian states.

OTOH, I also don't agree with the current state of the prison system in the U.S., as it is stuck between two potentially fruitful paths, in that it is too soft to act as a deterrent to crime, while also not being capable of a truly effective program of rehabilitation. This also ignores the importance of prevention; eliminate the roots of the majority of crime, (poverty, lack of education, lack of social services, etc.) and you have lower incidence of various types of crime, which ends up saving money on the post-conviction end as well as allowing law enforcement to concentrate on serious offenses. I could also bring up the increased efficiency and tax income that could be created by the legalization of marijuana, but that is perhaps a bit too far from the original topic.

[GlyphGryph]

I'm going to stand by my opinion in the other thread:
Evidence seems to fall, from what I've seen, in the camp of capital punishment being a factor in societies that believe "its alright to kill someone because of something they've done, even when you have other viable options to deal with them" (rather than something they are trying to do in a situation where options are quite limited, like in self-defense).

Societies with this belief tend to foster individuals with this belief. I am not okay with a society that encourages this sort of belief among the general population for minimal gain, since time and again you get people picking up on what they say as a failure of the government to act.

Life in prison has the wonderful advantage of not being something individuals can easily attempt to emulate, and thus takes away one of the cultural rationalizations that create a culture where it is "okay to kill people if they've done wrong."

You can't see why that sort of belief could cause problems and costs in a society as a whole, and why institutionally denying that belief could very well be an effective weapon against murder in the long term? (Even if we have to accept a couple potential extra deaths short term due to a possible decrease in the deterrence effect)

[Gamerlord]

Maybe instead of capital punishment put them to work, like in a sweatshop or something like that to make them give back to society.

[Phmcw]

Money, money, money... the aim of the justice system is not to make money.
We can afford a good prison system. And please , if you're to save money, use Norway approach. THAT WORK!!!!

Why the hell would you try save money on the murder case?

[Max White]

*Ahem*
THE ENTIRE WORLD IS WRONG EXCEPT FOR PHMCW, EIN AND MYSELF!!!!

That is all, thank you.

[Gamerlord]

I don't know where the bloody hell you're living, but I am always right, thank you very much.