Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View My 31/2 cents on the Death Penalty
4 years ago  ::  Aug 27, 2010 - 2:26PM #1
anidominus
Posts: 105

The death penalty is not a deterrent.  Getting caught is the deterrent.


If EVERY speeder was caught and pulled over and the punishment was a mere slap on the wrist, would you still speed?  No, because the second you got to 1 mph over the limit you’d be back over to the side of the road.  If would annoy you to death just to keep being pulled over.  Likewise if speeders were never caught but the punishment was death you’d travel 85 in a 25 (not really).  Why?  Because you know that you won’t ever see the punishment because you’ll never get caught.


To try a death penalty case is not more expensive than to try a life in prison.


 Why?  Because all of the extra expenses related to death penalty case has nothing to do with the cost of the electricity, gas, rope, gun, or “medicine” used to do the actual killing.  It’s a cost set by the government and can be lowered or raised at will.  If they wanted to make trying a life in prison case just as expensive they could.  In fact, in some circumstances, its better if your case is a death penalty case because 1) You get all the extra stuff and 2) If I’m still found guilty I know I won’t spend the next 20+ years in jail.


There really isn’t a legitimate moral reason to be against the death penalty.  There are moral reasons to be against certain kinds of death penalties.


Why?  Punishing people is a nasty business and often times we use actions against people that under normal circumstances we would never use.  We don’t lock people up in cages or small rooms, electrocute people (Taser), beat people upside the head with a billy clubs, shoot people, handcuff (non-sexual), kidnap (yes, an arrest is a legal kidnapping),  steal (fines are basically legal theft unless you wanted to give the state some extra money),  force people to strip naked and put on clothes they don’t want to wear (unless you like the orange jump suit look), and last but not least, give people a lethal dose of drugs. 


If you going to say we shouldn’t kill people because (insert your moral reason here) then why is all the other stuff ok?  Detain indefinitely, electrocute, beat, shoot, subdue, kidnap, steal, strip naked, and slap ugly clothes on them all you want…. just don’t kill them!  I guess the 911 terrorist should have just done these things instead, I suppose we wouldn’t have complained.


You may execute an innocent person.


Yeah, and putting them away for life is soooooo much better.


Oh come on now, there is more to life than freedom and “Being on the outside”. 


Yeah, there is more to life then possessions, money, and becoming famous but I haven’t seen a slow down in either of the three.


But it may give an errant person time to get closer to God.


First, I’m not interested in shelling out $22,000+ a year for someone to have a spiritual experience.  Besides, they may pick the wrong God.  Second, if 15 years on death row doesn’t get you closer to God, what will?


The death penalty does not serve a purpose.


First, probably more so in the past than now, it keeps wise men from becoming fools and makes wise men out of fools.  Second, if there is a hostage situation, especially one where someone has died.  Exactly what do you take off the table to free a few more hostages?  If you remove the death penalty from the equation you’re left with nothing but storming a full house of hostages.  This could possible put more people at risk of injury or death especially (gasp!) the assailants or you end up taking life in prison off the table.


Life in prison gives a person time to think about what they did wrong.


I do not wish to shell out $22,000+ a year for someone to think.


That’s all I can think of for now….  (Give me some more objections)


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
4 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2010 - 8:25PM #2
karbie
Posts: 3,329

Actually, what the death penalty-or life without parole does is makes sure that this particular person won't be committing  violent crimes outside the prison walls. At any rate, those who have received the death penalty and the automatic tax-payer funded appeals will probably have an easier death than their victims did.


A few years ago the prisoners on Death row filed a suit about how unfair and inhumane it was to keep them with other people who were due to be executed because of how cruel it was to know what was going to happen to them eventually.


I have a solution to that which spares the tax-payers the cost of an execution or a prolonged stay in prison. some of those men are there due to the slow, painful deaths of the toddlers they sexually molested. In one horrific case, the little girl died of ruptured intestines...and part of the guy's defense was that she had been 'coming on" to him. every day he's segregated from the general prison population on Death row is one more than he might have otherwise.


I imagine if we wanted to really not "torture" the Death Row guys, we could always keep them in the general population until all of their appeals have been lost. After all, until then they might not be executed...at least not by the State. I've heard the arguement that is just going to make some criminal responsible for killing them. I don't think so....I'm pretty sure they'd have a bunch of the other convicts learning how to cooperate and work well with others by taking turns.


However, given a choice between Death Row and general population, most of these poor murderers would stay in a nice, safe cell. I do think that all DNA tests should be run again, and the accused offered hypnosis, drugs--anything to be sure they were guilty.


We are supposed to honor the various religions the prisoners belong to. However, I kind of doubt that those who have converted to Islam would want the penal system to use the Islamic Code of justice, with the whippings and removal of hands and heads. The ones who were going to be stoned to death by a crowd would be the easiest to accomodate, I think.


After all, all you need is a bunch of people and a bunch of rocks.Showing respect for other religions, too. Again--if they decide to stay on Death row instead--at least the prison officials tried to be more sensitive to their religious beliefs.


Looking forward to your next 3 1/2 cents!

"You are letting your opinion be colored by facts again."
'When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."
these are both from my father.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 24, 2011 - 9:42PM #3
watcher59
Posts: 1,606

"If you going to say we shouldn’t kill people because (insert your moral reason here) then why is all the other stuff ok?  Detain indefinitely, electrocute, beat, shoot, subdue, kidnap, steal, strip naked, and slap ugly clothes on them all you want…. just don’t kill them!  I guess the 911 terrorist should have just done these things instead, I suppose we wouldn’t have complained"


Because all the other stuff can be undone. There is no reparation for wrongful death. Society has the  right to protect itself from the lawless. It does not have the right to hypocracy. It certainly can not morally justify murder.


Your premise that murder justifies murder is dizzyingly flawed logic.

How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 24, 2011 - 10:50PM #4
anidominus
Posts: 105

Jun 24, 2011 -- 9:42PM, watcher59 wrote:


"If you going to say we shouldn’t kill people because (insert your moral reason here) then why is all the other stuff ok?  Detain indefinitely, electrocute, beat, shoot, subdue, kidnap, steal, strip naked, and slap ugly clothes on them all you want…. just don’t kill them!  I guess the 911 terrorist should have just done these things instead, I suppose we wouldn’t have complained"


Because all the other stuff can be undone. There is no reparation for wrongful death. Society has the  right to protect itself from the lawless. It does not have the right to hypocracy. It certainly can not morally justify murder.


Your premise that murder justifies murder is dizzyingly flawed logic.





If someone has been in prison for 30 years for a crime they did not commit, please tell me how exactly you undo 30 years of false inprisonment?


If I am tased, exactly how do you untase me?  How do you remove the pain that felt when you used the taser weapon against me?


If a police officer accidently shoots me and kills me, how do you suppose we undo my death?


If you subdue me, you can unsubdue me, but how do you remove the mental scaring and embrassement of being subdued in the first place.


etc etc etc


 In addition, you answered my post out of context.  I am speaking of people who are guilty.  Therefore, there is no need to undo the punishment because the punishment is valid.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2011 - 12:03PM #5
watcher59
Posts: 1,606

If someone has been in prison for 30 years for a crime they did not commit, please tell me how exactly you undo 30 years of false inprisonment?


By release and a substantial monetary reparation. Not perfect, but the wrongfully executed get a funeral at the state's expense. The wrongfully imprisoned at least get the rest of their lives back.


If I am tased, exactly how do you untase me?  How do you remove the pain that felt when you used the taser weapon against me?


This is an apples and oranges comparison. Tasering is a response to a real or perceived threat. While the pain can not be undone, it can be prevented by demonstrating non-threating behavior. Criminal sentences result in a conclusion of guilt based on evidence.


 If a police officer accidently shoots me and kills me, how do you suppose we undo my deathon?


As the taser example was apples and oranges, this is apples and pomegranites.


If you subdue me, you can unsubdue me, but how do you remove the mental scaring and embrassement of being subdued in the first place.


Therapy


 etc etc etc


  In addition, you answered my post out of context.  I am speaking of people who are guilty.  Therefore, there is no need to undo the punishment because the punishment is valid.


Remember the criteria for conviction is "beyond reasonable doubt", not absolute certainty. Juries can be, and have been, convinced that innocent men and women were guilty. If they were not found to be guilty, they would not be imprisoned or executed. That renders the entire argument moot. The validity of capital punishment is subjective. I maintain that murder does not justify murder.

How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 25, 2011 - 1:52PM #6
anidominus
Posts: 105

Jun 25, 2011 -- 12:03PM, watcher59 wrote:


If someone has been in prison for 30 years for a crime they did not commit, please tell me how exactly you undo 30 years of false inprisonment?


By release and a substantial monetary reparation. Not perfect, but the wrongfully executed get a funeral at the state's expense. The wrongfully imprisoned at least get the rest of their lives back.


If I am tased, exactly how do you untase me?  How do you remove the pain that felt when you used the taser weapon against me?


This is an apples and oranges comparison. Tasering is a response to a real or perceived threat. While the pain can not be undone, it can be prevented by demonstrating non-threating behavior. Criminal sentences result in a conclusion of guilt based on evidence.


 If a police officer accidently shoots me and kills me, how do you suppose we undo my deathon?


As the taser example was apples and oranges, this is apples and pomegranites.


If you subdue me, you can unsubdue me, but how do you remove the mental scaring and embrassement of being subdued in the first place.


Therapy


 etc etc etc


  In addition, you answered my post out of context.  I am speaking of people who are guilty.  Therefore, there is no need to undo the punishment because the punishment is valid.


Remember the criteria for conviction is "beyond reasonable doubt", not absolute certainty. Juries can be, and have been, convinced that innocent men and women were guilty. If they were not found to be guilty, they would not be imprisoned or executed. That renders the entire argument moot. The validity of capital punishment is subjective. I maintain that murder does not justify murder.





Basically, you just demonstrated that it can't be undone.  Giving someone money doesn't undo anything.  Perhaps they would have earned more.  Therapy doesn't undo what was done, it only helps people deal with what was done.  The taser example was fine, because the context of that particular argument was regarding how we treat people.  Sometimes during the course of arresting someone or indealing out punishment we treat people in ways that under normal circumstances would be mistreatment.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2011 - 10:31AM #7
watcher59
Posts: 1,606

Basically, you just demonstrated that it can't be undone.


You are, of course, correct. The situation can be corrected not undone. Thanks for keeping me on my toes.

How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2011 - 1:51PM #8
anidominus
Posts: 105

Jun 26, 2011 -- 10:31AM, watcher59 wrote:


Basically, you just demonstrated that it can't be undone.


You are, of course, correct. The situation can be corrected not undone. Thanks for keeping me on my toes.





You're welcome.  I don't think I've ever receved such a complement on these boards. lol.  Not to disagree because I understand what you are saying.  I wouldn't use the word corrected.  I don't think injustice can ever be undone, corrected, or anything like that.  We can apologize and make amends but, depending on the injustice, that may not cover the loss.  This is why forgiveness is so very important.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 26, 2011 - 2:25PM #9
watcher59
Posts: 1,606

Unfortunately, many who come to these boards forget to check their emotions at the door. I like to think I am not one of the many. I come here because I love to debate. You demonstrated an uncommon ability to logically articulate your position without having to resort to personal attacks. You also made a valid point about my semantics. Since you debate well, I compliment you when you make a good point in the hopes that we will have more civil debates in the future. We will likely also find ourselves debating from the same perspective at some time in the future. That should prove to be fun!

How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jun 20, 2012 - 1:25AM #10
Wulf
Posts: 109

Without the death penalty, we tell the murderer and society that their life is more important than the victim's.  It cheapens the worth of the victim.  I also believe that society has a need to see justice done.

Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook