Death Penalty- yes or no ?

Dark Knight Palman Joined: Mar 27, '07 Posts: 2462

Are you for or against the death penalty? If so, why? I thought this might be an interesting poll to go along with our discussion / debate on the death penalty which can be found in the topic thread "Guy attempts to kill His Child", I think it is. Check that topic out too for some interesting discussion on this subject.

What are your opinions or comments on this subject?

Agent Joined: Jan 20, '08 Posts: 175

Ah, good idea, Silver! I cast my vote, but I was thinking maybe we should just continue the discussion here, in a thread designed for it, (sorry we kind of invaded your topic, Kaloes ^_^).

But as Silver said, feel free to jump in and discuss, but please read what's already been established in the "Guy attempts to Kill his Child" topic before doing so.

Now then, to respond to your last post...

Silver wrote:

I think I applauded your "statistics" and said that they were impressive, or something to that nature, however I don't need statistics to let me know that criminals will continue to do criminal acts with or without a death penalty. That is almost a given fact and due to the nature of some individuals, I think. Do I think a death penalty would or might stop some of these acts, maybe yes and maybe no, but I do think it couldn't hurt to try, and if it works in only one case, then that is enough for that would be one "innocent" life saved from the hands of a maniac.

I understand what you mean, but as I said earlier, the statistics say that, as a whole, the death penalty is not an effective deterrent to murder. Now some rational people may be scared of it, but if someone is going to make such an irrational and irresponsible decision as to end another human's life, then they obviously don't have the ability to foresee any consequences to their actions, (talking about unprovoked murder here, there are some understandable, but not justifiable instances of self-defence which must also be put into consideration). Personally, if I one day wake up and decide to kill my mate for losing a game I let him borrow, if I were to seriously consider doing this, (Death penalty is illegal were I am, but assuming it wasn't) then no number of threats, (no matter how terrible all of them may be) will stop me from doing so, because no number of rational or logical thoughts will have any impact on my completely irrational mindset. That's my theory that explains, to me, the bizarre statistics mentioned earlier from Texas.

If anyones interested, this site has a graph showing the murder rates of all countries, ranked from most murders, (highest) to least murders, (lowest). The data is somewhat old, (it's late, I found what I could!) but it does prove a biased point, when you look at the UK, a country without the death penalty, ranked as number 46 when compared to the US, a country, as most everyone here knows, enforces the death penalty in most states, ranked number 24, you can see that the death penalty really doesn't effect much at all, besides human lives of course. Now I do understand that other factors do come into effect here, (such as the availability of firearms), but it's still rather interesting to look at.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to argue that by getting rid of the death penalty, all crime rates are drastically reduced and everyone suddenly begins loving and caring for everyone else, that's not the case at all. What I'm saying is that the death penalty really doesn't do anything to effect the crime rate at all. It's all tied to other problems within the country that need to be addressed as soon as possible, (that means sooner than one individual criminal's execution) because lopping off the heads of those who fall victim to their country's problems doesn't solve anything for anyone in the long run.

Silver wrote:

Quite the contrary, I don't believe it would bring more death and destruction to the world, as you say. If someone kills someone, then they must suffer the consequences of their own freely chosen actions (which they inflicted on an innocent person) by being subjected to a death penalty sentence, then the world will see that justice has been carried out and the law has been fulfilled and upheld. There must be laws and they must be carried out. If there are no laws and they aren't carried out, then the world will run rampart and nobody will be safe. It sounds a little bit like now in some cases, probably because some laws are so untolerant as it is. I don't believe it is hypocritical at all. They chose this path when they murdered by their own hand first. It is simply carrying out a punishment.

Aye, it's murder is what it is. Justified and rationalised murder. What's so terrible about a life sentence in prison? That keeps maniacs at bay, and with all the costs of a long and drawn out trial for execution, (and the execution itself) coupled with the human consequences of the guardsman who are psychologically affected by knowing that they're the ones responsible for taking a life, (don't tell me you'd want someone who actually enjoys killing people as your friendly neighbourhood executioner? That would make them one of the people you want dead!) when you factor in all these costs, life in prison is actually quite cheap in comparison.

Sources for all statistics within post
NationMaster

Posted: Mon Mar 24, '08, 12:03 am

Heh, I'm not the best person to ask on this right now, mainly because I'm feeling good about killing people. lol, but I'm all for it. I like the idea of eliminating the bad guys, even if some good people get caught in the crossfire.

Agent Joined: Jan 20, '08 Posts: 175

Heh, Sparky, do you know who you sound exactly like? Kira (Light Yagami) from Death Note! My most hated character because of his philosophy and the "Justice" he delivers to the world. I'll always cheer for the greatest anime character of all time... L! As he is the embodiment of true Justice!

...That was completely and totally off-topic... I apologise... but I had to get it out! ^_^

Posted: Mon Mar 24, '08, 2:32 am

ehh it wasnt invading my topic.. you said you wanted to debate so thats what you guys started doin

Howlin' Winged Cyborg Joined: Dec 30, '07 Posts: 374

Hmmm, death penalty...well, I'd say I'd agree with Reno on this one, for the most part. It isn't really an issue that's particularly important to me and I don't give a whole lot of thought to it, but I'll chip in my two cents worth.

When I look at criminal justice, without a doubt, I see an imperfect system. I admit I know little about prisons, but it seems to me that convicts get good treatment in prison. Normally, I'd be okay with that, but it seems they get treatment that is TOO good. As it IS prison, it shouldn't be too great; it should be a little harsher, overall, at least harsh enough to become more effective as a deterrent to crime. I'm certainly not for the guards being free to intentionally mistreat and abuse convicts, but at the same time, criminals shouldn't be allowed to sue the prison if they don't like the guards or whatever, and apparently, they can do that. I always wonder if the fact that prison really doesn't seem like much of a punishment is contributing to an overall crime problem and potentially, overuse of the death penalty.

Now, to the death penalty itself. I agree with Reno on most of the problems cited. We catch way too many innocent people in the crossfire, and I don't think the money and innocent lives spent trying to make sure we kill the right guy is worth it in most cases. I'd say maybe for the most vile, extreme crimes like some kind of mass murder where we are positive of the perpetrator, I'm not against killing the one who did it (such as Timothy McVeigh), but sometimes it seems we overuse it. In cases of sex crimes/pedophilia, I'm more in the middle here, but I guess for repeat offenders who have gone through rehabilitation and all the ropes (and therefore we know who they are), go for it.

The one thing about the death penalty I'm dead set against is using it for drug crimes. My main reason for this is because American drug laws are hypocritical to begin with. Alcohol and tobacco are responsible for most drug-related deaths/crimes yet they are legal, but you're committing a crime for using pot in itself. A drug is a drug as I see it, either outlaw it all or allow it all, preferably the latter; I say this because I think part of the reason people use drugs is because they're banned so they have that outlaw appeal. That's pretty counterproductive. My secondary reason is because of my belief that the main victim of a drug is the user him/herself (certainly not in every case). I believe that if someone wants to go screw up their lives through drugs, let them. I think the government can tell us not to screw each other's lives up, but I don't think the government can tell us not to screw our own lives up. I think the only reason the government should get involved in a drug case is if the person's use is directly and negatively affecting someone else's life.

Hunter Joined: Nov 20, '07 Posts: 114

I, personally, am for the Death Penalty. I honestly don't think certain criminals (And I'm talking the more najor ones, like the one here in England that killed five hookers. I never did find out why..) should be permitted to sit in a cell, and then also get a chance to be released.

Also, I hate to sound rude, but Reno's comparison is flawed. And I base this on England's Gun Control laws. If you'd notice, the best a guy can legally have is a knife with a blade shorter than 3 inches. And it's a main reason why we (As in England.) don't have much of a problem. (Though our police forces here are short-handed, forcing us to rely on CCTV cameras more than we should. But that's another problem we can debate on later.)

Agent Joined: Jan 20, '08 Posts: 175

I wrote:

If anyones interested, this site has a graph showing the murder rates of all countries, ranked from most murders, (highest) to least murders, (lowest). The data is somewhat old, (it's late, I found what I could!) but it does prove a biased point, when you look at the UK, a country without the death penalty, ranked as number 46 when compared to the US, a country, as most everyone here knows, enforces the death penalty in most states, ranked number 24, you can see that the death penalty really doesn't effect much at all, besides human lives of course. Now I do understand that other factors do come into effect here, (such as the availability of firearms), but it's still rather interesting to look at.

No, I mentioned our gun control laws as one of the factors that affect the data, that's why I said it proved a biased point.

Hunter Joined: Nov 20, '07 Posts: 114

Reno wrote:

No, I mentioned our gun control laws as one of the factors that affect the data, that's why I said it proved a biased point.

My mistake, then. I guess this is what happens when you try to speed read something important.

Dark Knight Palman Joined: Mar 27, '07 Posts: 2462

Caged Wolf wrote:

When I look at criminal justice, without a doubt, I see an imperfect system. I admit I know little about prisons, but it seems to me that convicts get good treatment in prison. Normally, I'd be okay with that, but it seems they get treatment that is TOO good. As it IS prison, it shouldn't be too great; it should be a little harsher, overall, at least harsh enough to become more effective as a deterrent to crime. I'm certainly not for the guards being free to intentionally mistreat and abuse convicts, but at the same time, criminals shouldn't be allowed to sue the prison if they don't like the guards or whatever, and apparently, they can do that. I always wonder if the fact that prison really doesn't seem like much of a punishment is contributing to an overall crime problem and potentially, overuse of the death penalty.

Excellent points and observations, Caged Wolf! I agree with many of your comments here.