Capital Punishment - For or against?

[WoIverine]

Capital punishment, that's a tough decision. I used to be for it, but now I honestly think it depends on the cime.

Edited February 4, 2013 by WoIverine

[+HerNibs]

For but not with our current system.

I don't think there is a better system in the world but until we can be 100% sure of guilt we shouldn't be doing it.

Nibs

[+ouija ouija]

Here's a good candidate to be strung up:

http://www.dailymail...t-sentence.html

Oh, and I'm for capital punishment and I'm an atheist.

Edited February 4, 2013 by ouija ouija

[Beckys_Mom]

Here's a good candidate to be strung up:

http://www.dailymail...t-sentence.html

Oh, and I'm for capital punishment and I'm an atheist.

From the article - Lama al-Ghamdi died in October having suffered multiple injuries including a crushed skull, broken ribs and left arm, extensive bruising and burns.

The child had also been repeatedly raped and the burned.

He has reportedly agreed to pay £31,000 ($50,000), which is believed to have gone to Lama's mother.

The amount is half that would have been paid if Lama had been a boy.

Activists say under Islamic laws a father cannot be executed for murdering his children. Husbands can also not be executed for murdering their wives, the group say.

Absolutely disgustingly evil man.. and so are those that created a law like that for men only.. . If I thought he would rather face death than jail, I would then sentence him to 150 years in jail with no chance of seeing the light of day, and feed him nothing but bacon. Every day he should suffer and a picture of that little girl shown to him over and over... He is a disgusting piece of filth... Any man that does that to his own child is a disgusting piece of scum .. I do not give a hoot who thinks I am wrong.. This kind of crime is too much..

Edited February 4, 2013 by Beckys_Mom

[WoIverine]

Can delete this.

Edited February 4, 2013 by WoIverine

[Beckys_Mom]

I'm sure there are already some who would kill all Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Russians, Jews, North Koreans, Afghans, Iranians, Isrealis, Gays, and so on, regardless of whether a crime is involved, or not.

Basically someone out there would like to kill just about everyone and anyone..even if no crime was committed....Can you explain what you mean?

[Goblin-5]

For it for murder in the first degree (including terrorist action) and treason but only when there is incontrovertable proof of guilt (DNA evidence). It should only be used in extreme cases.

My worry is that the State bodies (police/intelligence agencies) may either withhold or manufacture evidence to secure a conviction because they "know" someone is guilty. In such cases the death penalty should be applied to these people as well if their actions result in a wrongful conviction, regardless of whether the death sentence was carried out or not.

[eight bits]

Opposed on non-religious grounds.

I live in a state which has not had an execution in about 80 years. Nevertheless, death is allowed here for a small number of crimes, such as contract killing, or killing a law enforcement or corrections officer. Generally speaking, the role of the death penalty is to motivate defendants to plead guilty to different charges. I'm not so sure about the ethics of that, either.

[Bonecrusher]

Definetly,utterly against it! There's too many miscarriages of justice to make it a viable option.You only have to look at the obvious examples of Colin Stagg and Barry George.

Colin Stagg was sent to the dock by dubious means in the form of an honey trap.It was a typical case of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing.Because an other group of detectives were more switched on and alert when it came to Robert Napper.Then there's Barry George who despite having stalking tendencies and loads of newspaper clippings of celebrities including Freddie Mercury didn't show any interest in Jill Dando.It's also been proven that his medical condition would have stopped giving him a steady aim of the gun.Then there's the controversy of the gun residue which was contaminated.I personally blame Serbian hitman on the orders of Milosevic but that's only an opinion.

I might re- consider if there's definite proof that the perp is responsible for at three murders.Besides Colin Stagg and Barry George were alleged have done one murder apiece.Though it has to be said that capital punishment is cheaper than letting murderers living the life of riley at the taxpayers expense.

But there's no way I would recommend anything less than murder to justify the death penalty.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Medium Brown

[lightly]

I thought i was completely against it all my life so far... but now i'm not so sure . It almost seems like fair punishment for some Murders.

[Mr Walker]

As an atheist, and as a theist, I have always been in favour of capital punishment. Human right to life is, and always has been, conditional and society sets those conditions. IMO, any person society feels should be locked up for life should rather be executed. I would extend the death penalty to more crimes but also use the money saved to establish rehabilitation and education programmes for criminals who did not deserve the dealth penalty and who will eventually go back into society.

I differentiate quite clearly between murder, and the taking of an innocent life; and execution after due process, and the taking of a life where the person has chose to harm others.

This is not vengeance but justice, and also what is right, logically.

I would continue, for example, to love a person who had raped or murdered, but still want them executed. They have lost their right to human life by acting in an inhuman way. Mental incompetence where a person was not ABLE to make an informed choice would be reason not to execute someone, as would being too young to understand the consequences of one's actions.

Further, where a person demonstrated an inabilty to control their actions, even where that did not lead to a serious crime, I would lock them up until they could (with or without professional help) demonstrate that they could control their lust or anger, greed or envy etc.

Why should a society let any person who demonstrates an inabilty to control themselves, and thus be an ongoing danger to self or others, roam freely?

Edited February 5, 2013 by Mr Walker

[Kazahel]

I have always been against it and always will be.

I think if capital punishment is considered a norm it only teaches society/people that death is a form of punishment for wrong doings. So in the times where people feel the need to punish another(in the heat of the moment), death has been programmed/condoned as a form of punishment. So I believe inorder to teach that life is precious to society you must teach that life is precious to everybody in it, no matter what the crime.

And I believe the same thing in regards to spanking children and in regards to fighting. You teach by example, not with violence. I understand in the heat of the moment things can happen and people will lash out but at the end of the day I think its best not to, and best not to teach that violence is a normal reaction to a wrong doing.

I also think only God has the right to end a life(He knows all the in's and outs). But I believe people can call out to God and ask for punishments in their frustrations and anger and if He wills it, it will be.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Kazahel

[Jinxdom]

Against, for non religious reasons. It's more expensive then keeping them alive and it's way to easy of a way out. Make prison for what it should be a punishment. Lock them in a little tiny room and give them the bare essentials to live and make them work the crappy jobs that nobody wants to do we all benefit from. They tried to exploit society in their favor, let us exploit them for over favor.

If you know you are going to die and don't care about death the threat of punishment doesn't work. Losing your freedom and any luxuries that are gained by freedom will put a lot more people on pause. If they cannot work with the public then solitary. They broke the law, now you lose all rights that come with it. Not against killing somebody but people who deserve capital punish should get fates worse then death.

Lesser crimes should be reduced time and have a different punishment setup(education, mental health) to help fix their problems.

Death penalty is not cheaper, after you factor in court time, appeals, and special(Food the chemicals to kill them bleh bleh) treatment. Remember we as tax payers also pay for that stuff too.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Jinxdom

[pallidin]

Interesting outlook you have there - It's not OK to have it legally done by law, but it is OK to illegally do it yourself...!

BM, I think you're misuderstanding my position.

I am against Capital punishment by any country.

But if I come up against someone brutally rapping my daughter, and if to stop it requires lethal force, yes, I will do it.

I see absolutely no contradiction there, because they are wholly different circumstances.

[Cradle of Fish]

Atheist and opposed. Firstly I do not consent to my Government having the power to execute citizens. Regardless of how watertight their case is. Bevan Spencer von Einam, Ivan Milat and Martin Bryant are exactly where they belong, serving life. The way I see it is Government already screws up enough, so how can they be trusted to ensure that a truly guilty person is put to death?

Not to mention a miscarriage of justice can be better rectified if the person is serving time in jail instead of in the grave.

I wouldn't say my inclination towards atheism informs my view on the matter all that much.

[pallidin]

The way I see it is Government already screws up enough, so how can they be trusted to ensure that a truly guilty person is put to death?

Not to mention a miscarriage of justice can be better rectified if the person is serving time in jail instead of in the grave.

I like it!

[mysticwerewolf]

I am in favor of capital punishment, But I am in favor of it as an immediate action it is cruel to make someone wait 20 or 30 years and a half dozen appeals it should be appealed once, the appear may take no longer than three months. and once the grounds are established for the reasons of the appeal the court MUST force the appeal process to be done and done correctly within said time limit.. the capital punishment MUST be carried out within 6 months

mentally il is not an appeal issue

i'm to fat to be killed is not an appeal issue,

i'm sorry for what i did is not an appeal issue

and when the capital punishment is carried out it should be a prime time TV show

self defense is acceptable as an appeal if it was used in the first trial as a defense.

the person accused of being the green river killer Plead guilty to over fifty murders and lead investigators to the disposal areas he used To avoid the death penility. It could be a deterrant if done correctly and it would save governments money to waste on other things why should we let a murderer of over fifty people ( one of whom i went to school with) sit in jail at 50 to 100 grand a year out of The taxpayers pocket

we need to re-instilll respect of the rules in our children. if you can't do the time, and or are not willing to face the punishment you should not do the crime and if we catch you you will face punishment. period

and the most important part why should they get a lesser sentence, their victims didn't get a lesser sentence

edited to addd > atheist.

Edited February 5, 2013 by mysticwerewolf

[mysticwerewolf]

and two further thoughts capital punishment should also be handed out to the cops and lawyers that helped find an innocent person guilty As Well As the lawyers who got the guilty man off as innocent

too often cops steriotype people the instant something happens

[+Paranoid Android]

and two further thoughts capital punishment should also be handed out to the cops and lawyers that helped find an innocent person guilty As Well As the lawyers who got the guilty man off as innocent

too often cops steriotype people the instant something happens

That would also mean that genuinely mistaken human beings who followed where they thought the truth was can then later be executed for.... *wait for it* - doing their jobs! You see nothing wrong with that?

I don't agree with your previous post either (a wrongful imprisonment followed up by a death penalty still means an innocent person has been executed - a posthumous pardon does nothing for friends and family of an innocent).

[Frank Merton]

Killing people does not undo what was done, nor is there any reason to think it deters anything (after all, they did it anyway), and revenge and hate do harm to those with those motives.

There is always the possibility that an innocent person is executed -- it does happen fairly regularly, probably far more so than we will ever know.

Capital punishment also perverts the justice process -- when a person is subject to the death penalty there is a morbidity introduced and sometimes juries become less likely to convict.

I would not say that executions should be stopped completely. They could be allowed in limited situations -- places such as mass murders or murders of kidnap victims or murders of law enforcers, but even then in a limited way, such as perhaps taking the capital aspect out of the trial and putting it in the hands of a governor or President only after conviction of a capital offense has happened in normal procedure.

[mysticwerewolf]

a lot of people don't agree with me and that is their right. who knows maybe they are right.

but at the same time

The green rivers killers victims didn't deserve to die, the pig farmers victims didn't deserve to die, the children in puyallup wa who were beaten and burned to death last year because their father was hounded by police and the new corps didn't deserve to die, the young lady who was shot down by a gang banger in seattle a while back didn't deserve to die. why should their killers live getting three squares a day and a pool table and a gym and books and all the stuff they get at the tax payers expense?

[Knight Of Shadows]

strict punishment makes the criminals think twice before commiting a crime

more importantly should they do it .. they won't have the chance to do it again

truth to be told .. the world would be better off without them

[Beckys_Mom]

BM, I think you're misuderstanding my position.

Ok then, let's see..

I am against Capital punishment by any country.

As you casn see, you are against it done legally by law

But if I come up against someone brutally rapping my daughter, and if to stop it requires lethal force, yes, I will do it.

And in this instance, you would kill the criminal illegally if you had to.. You should think more about this... IF some mad man brutally raped and killed your daughter, you would rather you kill him than the law doing it instead.. It is clear what you have said.. I too would want to kill anyone who took my kids, raped them and took their lives away ..Of course I would.. BUT I would not be against capital punishment, because in that case, it would be hypocritical of me ...

I see absolutely no contradiction there, because they are wholly different circumstances.

I call it being most ironic

Edited February 5, 2013 by Beckys_Mom

[AsteroidX]

Im completely for the death penalty for child molesters and serial killers.

[Bonecrusher]

I need to clarify my position here because my reasons are totally non- religious.

Who honestly needs the scriptures and the Bible when all is required is a little bit of common sense.

Tbh capital punishment is one the biggest questions when it comes to morals and morality.

I'm just glad I'm here to get the opportunity to answer it.

Here's a little factoid to disgest....

I was the one who initiated this debate in the forum that refuses to be named.

The Chav hating one that you'll never guess the name of even in a million years.

But by that time the trolls had moved on because it was subscription only.

Btw death penalty for any kind of drug peddling and I can't emphasis this better is total overkill.

There's also this ridiculous law where Brits can be done for treachery to the UK.

Whether the coalition have repealed it is anybody's guess.