Poll: Pro or con death penalty
pro
con
[Show Results]
 
Death penalty
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-01-2011, 07:41 AM
Death penalty
Poll inspired by this post.

Why am I pro death penalty...

1) Some criminals are never going to change their lives. Not even after 50 years
2) It costs the society lots of money to maintain these bastards. Putting them to death is cheaper
3) Death penalty will intimidate criminals not to do crimes.


Why am i against death penalty...
All of the above is mere emotional bullshit of conservative thinkers.

1) Sure... but can you tell the difference in a 3 or 4 week trial between one who is, and one who isn't?
2) Sure, yet prisons CAN be made self supporting.
3) C'mon... do you really think a criminal is thinking about his penalty when committing a crime? Most crimes are just emotional deeds. Crimes are things that grip your inner caveman to the throat. Committing, as well as judging. They have nothing in to do with balancing between deeds and possible retribution.

So...
Once you decide, "Yes, you CAN put someone to death as a punishment", you cross a border. A border that in my opinion is just safer not to cross. Even here in small scale Belgium I know of criminals that are better put to death. Marc Dutroux, Kaplan, Basrami, Junior Kabunda... Yet there are people where guilt isn't so clear. Els Clottemans Is a nice example. The pedo-priests as well... Now of course you can say that, when you are unsure you are not going to execute them. So what you are basically saying is... want to commit a crime? Just make damn sure there is no evidence. (This would only put the dumb criminals to the gallows, that's one hell of a natural selection!)

No, in my opinion, death penalty is just a way to buy yourself a fake safe and just feeling. Buying it at a very high price.

As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) , there is always a 50% chance that you are going to get away with murder, first make sure you get EVERY criminal. That would mean something to safety.
(ps: Sorry about the sketchy news-sources, Belgian news in English is very hard to find)

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 10:18 AM
RE: Death penalty
Pro=Professional? Con=To cheat?

Once again a wordbook has saved me. :F

I'm pro only if the evidence is indisputable and the crime is horrible enough.
Would I want a death penalty to Finland? - No. I'm not sure why not, I guess it rings my moral bells. I would like some other changes in the justice system (a police raped an underage girl and only got ½ year of parole, while 2 guys got 800000€ fines +months of parole for having a peer-to-peer system), but not death penalties.

I guess I'm sitting on the fence in this one. :F Start discussing and give me something to think.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 10:37 AM
RE: Death penalty
I've always tended to flip-flop on this issue, so I'm going to withhold making an opinion until I get all my facts straight.

I want to know about the costs. I've heard that once you factor in all the legal stuff, it can cost a lot to put someone to death than life in prison without parole. I've also heard the opposite, that the death penalty is a lot cheaper. I can't find much citations for either, none reliable anyway. Anyway, could someone please provide a reliable link citing if the death penalty is cheaper or more expensive than life without parole?

The two biggest sites I found are Death Penalty Info and Pro Death Penalty, neither of which can boast being unbiased.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 11:49 AM
 
RE: Death penalty
I have to say that i'm against the death penalty. It might be because there hasn't been a death penalty where i live for a couple of hundred years, but i don't think that anyone has the right to take another persons life (except in a situation of self-defense, and by that i mean if you are being attacked, not "he might possible do something sometime"). Plus, there's always a chance that you might choose to convict someone to death who is actually innocent, and would that be an acceptable risk? Personally, i think that death penalties are not the way to go. If people are worried about the cost of keeping prisoners for life, then why just not have them work 8 hours a day (something that can be done within the prison walls) to weigh against the costs of keeping them?

Anyway, these are my thoughts on the issue.
Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 11:56 AM
RE: Death penalty
Isn't a decision on life or death based on costs a rather awkward one? Confused

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 12:20 PM
 
RE: Death penalty
I've always supported the death penalty without really knowing why. More than likely it's because of all the pro arguments that Observer debunked.

Death is a given. No one escapes. I have no fear of death, so perhaps I don't adequately understand why putting someone to death for certain crimes or under certain circumstances is a bad thing.

Can I assume (without highjacking this thread) that those that are against the death penalty are also against euthanasia? Do the two go hand in hand?
Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 12:59 PM
RE: Death penalty
(23-01-2011 12:20 PM)Mohanna Wrote:  Can I assume (without hijacking this thread) that those that are against the death penalty are also against euthanasia?
No Mohanna. I am contra death penalty and pro euthanasia.
The big difference lies in the fact that euthanasia is your own decision and not a decision forced upon you by lawgivers who are chosen by a consensus of a consensus of a consensus.
(But... it might be possible that there is no such thing as a free will. In which case this tread is completely obsolete)

I think it is normal that people are unsure about there position on this matter. The issue is very emotionally charged. When following debates you hear a lot of arguments like "What if you children where the victims", "What if your son was the convict". These aren't really arguments. These are ways to make it visible, graphic, and personal. Typical caveman mudslinger

Observer

Agnostic atheist
Secular humanist
Emotional rationalist
Disclaimer: Don’t mix the personal opinion above with the absolute and objective truth. Remember to think for yourself. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 01:05 PM
 
RE: Death penalty
There's an old saying. Some people ask to be killed!
Pedophiles, rapists, (especially those who assault the elderly), murderers, terrorists and corrupt politicians, corrupt jurists, corrupt and or murdering law enforcement, corrupt attorneys who's actions result in wrongful convictions. Especially sentences to death row, are a few that come to mind so as to fit the bill.

However, folks in this country (U.S) have become well aware that the system of criminal justice is fallible. And often, to it's discredit a shame is afforded when certain members of it, entrusted to uphold the law, are so corrupt as to make necessary the revision of the term unto; The Criminal Injustice System.

As a consequence innocence is incarcerated. And one day behind bars for the innocent, is one day too many. A death penalty conviction is the highest betrayal of everything the true justice system stands for. Innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Wrongful convictions impugn that standard. And in the case of murdering an innocent wrongly convicted, it's a violation that can never be rescinded once the execution is carried out.

I think the entire prison system must be reformed, in order to make it work better than it does now. As an abysmal failure in reform, yet a rampant success in institutionalized higher learning for recidivism.

One point, relevant to this thread/poll, is rescinding capital punishment in those few States that currently have that, and instead replacing that sentence with that of life without parole.
This way the innocent are still entitled to their appeals process, while at time of trial all methods afforded a fair and impartial hearing should be employed.Without exception as in, whether defended by private practice representation or a Public Defender.

Currently, many defendants who retain public defenders are, depending upon the State jurisdiction, dependent upon the budget afforded their defense through the very State that's prosecuting them. And while Jurists are suppose to sit as impartial triers of fact, in many Jurisdictions it is the Judge who decree's what budget is afforded a defendant who's represented by a PD. As well as having the discretion to determine what methodologies are at that defendants disposal, in preparing a proper defense.

Which means, if a defendant represented by a PD wants DNA tests on the evidence, in some Jurisdictions the Judge can refuse because the testing is too costly!

Consequently we later read of a justice advocacy group like The Innocence Project, who seek out that evidence and have it tested and then find, after the convict their office is representing, has spent over a decade on death row as one wrongly accused. Because justice and acquittal of an innocent, wasn't in the budget!

A hugely costly stay in many ways for that wrongly convicted citizen. And a horrific evil injustice and at a far higher expense for the State taxpayer than what would have been afforded had that same DNA test been permitted at time of trial.

It's easy to give lip service to claiming our criminal justice system is not perfect, but it's the best we have. However, while that may indeed be a legitimate point of view, it is at our peril if we apathetically set back and resign ourselves to the errant notion that it's the best we can do.
Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 01:22 PM
RE: Death penalty
As far an I'm concerned the British government needs to start deporting immigrant, tourist and illegal alien murderers before they worry about death penalty.

Still though, on a wider pane I'd say that it really is flawed. So I'ma vote for con.

[Image: sigone_zps207cf92c.png]

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015
Live long and prosper.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2011, 01:39 PM
RE: Death penalty
I'd like to correct myself in case someone mistook what I said. I'm not going to make up my mind based purely on the costs, but it's an aspect of the death penalty I would to know better, largely just because I can't seem to find an answer anywhere. Sort of bugs me.

If I were to completely disregard the costs, I'd lean towards against, though I do tend to flip-flop on this issue a lot. There are a lot of complaints I have with the American crime and punishment system, so that might be why I can't make up my mind.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: