The Death Penalty Thread

Hello and welcome back to another great cosmos discussion. I've been thinking about what to post, but after recently purchasing and watching The Green Mile (for about the fifth time - absolutely ripper of a movie...very emotionally draining) I thought I'd discuss the issue of the death penalty and whether we should have this in place or not. If so, why do you believe this, if not, what other alternatives would you recomment in terms of punishing criminals?

OK, I'll start off the topic with my thoughts on the issue. Here they are:

I'd like to start of by saying that I believe criminals should be punished severly for the crimes they commit. When dealing with serious crimes, such as murder and rape, etc., the punishment should be very, very severe. These people obviously have no respect and care for human life, so why should they be left with some 'easy time' in prison and minute punishments? The should be punished with the maximum possible amount.

Now, should some serious crimes warrant such a penalty as to take someones life? Well, I think if someone has taken someone else's life, or destroyed it without respect (such as rape), why should their life be taken from them? Another viewpoint would be that if you do take their life, is this just an easy way out for them? Wouldn't it be more of a punishment to lock them up in a harsh environment for life? Then there comes the issue of over-filling prisons, which leads to a severe risk of outbreaks, due to a decreasing ratio of security personnel to inmates. It's really a tough issue in many ways.

Due to the issue of prison space, I think that if someone has committed such a horrible crime as murder or rape, I think there is no reason for them to remain in society, sentencing them with the death penalty. Having said that, what happens if they didn't do it? What happens if the legal system just screwed up and punished them wrongfully? After you've killed em, it's too late to say your sorry. Now, with the advancements in DNA testing technologies, wrongful imprisonment is hopefully a diminishing situation and I hate hearing cases where people are kept in jail for 20 years, before being found that they were wrongfully accused. What would you do then? How could you give someone back 20 years of their life? You couldn't...it's impossible. You wouldn't be able to repay them in any way, not even money - money isn't everything.

So, summing up my points now, I'd have to say that, with the current state of DNA technologies and the state of prison facilities/space, I think that if a person is found guilty and that if it's proven without a doubt that they did commit a serious murder, I would not show any sympathy if they were given the death penalty. If someone was capable of commiting such crimes of disrespect and total disregard for others well-being, why should they live with us in society?

There's also millions of cases where people plea 'mental instability'. Those cases piss me off something fierce. I mean yes, some people have mental problems, but the amount of times lawyers use this to get a minimal punishment for their clients is just absured. It's getting to a point where the whole legal system is just ridiculous. But that's kind of a seperate matter, so I won't go into that.

So, what you all think?

:o

Greg

i don't really think other people should be able to choose who lives and dies. eg. death penalty, abortion, youthinasia.

sure their crimes are heinous, but don't you think death would be the easy way out for them? you brought up a good point in that how can we know 100% that the person committed the crime? In the speculative case, a death penalty could be disastrous, especially when forensics show that the convincted was in fact innocent.

Here's my thoughts. I believe strongly that the current justice system is a shambles. There should be guidelines (laws) and if they are broken a punishment. My version can be described as follows:

If a baker sells short weight bread and gets away with it, fine. But if his customers find out and feel the need to nail him to his ceiling, that is also fine.

But yes, death penalty is a bit absurd. You can actually get the death penalty in 99% of countries, sometimes only for one crime. In the UK the only crime that can be given a death penalty is high treason.

Makes sense.

I personally don't believe in the death penalty ever being necessary. People are often ready to redeem themselves after time. That is something that should never be taken away from anyone; the potential to be a better person.

This is an ethical/moral viewpoint. The irony is that the people we least admire are sometimes brilliant enough (with many, many exceptions) to make a positive difference.

Look at the horrible things which have happened to POWs during WWII. We owe a lot of our knowledge of the human physicality to experiments performed on various persecuted ethnic groups. I certainly don't think that these actions are acceptable in any way, regardless of the lives saved by new medical knowledge gleaned from these atrocities.

Another point worth considering is that nobody ever does anything that they think is wrong.

I know that I have done (and probably still will do) things which I knew that other people thought were wrong, but to me, it was the right thing for me to do according to who I am and what I believe.

I am sure that quite a few people will disagree on this point, but hopefully everyone can stay withing the bounds of the thread.

To sum my views up:
No to the death penalty because people always have the ability to change.

Perhaps another thread should be started looking into the effects of minimal punishment on the victims.

By the way, The Green Mile is a fantastic movie. Great screenplay, great performances.

Cheeseness wrote:
I personally don't believe in the death penalty ever being necessary. People are often ready to redeem themselves after time. That is something that should never be taken away from anyone; the potential to be a better person.

That is a very good point and it really makes me wonder whether I should change my view on the death panelty, cos, as you say, people can change. Having said that, what about if someone commits a crime that is so horrible that it would be hard to ever imagine them being ever released. For example, if they catch Bin Laden, what should they do? I mean would you think he could change? I dunno, but you would NEVER let him out once you've caught him, that's for sure.

Cheeseness wrote:
Another point worth considering is that nobody ever does anything that they think is wrong.

I'd have to disagree with you there. I mean think about it, people always do things that they know are wrong. Committing adultery, stealing, killing. I know you said that in their mind, they think it's right, but that's only a few cases where people are mentally insane.

For example, I know it's illegal and wrong to speed, but I still do it when I drive, for whatever stupid reason. I mean say the limit is 100, I'd go sometimes 110 or 115. Altough this is only a small thing, you can reflect it onto a larger scale that would require a much harsher penalty. Let's take rape or murder. I'm sure people who have committed this crime knew in their mind it was wrong, but they still did it.

Greg

liquid wrote:
I'd have to disagree with you there. I mean think about it, people always do things that they know are wrong. Committing adultery, stealing, killing. I know you said that in their mind, they think it's right, but that's only a few cases where people are mentally insane.

For example, I know it's illegal and wrong to speed, but I still do it when I drive, for whatever stupid reason. I mean say the limit is 100, I'd go sometimes 110 or 115. Altough this is only a small thing, you can reflect it onto a larger scale that would require a much harsher penalty. Let's take rape or murder. I'm sure people who have committed this crime knew in their mind it was wrong, but they still did it.

absolutely! Unless you are absolutely insane, you have to know that murder is wrong. There are reasons for laws, and people need to obey them. That is why people believe breaking the law is wrong. It is just morally wrong to break laws. They are what keep society civil.

what i said probably has nothing to do with your point

My opinion on this issue like everything else is harsh and most likely not well justified or backed up, however I believe people who commit a horrendous unforgivable crime should be killed, given 100% certaintity they commited it (i.e. a written confession from the accused)

I mean as you guys have mentioned everything we do is either right or wrong, and by our very nature we know exactly what is right and wrong hence if you choose to step out of line you know you face the death penality - simple as that!

I mean, it is either death or life behind bars, whereby they have no futher effect on anyone else and serve no purpose other than cost tons in tax payers money. How can that honestly be justified. Ahh well I am a harsh bastard, sorry but that is just my opinion and I can think up plenty more arguements justifing my stance on this

Cheeseness wrote: To sum my views up:
No to the death penalty because people always have the ability to change.

The people who are killed get no opportunity to change. I think there should be a death penalty, as long as person is undeniably guilty (nothing really, can be certain). However, I think there are honestly people who don't think killing or whatever is wrong. Think about it, why do we think killing is wrong? Because our society is based on Judeo-Christian values, which includes a value for life. Other societies that may not have been influenced by this may not value life as we do. I think that for everything we label as "right" or "wrong", there is really no certain, clearly-defined line between right and wrong besides what you believe.

INtense! wrote: Ahh well I am a harsh bastard, sorry but that is just my opinion and I can think up plenty more arguements justifing my stance on this

not harsh. Just outspoken.

Just out of interest...what were some of your arguments?

jus one mild stray point, has anyone ever been prosecuted for low treason?
i am of the opinion that the whole cruel and unusual punishment thing has its faults.
i remember reading a book (bear with me here, this does have a point) in which a new type of media, xv, was developed. this media was like tv, but instead of just seeing what ppl saw, u felt what they saw. it was mentioned in the book that an atempt to curb rapists and ppl like that by hookin them up into the victims minds went horribly awry, because ppl like that are messed up to begin with, and being the victim just made the whole expierence even better for them, knowing what their victim was feeling
now for the point of this:
ppl that commit things like this do it not because of the fact that they somehow think it is the right thing to do, but that it gives them some sort of trip, like a kind of addiction.
the only real way to treat these ppl is to be rid of them. If someone like this is accused, like it was said, dont waste the taxpayers money, but kill them, and rid society of the menace

I think that people get punished so that they wil never so something similar agian, and to protect the society, so if you give them the death penalty you protect the society and you'll hold others from doing such things, cause people don't wanna die doh?

But on the otherside, i't not good to take somebodys life in what kind of way, so i'ts not good.
I'd go for the old fashion cut-a-hand-off way. I dont think people want to lose a second hand, so they will never do it again. Even if they are mentaly ill. (it's a good reminder)
Everybody happy, no more killing, case closed

what if their ambidextrous though?

Eh, whats that?