Capital punishment or the death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. The judicial decree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual process of killing the person is an execution. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences.
Basically i want to know peoples opinions on Capital Punishment. Is it right? if so then when should it be taken place? or do you think its wrong?
In my opinion, i think the death penalty should only be taken place in the act of murder (not manslaughter). If someone deliberately kills another then its only right to take their life. A life for a life. Also i think the only way to kill them would be to use the lethal injection. But i want to know other peoples opinion on this.
[IMG]http://deathpenalty.procon.org/files/1-death-penalty-images/state-death-penalty-image-yes-no.PNG[/IMG]
If it was possible to absolutely prove someone was guilty then I might consider it applicable to some crimes, but while it is possible for the innocent to be sentenced I think it is far too extreme.
Death is a part of life. I don't see why it has to be either or.
I believe the death penalty [i]could[/i] be part of some good/ideal legislation on which the society is built upon.
[QUOTE=Ziks;43272107]If it was possible to absolutely prove someone was guilty then I might consider it applicable to some crimes, but while it is possible for the innocent to be sentenced I think it is far too extreme.[/QUOTE]
what crimes do you think it will be ok for?
With video evidence or DNA evidence or some sort of evidence, collected properly, that categorically places the defendant as the offender, I think capital punishment should be a quick shot in the head. Like the Colorado shooter who was witnessed by dozens of people or whatever and caught in the act.
I don't want my tax dollars going to his rotting in prison for life. Take him out back, shoot him, and be done with it.
If it can be proven without a doubt, then yes. Such as stabbing multiple people in a public place with truckloads of witnesses and security cameras + DNA from the knife.
I'd say murder and rape are the worst crimes so it could apply to them, though the latter is really difficult to prove beyond a doubt.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43273167']With video evidence or DNA evidence or some sort of evidence, collected properly, that categorically places the defendant as the offender, I think capital punishment should be a quick shot in the head. Like the Colorado shooter who was witnessed by dozens of people or whatever and caught in the act.
I don't want my tax dollars going to his rotting in prison for life. Take him out back, shoot him, and be done with it.[/QUOTE]
I'd just like to point out that preparing someone for death penalty isn't cheap, especially with all the investigations involved.
I disagree with the gunshot though, you have a slight chance of surviving. I'd support a gas chamber imo, there are many gasses that will kill without pain.
Then shoot a second time. Surely you're not that obtuse.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43273442']Then shoot a second time. Surely you're not that obtuse.[/QUOTE]
I'd feel pretty sorry for the clean-up crew. Also what about the pain you expose them to when the first shot fails to kill? Unless you don't care about being humane. What's the point of needless pain when surely the exercise is carried out to just rid them from society?
[QUOTE=Ziks;43273718]I'd feel pretty sorry for the clean-up crew. Also what about the pain you expose them to when the first shot fails to kill? Unless you don't care about being humane. What's the point of needless pain when surely the exercise is carried out to just rid them from society?[/QUOTE]
One shot through the medula oblongata will kill anyone instantly with no pain. That's why snipers aim there.
Surely you're not THIS obtuse... are you being obtuse intentionally?
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43273760']One shot through the medula oblongata will kill anyone instantly with no pain. That's why snipers aim there.
Surely you're not THIS obtuse... are you being obtuse intentionally?[/QUOTE]
I was responding to you saying to shoot them a second time if you survive, additionally what about the clean-up as I mentioned?
In terms of me being obtuse, to be honest it sounds like you are the one deliberately constructing posts designed to cause conflict.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43273760']One shot through the medula oblongata will kill anyone instantly with no pain. That's why snipers aim there.
Surely you're not THIS obtuse... are you being obtuse intentionally?[/QUOTE]
Your argument for capital punishment is obtuse if anything.
[QUOTE=Ziks;43275121]I was responding to you saying to shoot them a second time if you survive, additionally what about the clean-up as I mentioned?
In terms of me being obtuse, to be honest it sounds like you are the one deliberately constructing posts designed to cause conflict.[/QUOTE]
My "shoot them a second time" was nothing more than a flippant reply because your question about them surviving the shot was just stupid in the first place. :) Have you ever seen the electric chair process and what cleanup is involved? Spraying down the pavement of a little blood and disposing of a body is less to deal with than smelling charred flesh and dealing with things like flesh falling off the bone and blood and other body fluids exploding out of the body. The eyes literally explode out of the sockets from the boiling pressures within the eyes.
A single bullet to the medula and rolling the body into a shallow grave is far less caustic cleanup than dealing with an electric chair execution.
[editline]22nd December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;43275297]Your argument for capital punishment is obtuse if anything.[/QUOTE]
Nuh uh.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43275395']My "shoot them a second time" was nothing more than a flippant reply because your question about them surviving the shot was just stupid in the first place. :) Have you ever seen the electric chair process and what cleanup is involved? Spraying down the pavement of a little blood and disposing of a body is less to deal with than smelling charred flesh and dealing with things like flesh falling off the bone and blood and other body fluids exploding out of the body. The eyes literally explode out of the sockets from the boiling pressures within the eyes.
A single bullet to the medula and rolling the body into a shallow grave is far less caustic cleanup than dealing with an electric chair execution.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure when I advocated the electric chair.
[QUOTE]Nuh uh.[/QUOTE]
Nice.
I never said you did. Jesus christ, do we really have to go that route? I gave an alternative capital punishment in an attempt to illustrate the "clean up" argument.
I don't mind Capital Punishment/Death Penalty unless it's taken a "little bit far". When I mean by that is that causing a homicide is punishable by death. Great examples of this case is in Japan, which in a case a Mentally retarded person was sentenced to death by accidental homicide. In my bias opinion, this is unlawful and shouldn't be taken to that level.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43275989']I never said you did. Jesus christ, do we really have to go that route? I gave an alternative capital punishment in an attempt to illustrate the "clean up" argument.[/QUOTE]
Why did you choose the electric chair instead of lethal injection? Because with the lethal injection there would be less traumatic clean-up, so it wouldn't support your argument.
I'm sure you are aware of what a strawman argument is, but that was pretty blatant. I'm not sure if there's anything I could say to make you more self-aware about the things you post, but I wish you would understand that you would be able to participate in far more constructive discussions if you reflect on your arguments a bit more before you post them. [/highhorse]
There are objections to lethal injection being humane. I don't understand those objections, but I don't really care. It's a huge waste of resources. One bullet is cheap as fuck and the cleanup is irrelevant.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43276104']There are objections to lethal injection being humane. I don't understand those objections, but I don't really care. It's a huge waste of resources. One bullet is cheap as fuck and the cleanup is irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
It's more about the trauma induced when cleaning up the brain tissue than the actual physical inconvenience, but I suppose you could find someone that didn't care.
[QUOTE=Ziks;43276154]It's more about the trauma induced when cleaning up the brain tissue than the actual physical inconvenience, but I suppose you could find someone that didn't care.[/QUOTE]
You don't have to clean up brain tissue with a medula shot with a 9mm. The 9mm doesn't even exit the subject. The only thing to deal with is blood. With the correct firing angle, you don't even have to deal with much blood since neither major blood vessels in the neck are pierced.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43276211']You don't have to clean up brain tissue with a medula shot with a 9mm. The 9mm doesn't even exit the subject. The only thing to deal with is blood. With the correct firing angle, you don't even have to deal with much blood since neither major blood vessels in the neck are pierced.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I had made some incorrect assumptions. Do you know what the latency between 9mm entry and loss of consciousness is?
My only strong opposition to the death penalty at this point is that it's going to be somebodys job to kill people. I know, it's a soldiers job, but this is a job as a clinical killing mechanism.
I don't have a problem with the right person dying for the right crime, proven that they're not viable for rehabilitation in the slightest, then sure, kill them I guess. I have no ability to really truly oppose it on a logical level, just an emotional one, so it's not really worth an argument about that.
But what is to me an argument is what I mentioned first. Somebody will have to kill people. Whether they are guilty or not, this guy, person, or what not who pulls the trigger or presses the button, is now a state sanctioned murderer and is probably going to have some of his own issues. It's a little hypocritical, a little weird, and in my opinion, a really bad and messy solution to murderers.
[editline]22nd December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ziks;43276270]Sorry, I had made some incorrect assumptions. Do you know what the latency between 9mm entry and loss of consciousness is?[/QUOTE]
probably instant as most 9mm handgun rounds fly at about 900 feet per second
the distance to the mebdulla from the back of your neck is around an inch I'd guess
[QUOTE=Ziks;43276270]Sorry, I had made some incorrect assumptions. Do you know what the latency between 9mm entry and loss of consciousness is?[/QUOTE]
Based on muzzle velocity is and the size of the medula and the rest of the brain that the 9mm will stop in, I'd say instant lights out and it doesn't matter.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43276370']Based on muzzle velocity is and the size of the medula and the rest of the brain that the 9mm will stop in, I'd say instant lights out and it doesn't matter.[/QUOTE]
There's actually people arguing that a 9mm is insufficient to deliver a killing blow to the front of someone's head, however that's for the front which is very strong, a shot to the back will have no issue going through and killing somebody instantly, without escaping.
Those people are incredibly ignorant. A 9mm has more than enough energy and enough mass to easily penetrate the forehead and kill.
I believe that people that did something to the degree of capital punishment shouldn't be killed, but they should be locked away in solitary forever. I think this is a good idea because:
1) Should someone (i.e. a detective) find a piece of evidence that proved someone in prison to not be guilty of a crime, they can still let that person go. Now you cant do that if you killed them, can you?
2) Isolation is far worse then death. At least with death it will all end when your sentence is up. But with isolation, you'll be spending every last moment of your life in a cell, alone, and probably wanting to kill yourself.
[QUOTE='[BBNH] Jesus;43280502']Those people are incredibly ignorant. A 9mm has more than enough energy and enough mass to easily penetrate the forehead and kill.[/QUOTE]
I'm still not sure why a 9mm is easier than lethal injection?
Regardless, capital punishment is wrong for three reasons. The first being that there is no judiciary system in the world that gets it right 100% of the time. To utterly destroy a being and get rid of their entire consciousness would require absolute precision and no mistakes in determining that they truly are guilty. The second is that, at least in the United States, the modern death penalty [url=https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/616589-buck-paternoster-report.html]is racist.[/url] Blacks are convicted more, especially if they had murdered a white person. Our justice system is supposed to be fair for all, regardless of how they appear or were born. The death penalty exaggerates the effects of racism and discrimination. The final reason is that it is [url=http://www.ccfaj.org/documents/reports/dp/expert/SacBee1988.pdf]downright more expensive.[/url] If a moral argument isn't compelling enough, then at least consider that it costs more to kill somebody than to imprison them for life.
Whether or not a man truly committed a crime is irrelevant to the ethics of capital punishment. A man can be convicted of several murders, and his crimes admitted completely certain, and still his execution would be unjust. It is the resolve of barbarians to kill another in the name of so-called 'justice', and, as a point, equals them to those they're 'punishing'. In the interest of maximizing the utility of every able person, it is only obvious tat the effects of a death penalty are much worse than its alternatives; it guarantees an occasion of at least two deaths rater tan just one, or however many were dealt by the criminal, and obstructs their potential for service. It should be sufficient, I think, that any such criminal should suffer labour proportioned to the suffering caused by is crime, so that the community might still receive some benefits from is continued life.
[QUOTE=Sweet_Water;43283128]Whether or not a man truly committed a crime is irrelevant to the ethics of capital punishment. A man can be convicted of several murders, and his crimes admitted completely certain, and still his execution would be unjust. It is the resolve of barbarians to kill another in the name of so-called 'justice', and, as a point, equals them to those they're 'punishing'. In the interest of maximizing the utility of every able person, it is only obvious tat the effects of a death penalty are much worse than its alternatives; it guarantees an occasion of at least two deaths rater tan just one, or however many were dealt by the criminal, and obstructs their potential for service. It should be sufficient, I think, that any such criminal should suffer labour proportioned to the suffering caused by is crime, so that the community might still receive some benefits from is continued life.[/QUOTE]
Oh, communities do benefit from prisoners as is, or prison labor. Although I'm not sure about some solitary/max security nut-jobs.. Not saying that we should execute those.. I'm kinda on the fence with the death penalty. It's wrong, but people also do terribly wrong things sometimes.. Another thing on the list of things that holds society back (not just the death penalty.)
[QUOTE=Zally13;43281994]I'm still not sure why a 9mm is easier than lethal injection?
Regardless, capital punishment is wrong for three reasons. The first being that there is no judiciary system in the world that gets it right 100% of the time. To utterly destroy a being and get rid of their entire consciousness would require absolute precision and no mistakes in determining that they truly are guilty. The second is that, at least in the United States, the modern death penalty [url=https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/616589-buck-paternoster-report.html]is racist.[/url] Blacks are convicted more, especially if they had murdered a white person. Our justice system is supposed to be fair for all, regardless of how they appear or were born. The death penalty exaggerates the effects of racism and discrimination. The final reason is that it is [url=http://www.ccfaj.org/documents/reports/dp/expert/SacBee1988.pdf]downright more expensive.[/url] If a moral argument isn't compelling enough, then at least consider that it costs more to kill somebody than to imprison them for life.[/QUOTE]
To answer your first question, his whole point was a single bullet is [I]much[/I] cheaper than going through the entire lethal injection process. As he's stated in a couple posts up a bullet is cheap, and there would barely be any cleanup.
Also, I agree with most of your points. I don't think the death penalty should be resorted to unless we're 100% positive that it was the person being tried. I can really comment on the racism factor, because I don't follow trials all that often, and rarely ever care to be honest. Also, going back to the one bullet thing, a single bullet to the head (assuming the medula), would most likely be a lot cheaper than to keep someone alive and in isolation. While in isolation they're going to still have to be fed, and cared for to an extent - which costs money.
Death by a firing squad is done with a high powered rifles and to the heart. One thing about it is that the bullets induce hydraulic shock which brings unconsciousness and in turn shatter the heart. Instant death.
Also there's death by hanging. At the drop the rope snap your neck and your lights are out instantly.
Lethal injection is supposed to be humane. They inject series of drugs that first put you to sleep and then stop your heart.
The gas chamber has to be the worst way to die and I don't see how it is humane. You're gasping for air in there.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
