Is the death penalty justified in certain circumstances?

[gela]

I simpily don't believe that the government, the law system, a judge or a jury have the right to decide who lives and who dies.

All these people are open to corruption. The enforcement of law is ultimatly subjective. Mistakes happen.

The term 'A dingo ate my baby' comes from an actual case:
Azaria Chamberlain disappearance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If we had the death penalty, chamberlain would have been put to death for killing her baby. But she wasn't, and 8 years later she was released, and cleared of all charges, after the babies jacket was found in a dingo's lair.

[sgrainger]

Quote by: another day Well sorry, this may have been erroneously posted in the religion section, but it doesn't matter what you "believe" because that is not true.

excuse me. it does matter what i believe as otherwise i wouldn't be here debating with you and neither would you likewise. our beliefs on such issues are what form a view-point... therefore, what you've just said is complete tosh.

the most horrific crimes (such as murder) are the ones which the death penalty should be applied as the criminal deserves the worst possible punishment. a punishment lesser than the worst possible clearly undermines the value which society places on the protection of lives. rehabilitating murderer's is just completely barbaric.

[Walrus]

The only justification I can think of for a death penalty is to give closure for the victim’s family and friends. The problem with capital punishment is that the justice system is simply not reliable enough and this can result in the deaths of innocent people. You may take the utilitarian viewpoint that the death of a few innocent people is necessary for the good of a majority, but even if this is morally acceptable it would require definite evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent and saves lives. Considering some of those who commit the most heinous crimes are put on suicide watch (that is in England) and have attempted suicide, sometimes with success, rather than spend a life in prison as a social pariah, it would suggest there are limitations as to the effect of the death penalty as an effective deterrent.

[Barnicals]

In certain circumstances, absolutely. I don't want to pay for people like serial rapists, murderers, and pedophiles to live in comfort and safety (relative safety, anyway). Seen the movie, man in the iron mask? That's were people who deserve the death penalty should spend waiting. That said... that makes the punishers just as bad. Meow. Lol.

Slightly contradictory to my sig I guess.

[Barnicals]

Quote by: Walrus The only justification I can think of for a death penalty is to give closure for the victim’s family and friends.

So if a murderer was caught red handed, killing somebody in cold blood, and the victim had no family, you would gladly pay taxes so that he can live his remaining years in a cell with tv and insulation? I could never justify that to myself, personally.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Can you justify cold blooded murder just to save a few bucks (which it doesn't)? You are taking a human life either way, and there is no justification unless they are not completely under your control.

[Walrus]

Quote by: Barnicals So if a murderer was caught red handed, killing somebody in cold blood, and the victim had no family, you would gladly pay taxes so that he can live his remaining years in a cell with tv and insulation? I could never justify that to myself, personally.

Yes, as I would rather not be a participant to killing somebody in cold blood; although I never mentioned a TV and I’m not sure what you mean by insulation, unless you’re planning on having criminals wrapped in fibreglass; now that would be a deterrent.

[Pooeypants]

I believe that the convicted should be sentenced to do work for the community for the rest of their lives. In some people's eyes, they may never redeem themselves but that doesn't mean their life should be wasted through execution.

[Gods_Mercenary]

If the convict is sufficiently pliable, I agree.

[Lullaby Chainer]

I also concur. lol

[Barnicals]

Quote by: Walrus Yes, as I would rather not be a participant to killing somebody in cold blood; although I never mentioned a TV and I’m not sure what you mean by insulation, unless you’re planning on having criminals wrapped in fibreglass; now that would be a deterrent.

You wouldn't need to be a participant as such, unless you include living in the country that authorizes it as participation. I mentioned the tv as in entertainment and insulation as an example of warmth and safe living conditions. Because that's what most convicted felons in jail get in developed countries, isn't it? That's what they get here, in any case.

And yeah, being wrapped in fibreglass... I can think of better ways to be restrained.

[Barnicals]

Although that isn't such a bad suggestion on the part of Pooeypants...

[Morality Games]

excuse me. it does matter what i believe as otherwise i wouldn't be here debating with you and neither would you likewise. our beliefs on such issues are what form a view-point... therefore, what you've just said is complete tosh.

Put the dishonesty away, then argue fairly or leave. When someone responds to a particular statement, you don't extract a bit of that statement and place it in a larger context they did not intend for it to be appear in. Him saying your beliefs don't matter in response to your assertion that the death penalty discourages further killing (because studies show you are wrong) does not give you leave to start railing about something completely seperate, the valdity of beliefs in general as a starting point for argument. That's a nice bit of scumbaggery, but we're not idiots here.

Your source is kind of disingenuous, it seems that it is only more costly due to lawyer fees, but are yout telling me that people with life sentences don't appeal? If you ask me they have just as much motivation to appeal then someone wiht the death penalty.

A man who 'obviously' killed his mother can appeal to be let off death row and into prison for life, but this same person can't appeal for freedom upon being sentenced to prison for life. Appealing for something better requires a case.

People on death row are appealing for lighter sentences, not for freedom. If people have a lighter sentence but no case, then they can't have another trial.

One solution would be to disallow people on death row to petition for lighter sentences on the grounds they don't have enough substance for a case, but that isn't likely, as that process exists as one of several safeguards to not execute innocent persons. There is something horrifying at the thought of putting a person on death row and telling them to shut up when there always exists the possibility huge bits of information regarding their case have led a larger impression of guilt than is actually the case.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Barnicals You wouldn't need to be a participant as such, unless you include living in the country that authorizes it as participation. I mentioned the tv as in entertainment and insulation as an example of warmth and safe living conditions. Because that's what most convicted felons in jail get in developed countries, isn't it? That's what they get here, in any case. And yeah, being wrapped in fibreglass... I can think of better ways to be restrained.

If you pay taxes to fund murder, you are culpable to an extent. Plus, in a democracy, partial responsibility for public policy falls on you.

[LaW]

After seeing the arguments and sources of others in this thread, I retract my statement. lol

LOL! YOUR THE MAN!!!

[tivodan1116]

Quote by: sgrainger the most horrific crimes (such as murder) are the ones which the death penalty should be applied as the criminal deserves the worst possible punishment. a punishment lesser than the worst possible clearly undermines the value which society places on the protection of lives. rehabilitating murderer's is just completely barbaric.

I see. But killing someone to prove a point does not undermine the value of life? Curious.

Quote by: Barnicals So if a murderer was caught red handed, killing somebody in cold blood, and the victim had no family, you would gladly pay taxes so that he can live his remaining years in a cell with tv and insulation? I could never justify that to myself, personally.

Incidentally, the taxes to execute someone are more than the cost of life imprisonment, as myself and others have pointed out.

And yes, I would. I'm not a murderer. That's what separates me from the criminals. If we execute them, making all of us complicit in their murder, what is the difference?

Quote by: Pooeypants I believe that the convicted should be sentenced to do work for the community for the rest of their lives. In some people's eyes, they may never redeem themselves but that doesn't mean their life should be wasted through execution.

I generally agree, however labor unions and other groups often oppose this under a principle called the "least eligibility rule", which says that we shouldn't be giving jobs to prisoners (the "least eligible" for good jobs) until every single person who hasn't broken the law has gainful employment. It's a tough debate.

Quote by: Barnicals You wouldn't need to be a participant as such, unless you include living in the country that authorizes it as participation. I mentioned the tv as in entertainment and insulation as an example of warmth and safe living conditions. Because that's what most convicted felons in jail get in developed countries, isn't it? That's what they get here, in any case.

Corrections officers are the biggest supporters of having a clean, safe, comfortable environment for prisoners, with privileges like television and exercise rooms that can be granted or taken away based on prisoners' behavior. Providing television and other carrots to dangle is a method of control inside the prison.

[sgrainger]

Quote by: Morality Games Put the dishonesty away, then argue fairly or leave. When someone responds to a particular statement, you don't extract a bit of that statement and place it in a larger context they did not intend for it to be appear in. Him saying your beliefs don't matter in response to your assertion that the death penalty discourages further killing (because studies show you are wrong) does not give you leave to start railing about something completely seperate, the valdity of beliefs in general as a starting point for argument. That's a nice bit of scumbaggery, but we're not idiots here.

if you can provide some evidence that my argument is in fact "wrong" then maybe then, and only then, will i consider that the death penalty is in fact not the best option in certain circumstances. and for the record, i was by no means attempting to produce a "nice bit of scumbaggery" and i do not see how i have "placed it in a larger context". i was merely responding to the fact that 'another day' claimed that it didn't matter what i believed because what i believed was wrong. i am only offering my own opinion on this thread and i thought this i what the whole point of debating forums are all about - debating with others about what you think. well, it seems i've gotten that wrong and your accusations are offensive and inconsiderate 'Morality Games'.

[SoylentGreen]

sgraingerthe most horrific crimes (such as murder) are the ones which the death penalty should be applied as the criminal deserves the worst possible punishment. a punishment lesser than the worst possible clearly undermines the value which society places on the protection of lives. rehabilitating murderer's is just completely barbaric.

BarnicalsI don't want to pay for people like serial rapists, murderers, and pedophiles to live in comfort and safety (relative safety, anyway). Seen the movie, man in the iron mask? That's were people who deserve the death penalty should spend waiting. That said... that makes the punishers just as bad. Meow. Lol.

Both of you are displaying a lack of understanding about freedom. Possibly because you have never lost it.
It does not matter if they are kept in comfort , and it is not necessary that they be tortured.. The fact is they have lost the right to do as they please in prison.
Ask any criminal who has spent time in jail and they will tell you that all the material comforts add to nothing compared to the right to just do something as simple as take a walk when they feel like it rather than be told when to.

Suggest you try some time in a prison before arguing that death is more appropriate than life.

[Morality Games]

if you can provide some evidence that my argument is in fact "wrong" then maybe then, and only then, will i consider that the death penalty is in fact not the best option in certain circumstances.

The argument that the death penalty discourages murder? Okay.

The Death Penalty: Society's Injustice System

I don't buy the part about the death penalty increasing murders. More likely states which have higher murder ratios feel a need to be harsher toward criminals. Nonetheless, the fact murder is not being substantially reduced in states where the death penalty is active implicates it as non-effective.

i was by no means attempting to produce a "nice bit of scumbaggery" and i do not see how i have "placed it in a larger context". i was merely responding to the fact that 'another day' claimed that it didn't matter what i believed because what i believed was wrong.

Then you need to go out in the woods and reflect by yourself for awhile to hone your intellect, as it is blatantly obvious from the elements in the writing you took offense to that he wasn't referencing the legitimacy of beliefs as a basis for knowledge, but your very particular and singular belief that the death penalty deters additional murders.

Unless English isn't your first language, there is no excuse for interpreting his statements so erroneously:

Well sorry, this may have been erroneously posted in the religion section, but it doesn't matter what you "believe" because that is not true. Studies have shown a death penalty does nothing to reduce homicide rates and the reasoning is obvious.

Are you going to look me straight in the eye and tell me he was attacking the validity of beliefs as a basis for knowledge or are you going to be honest and say he was attacking your very particular and singular belief that the death penalty reduces homicide rates?

i am only offering my own opinion on this thread and i thought this i what the whole point of debating forums are all about

And indeed you can, but if you do something outrageous people will take notice of it. If I leaned over and spat in your tea during a formal dinner, you would have words for me. Ignorance of the English language or debate etiquette is no excuse.

well, it seems i've gotten that wrong and your accusations are offensive and inconsiderate 'Morality Games'.

You are pretty offensive too, the exception between us being you are completely unaware of it. Considering I have in no way attacked your right to express your opinion, it is extremely offensive that you just implied I did. What I attacked was your wildly misinterpreting something which should have been obvious, and nothing beside that. By extension, I attacked your opinion, but that is not the same as attacking your right to express it.

After seeing the arguments and sources of others in this thread, I retract my statement. lol

Sweet Jesus. I have found a pearl, and I intend to keep it even if I have to fight to the death.

[sgrainger]

'Morality Games'. ok. i see your point and i can see that i took 'another day''s point in the wrong way and i apologise if i have come across as "offensive" but that wasn't my aim, truly.

however, my view on the death penalty will still remain the same and i have nothing else to say on this matter as i feel i have resolved it in the correct manner. if you think otherwise then please let me know.