Criminals should be exiled, ment to suffer, etc but not die.
We really don't know what is on the other side, it could be a god damn disneyland for all we know..
I personally (if I was an offender) would much rather capitol punishment than have to deal with prison, or being exiled to a remote island where.... it really won't matter.
I can't imagine being locked in a box 23 hours with nothing to do but fap and sleep (for the time that they allow max security imates to sleep) and think about all of those people on the other side, wait for meals and go outside and walk in a circle for an hour. it would be the worst... most cruel torture for me.. watching myself age, forcing me to deal with regret etc.
[B]Id probably end up committing suicide after a while and be happy for death[/B]
One problem I have with capitol punishment is the fact that the act of forcing death from another person hits an odd chord for me...
let me explain that...
So... you kill the man your wife was sleeping with [I](make this any scenario possible, victim can be hobo to father with 3 kids, doesn't matter)[/I]; with a 9mm gun... 1-20 years prison then killed by a man in the same manner within 5 seconds without a similar reason?
Am I the only one who sees the irony/bullshitStupidness here?
I think exile to a remote large fenced off unmaintained island would be best. ([I]Think [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poveglia"]Poveglia[/URL]-type shit[/I]) Removed from society to live in the alt society with the rest of the worthless citizens.
It wouldn't matter because what is the difference between death/neverSeeingThemAgain ?
It would make me feel better knowing that the person who wronged me would be tortured by fellow peers, probably eaten/murdered/raped.
also it would make [U]GREAT[/U] TV if the prisoners do anything somewhat productive on the island...
[B]tl:dr [/B] Id kill myself before spending life in prison, Id much rather a person who wronged me to not escape via death but suffer in prison, Killing a man using another man to hit the switch is wierd, excile would be a much better/cheaper/efficent/entertaining alternative...
I'll just repost what I said in the other thread:
[QUOTE=Tweevle;41181808]IMO, the death penality is undeniably the wrong thing to do for the following reasons:
1. You're going to execute innocent people. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exonerated_death_row_inmates#2010-2012"]Just look at this list of people on death row who have been exonerated later.[/URL] There's no way at this point in history to make 100% sure that the person in question is definitely guilty, and in all likelihood there won't ever be. If someone is wrongly imprisoned, you can let them go and pay them compensation. You can't bring someone back to life.
2. [URL="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty"]It's more expensive than life in prison[/URL], as someone said earlier. To make it less expensive than life in prison you'd have to take away all the procedures of appeal, and that'd mean even [I]more[/I] innocent people are killed.
3. [URL="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-about-deterrence-and-death-penalty"]It's not a deterrent.[/URL] People who commit crimes often do it in passion without thinking of the consequences, or don't think they're going to be caught. The US has a higher crime rate than a ton of other countries that don't have the death penalty, so reducing crime can obviously be done in other ways.
4.[URL="http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=594"] The death penalty doesn't necessarily provide closure to victims, and indeed there are a lot of victims who actively oppose the death penalty.[/URL] In addition, if the government is trying to help victims, why not spend all the extra money spent on killing perpetrators to instead pay for actual therapeutic techniques that have been proven to be effective?
5. This is more subjective as opposed to the reasons above, but IMO the justice system should be there to provide rehabilitation and protection for the public, not punishment - that's an emotional response and the law should be based on what logically provides the best societal benefit, not emotional responses. Rehabilitation and imprisonment provide benefits in keeping people from doing harm to others, killing them instead doesn't provide any further benefits and causes the harm of taking someone's life. Dehumanizing someone who has done terrible things may make you feel more comfortable, but at the end of the day they are still a human being with their own thoughts and feelings, and I don't think that killing them or making them suffer is somehow a better thing to do because they've done bad things in the past.[/QUOTE]
You cannot however rehabilitate someone who doesn't want to be rehabilitated for one reason or another.
As long as it is done in an impersonal manner, as though it is a force of nature I can accept that the death sentence is just when implemented appropriately. Death is so highly prevalent in the third world its only in our cosy, pampered society that we view it as so terrible a punishment, when everywhere else good and innocent people die all the time. When a person commits crimes of a horrendous nature, the molestation of children or mass murder for example, it seem to me they forfeit their right to belong in a civilised, ordered society.
[QUOTE=Exigent;43298628]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.[/QUOTE]
The cost of the death penalty really has nothing to do with the cost of the actual execution.
It has everything to do with the fact that its a long process in order to reduce the chance of innocent people being executed. And still innocent people have been known to be executed.
Death penalty is an aberration from the past. It shouldn't exist anymore.
Killing someone never solved any problem.
If one lives in a society, he's the product of this society. D.P. is used as a shortcut for bigger issues.
My ideal solution for a Capital Punishment involves four things.
1. Can the defendant be rehabilitated and feels remorseful for their actions? Have they started it instead of being instigated to their actions?
2. Is there physical evidence showing without a doubt that the defendant has done these crimes, including video footage, DNA testing and multiple witness accounts. The defendants face must be perfectly shown as would it meet the stature and description of them.
3. Has the defendant created a very large impact upon society that affects it in an obviously worse way. It's a roughshod example but if someone were to commit a mass shooting, killing and wounding over ten people for no reason and no provocation.
4. Do the families of the Victims, if there are any, advocate for their death. All will be considered and there must be a unanimous consent for them to see them die.
This would be a following case to a different judge specific to these cases to allow for no bias given, if it was under the same Judge. The defendant will be judged by his peers of society randomly selected. The case will be handled for a maximum of one or two months and to be frequented daily. Wherein the Jury must give their decision otherwise the responsibility hands itself over to the Judge.
With this, if the defendant is guilty, they're immediately sentenced to execution with no reprisal because it has been found that they're unable to be rehabilitated, have committed an atrocity to society, have found that it's 100% them and the Victim's by proxy of the crime have unanimously voted for the murder of the defendant.
The execution would be swift and humane to the defendant. Hopefully so that in the long run other innocents, rehabilitating criminals are not harmed or killed. With this society is hopefully not hindered nor harmed again by dangerous and volatile criminals who have no concept for self-preservation and are for certain willing to go to great lengths to harm other people. Society does not have to be bogged down spending money keeping them locked up in heavy security prisons that cost thousands in maintenance and paying for the employees and any damages that might occur to staff or people who are trying to rehabilitate.
I'm against it for the following reasons:
Innocent people can and will be executed.
There are certain crimes that I think should lead to an instant acquittal that even people in the U.S. are executed for. They're crimes of passion that have to do with say, killing an abuser or something. I don't particularly care what happens to someone convicted of another crime that'd get them killed. To put it simply, crimes upon and provoked by another specific individual or set of individuals should be forgiven and the criminal rehabilitated. Unprovoked crimes (or ones ~provoked by society!!!~) against innocents or groups of innocents should be met with absolute and heavy punishment. The latter set of crimes are generally caused by people with little chance of rehabilitation, and have zero mitigating factors.
If those two factors weren't present, I'd have no qualms with it. I don't think anyone should be able to harm someone, leave them and their lives a burning wreckage, and then continue forward with smooth sailing under the pretense of rehabilitation. Considering most, if not all societies are built off of arbitrary and subjective foundations, I'd say an "emotional response" to things is just as valid as what people would like to think is just all cold pragmatism.
I won't deny that many criminals wouldn't care of the possible punishments they might get for their crimes, but there are also many that might be dissuaded by the thought of a brutal and absolute punishment.
People can say that the punishment is "barbaric" or "draconian" all they want, and that "we'll be dropping down to their level", but they're forgetting that the value of life is zero. People's entire pretense about what is "barbaric" or "draconian" are a product of the society that they live in. There is no good or progressive path for humanity to take, so any moral argument surrounding the death penalty is nullified, including my own argument in the first half of the second paragraph.
Capital punishment is immoral. Because, even if the man being executed was literally Hitler, and the process was painless (like an altitude chamber) it would still be immoral, because everyone in the country whom the person is being executed in pays taxes, some of which go to give capital punishment to whole scores of people a year. This basically forces citizens to pay for another person's death against their will. So every argument aside, if you do not agree that forcing people to pay for the deaths of thousands in their life-time is immoral, dismiss what I have just posted and think about where you stand on such an issue.
[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43401552]Capital punishment is immoral. Because, even if the man being executed was literally Hitler, and the process was painless (like an altitude chamber) it would still be immoral, because everyone in the country whom the person is being executed in pays taxes, some of which go to give capital punishment to whole scores of people a year. This basically forces citizens to pay for another person's death against their will. So every argument aside, if you do not agree that forcing people to pay for the deaths of thousands in their life-time is immoral, dismiss what I have just posted and think about where you stand on such an issue.[/QUOTE]
One could say the same thing for someone going into life in prison. Tax payers are "forced" to pay for the housing, food, and clothing of said prisoner. I'm not really sure how a portion of the taxes going to things like this as morally wrong, anything you do with a prisoner costs time and money.
[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43401552]Capital punishment is immoral. Because, even if the man being executed was literally Hitler, and the process was painless (like an altitude chamber) it would still be immoral, because everyone in the country whom the person is being executed in pays taxes, some of which go to give capital punishment to whole scores of people a year. This basically forces citizens to pay for another person's death against their will. So every argument aside, if you do not agree that forcing people to pay for the deaths of thousands in their life-time is immoral, dismiss what I have just posted and think about where you stand on such an issue.[/QUOTE]
Police kill people too.
I'm trying to grasp the point you are trying to make, comparing being forced to pay for a man's death, to being forced to pay for a man's livelihood in or out of prison. And it's not forced in quotation marks because it is literally forced, try living in the United States without paying a single tax dollar, they'll either force you to pay or send you to jail. I didn't say I supported the police or prisons. But, capital punishment is an especial component of cruelty to its victims and the people who pay for it.
[QUOTE=sgman91;43407689]Police kill people too.[/QUOTE]
police generally are meant only to kill people who are immediate threats with no other method of stopping them.
supposed to.
it's not really in the same boat, not that I think it's a strong argument
[highlight]This is the voice in your head and I command you to kill them. Kill them all.[/highlight]
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("This is not debating" - Megafan))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=poolofblood;43488602][highlight]This is the voice in your head and I command you to kill them. Kill them all.[/highlight][/QUOTE]
are you a special type of idiot ?
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Report, don't reply" - Megafan))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Silent Bang;43489042]are you a special type of idiot ?[/QUOTE]
Yes I am. What is your excuse?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
