• Public Execution: Is it alright?
    81 replies, posted
My personal answer is a certain and indefinite no, it should not be allowed in any capacity anywhere, and in fact the death penalty itself should be abolished. To see countries still support and commit public hangings is disgusting. I make this thread because my friend is a dumb fuck and he was talking about how he supports public hangings (and the death penalty for that matter(after I posted a video he said "well only if they're guilty!")). Basically the whole point of this thread is to see if anyone actually thinks its an acceptable action, and to see their logic and reasoning for such a stance. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("No debate presented" - Megafan))[/highlight]
God no. If they [I]have[/I] to (Like a serial killer) 10+ people murdered), do It private.
I think regular execution is wrong, so no. While ever there is the tiniest hint (and there always will be, no matter who did what) that the person is innocent, I will never support execution. The idea that innocent people have been killed in the name of justice is disgusting
[QUOTE=Muggy;37085433]God no. If they [I]have[/I] to (Like a serial killer) 10+ people murdered), do It private.[/QUOTE] I'm going to have to agree with this guy here, on all parts.
i can't see any advantages in public execution as opposed to standard execution (aside from the fact that i absolutely [i]hate[/i] capital punishment) - it simply infringes on a massive amount of human rights; and was only ever acceptable in the dark ages
happens everyday blud round hackney init next man starts talkin waste bled u dont even no man hollas his crew shit goes down bled gets shanked
Executions are wrong full stop.
What happens when someone take hostages to demand release of a prisoner ? Is it wise on out part to feed that potential sleeper cell on our taxes, only to see him getting released later and causing much more havoc ? I am against public executions. But some wrecks need to be executed for the greater good of humanity.
Oh and I'd like to mention that I'm the person he mentioned in the op, I chose not to respond back to not cause more conflict and he took it as me liking public execution and overreacted like usual. And if you read my post above there's only a certain time where I believe execution is right, and that's only and I cannot stress this enough, but only when it's a serial killer who's murdered a ton of people and has no guilt or remorse about it. Him and I both have issues and he's trying to demonize me even more, so move along folks, no need to feed him. Think of me as bad for wanting only serial killers to be executed, but we all have our personal opinions on this topic and I believe it's best to not let him take his anger out on me even more, which he does to everyone he knows, I know that's personal stuff but I felt that it was necessary to mention such a thing for once. And in case anyone didn't get the memo, I don't support public execution whatsoever, it's a step backward and I'd rather have it done in private, kids and the like don't need to see this kind of stuff.
I am against executions morally but to help further that position I am also against it because it is usually more expensive than life imprisonment. Here is a snippit from a paper on the subject which talks about estimates of the cost of execution against life imprisonment. [quote]While not empirically based, studies to date have estimated total costs for capital cases in the millions of dollars. A New York study compares a $1.4 million cost figure for each death penalty trial with $602,000 for the cost of life imprisonment for forty years in non-capital cases.[95] Florida has estimated that the true cost of each execution is approximately $3.2 million, or approximately six times what it would cost to keep that person in prison for all of his or her natural life.[96] Based upon our research and data currently available, these appear to be reasonable estimates of the overall costs incurred in capital and non-capital cases.[/quote] Here is a link to that paper. [url]http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1614&context=llr[/url] Basically what the paper as a whole says is that due to the nature of executions there are a lot more costs associated to it. To name a few of those extra costs, the average time prisoners spend on death row is 8 years and those prisons are more expensive to maintain than normal prisons, capital punishment cases are estimated to take up to 3.5 times longer than non-capital trials and appeals to the state's highest court are automatically granted to people who have been given a death sentence. Execution can be extremely expensive, and besides that there are other arguments that can be made against the death penalty.
No, it's bad
[QUOTE]And if you read my post above there's only a certain time where I believe execution is right, and that's only and I cannot stress this enough, but only when it's a serial killer who's murdered a ton of people and has no guilt or remorse about it.[/QUOTE] Why keep the whole capital punishment system around purely for a small group of people? Why is it completely necessary that we kill them in the first place?
I'd rather not get into the details about that due to Clementine, like I stated before. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] Though I'll keep it simple if you really want an answer, like Fritzel said in his post, some people just don't deserve to live.
[QUOTE=VagueWisdom;37090926]I'm going to have to agree with this guy here, on all parts.[/QUOTE] Bullshit you do lol, don't back out of your bullshit about supporting Public Executions just because you don't want to look retarded on FP. You literally were saying [img]http://puu.sh/OU4v[/img] And when confronted on voice, you said that they need to be serial killers, so no you don't agree with him, you want them to be publicly murdered
Any form of punishment is a cop-out. You're attacking the effect and not the cause of the problem.
Like I said earlier, and I know you ignored my post, I chose to not respond back for a reason. I'm going to leave this thread now and let people discuss because this kind of shit isn't needed here.
Clementine, I'm not crazy about his opinions either but this isn't really the greatest place for a personal argument. [QUOTE=VagueWisdom;37093804]I'd rather not get into the details about that due to Clementine, like I stated before. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] Though I'll keep it simple if you really want an answer, like Fritzel said in his post, some people just don't deserve to live.[/QUOTE] So it's pretty much the same argument everyone always uses in support of the death penalty. Tell me, how is it for the greater good of humanity that we participate in killing at all? How does it benefit us to do away with a few people that are completely isolated from us and will never see the light of day again anyway? Because we've decided they've "given up their right to live?" Also, have a look at this nice map that groups us with some of the most oppressive governments in the world: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_country[/url]
[QUOTE=VagueWisdom;37094003]Like I said earlier, and I know you ignored my post, I chose to not respond back for a reason. I'm going to leave this thread now and let people discuss because this kind of shit isn't needed here.[/QUOTE] Actually it literally is, its mass debate, that's what this entire board is made for, to debate things, explain your logic and reasoning for being for public execution, and don't change your opinion just because you realized your opinion is laughable. You had already been laughed at by everyone in the chat, and even then you didn't change your opinion, so yes, you do support public execution.
[QUOTE=Clementine;37093907]Bullshit you do lol, don't back out of your bullshit about supporting Public Executions just because you don't want to look retarded on FP. You literally were saying [img_thumb]http://puu.sh/OU4v[/img_thumb] And when confronted on voice, you said that they need to be serial killers, so no you don't agree with him, you want them to be publicly murdered[/QUOTE] So, you're mad and you have to come onto this forum to bring up some personal chats between you and your friends just to show that he is wrong on an opinion he has by posting it here so that like-minded people will agree with you and you can rub it in his face. How do we know you didn't cut out the part he explained himself further and you're trying to demonize him?
[QUOTE=Floreum;37094084]So, you're mad and you have to come onto this forum to bring up some personal chats between you and your friends just to show that he is wrong on an opinion he has by posting it here so that like-minded people will agree with you and you can rub it in his face. How do we know you didn't cut out the part he explained himself further and you're trying to demonize him?[/QUOTE] Do you want me to take a picture of the entire skype chat from that point down? Because I don't think everyone wants to see our posting of pictures and other links.
Public execution doesn't infringe on any more rights than regular execution, and the criminal threw his own rights out the window when he infringed on his victim's rights.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;37094113]Public execution doesn't infringe on any more rights than regular execution, and the criminal threw his own rights out the window when he infringed on his victim's rights.[/QUOTE] Did they also turn themselves into animals? Like, are they no longer humans not deserving of the basic human rights? You want to give the government the ability to take away people's basic human right to life? That and give them the ability to murder their own civilians? That's not even the only thing, morally execution is fucked up, how could you support useless revenge? Its not like you're stopping a violent person, they are done with their crimes, they are pacified, there is no reason to kill them besides idiotic revenge. Another thing is that it costs like 6x more to kill them, if that's the only thing you care about.
[QUOTE=Clementine;37094236]Did they also turn themselves into animals? Like, are they no longer humans not deserving of the basic human rights? You want to give the government the ability to take away people's basic human right to life? That and give them the ability to murder their own civilians? That's not even the only thing, morally execution is fucked up, how could you support useless revenge? Its not like you're stopping a violent person, they are done with their crimes, they are pacified, there is no reason to kill them besides idiotic revenge. Another thing is that it costs like 6x more to kill them, if that's the only thing you care about.[/QUOTE] This line of argument fails to take into account the right to life of the victim. From a perspective of 'equality', i'd often say it was unfair and unjust for a killer to be allowed to live, after unlawfully and knowingly stopping another from living. In a system without execution for serious crimes, the one's who wrong others end up with a better quality of life than their victims. Which system is more morally problematic? The one where the unjust are punished equally, or the one where they live a better life than the innocents that were killed? Edit: I also presume the cost of execution is linked to the extensive long stays on death row and the trials, retrails, hearings and so on. Depends what they class as a direct cost of execution. [quote]"[B]While not empirically based[/B], studies to date have estimated total costs for capital cases in the millions of dollars. A New York study compares a $1.4 million cost figure for each death penalty trial with $602,000 for the cost of life imprisonment for forty years in non-capital cases."[/quote] [I]Thought so.[/I] - Furthermore, by adding in the cost of executions, do people like yourself not run the risk or "pricing" a victim's life?
[QUOTE=Clementine;37094236]Did they also turn themselves into animals? Like, are they no longer humans not deserving of the basic human rights? You want to give the government the ability to take away people's basic human right to life? That and give them the ability to murder their own civilians? That's not even the only thing, morally execution is fucked up, how could you support useless revenge? Its not like you're stopping a violent person, they are done with their crimes, they are pacified, there is no reason to kill them besides idiotic revenge. Another thing is that it costs like 6x more to kill them, if that's the only thing you care about.[/QUOTE] They don't have human rights as soon as they kill another human as far as I'm concerned. I don't think the government should be given the duty of execution however. I think it would be better if the inmate makes his own decision whether he wan't to live or die. Give him the option of a life sentence or a cyanide pill. I agree that executions are wrong but I do feel that when you take another humans life you sacrifice your own in the process and you void your own human rights.
Hell no public execution isn't right. Its sad that execution's used to be fucking public spectacle. Its barbaric, cruel, and just wrong.
[QUOTE=Benf199105;37094408]This line of argument fails to take into account the right to life of the victim. From a perspective of 'equality', i'd often say it was unfair and unjust for a killer to be allowed to live, after unlawfully and knowingly stopping another from living. In a system without execution for serious crimes, the one's who wrong others end up with a better quality of life than their victims. Which system is more morally problematic? The one where the unjust are punished equally, or the one where they live a better life than the innocents that were killed? Edit: I also presume the cost of execution is linked to the extensive long stays on death row and the trials, retrails, hearings and so on. Depends what they class as a direct cost of execution. [I]Thought so.[/I] - Furthermore, by adding in the cost of executions, do people like yourself not run the risk or "pricing" a victim's life?[/QUOTE] An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind bucko. Equality when its comes to murder isn't equality at all, its tyranny, its barbaric, and its disgusting. They don't end up with a better quality of lives, if they're really bad killers, then they are likely to be terrorized daily, and we all know that prison/jail in the USA at least is awful, so no, its not a good life, one would likely rather be dead than live through all that. Then the cost argument is a moot point because we have no information either way.
[QUOTE=Clementine;37094640]An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind bucko. Equality when its comes to murder isn't equality at all, its tyranny, its barbaric, and its disgusting. They don't end up with a better quality of lives, if they're really bad killers, then they are likely to be terrorized daily, and we all know that prison/jail in the USA at least is awful, so no, its not a good life, one would likely rather be dead than live through all that. Then the cost argument is a moot point because we have no information either way.[/QUOTE] Yeah, sure, if he/she/it has done one murder/rape/public masturbation session, sure, but if he/she/it has done ten murders/one hundred rapes/does nothing but break public indecency laws, then by all means. An eye for ten eyes seems pretty fair to me.
[QUOTE=Clementine;37094640]An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind bucko. Equality when its comes to murder isn't equality at all, its tyranny, its barbaric, and its disgusting. They don't end up with a better quality of lives, if they're really bad killers, then they are likely to be terrorized daily, and we all know that prison/jail in the USA at least is awful, so no, its not a good life, one would likely rather be dead than live through all that. Then the cost argument is a moot point because we have no information either way.[/QUOTE] That saying poorly applies to murder.
[QUOTE=Clementine;37094640]An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind bucko. Equality when its comes to murder isn't equality at all, its tyranny, its barbaric, and its disgusting.[/quote] You're bringing in an emotional response that isn't anything to do with logic. - "barbaric, disgusting" etc. Stick to you're own rules OP. Furthermore, the "an eye for an eye" analogy isn't that way at all. It only makes those who wronged blind, we aren't blinding the innocent remember. [quote]They don't end up with a better quality of lives, if they're really bad killers, then they are likely to be terrorized daily, and we all know that prison/jail in the USA at least is awful, so no, its not a good life, one would likely rather be dead than live through all that. Then the cost argument is a moot point because we have no information either way.[/QUOTE] Also on your point of "they don't have better quality of life". Thats semi-retarded. Life > no life, thus a killer who continues living has a better quality of life, even at it's most insufferable, when compared to their victim, as death is non-comparable to life. Try again "bucko".
[QUOTE=Benf199105;37094408]This line of argument fails to take into account the right to life of the victim. From a perspective of 'equality', i'd often say it was unfair and unjust for a killer to be allowed to live, after unlawfully and knowingly stopping another from living. In a system without execution for serious crimes, the one's who wrong others end up with a better quality of life than their victims. Which system is more morally problematic? The one where the unjust are punished equally, or the one where they live a better life than the innocents that were killed? Edit: [/QUOTE] Why is the only argument for the death penalty vengeance? You aren't looking to fix anything in society you are looking to give people revenge, revenge is not justice. Let me tell you what is morally problematic, the fact that people have and will continue to be wrongfully executed. At least in a system where life imprisonment is the harshest sentence people who are actually innocent can still have a chance to recover. [QUOTE] I also presume the cost of execution is linked to the extensive long stays on death row and the trials, retrails, hearings and so on. Depends what they class as a direct cost of execution. [/QUOTE] Of course death row and trials and all of those others count as part of the cost of execution, because they it is necessary part of the process. [QUOTE] [I]Thought so.[/I] [/QUOTE] Are you going to actually look at the entirety of what I quoted or any part of the paper I linked? Such as the part of how those numbers were [U]reasonable estimates[/U]. Or are you just going to condescendingly dismiss my evidence without actually providing any on your own? [QUOTE] - Furthermore, by adding in the cost of executions, do people like yourself not run the risk or "pricing" a victim's life?[/QUOTE] No you aren't, because life imprisonment is still a valid form of punishment. Life imprisonment is less morally questionable, generally cheaper or at least the same cost of execution, and allows wrongfully convicted people at least a chance of returning to a normal life. Does that not make life imprisonment a better choice for society?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.