When thinking of the death penalty, the phrase "Two wrongs don't make a right" comes to mind. Who are we to decide when someone is to die? It is morally wrong to decide when and where to take a life. But that does not justify taking the life of another.

That, however, does not mean that someone should go without punishment for a crime they committed. To me, it doesn't seem like sufficient enough punishment to kill someone. Punishment is to live with the choices you made.

More ofen than not, the death penalty is administered to killers. IMO, if we give them the death penalty, we are relieving them of their punishment. They don't have to live with it. They know that in a matter of time, (few years, few months, depending on the trial) they won't have to deal with it any longer.

A life-long sentence of confinement in prison, seems like a much more horrible sentence to be given. The prisoner is faced with a horrible and lonely life, remembering that the crime he/she had committed, was the one that landed them there.

Giving the death penalty is like flicking off the justice system in America.

That means, that we, are also killers. Are we not? We are taking someone's life, whether or not he/she was a "bad" person, we are still killing another person. Then, since we could be considered mass murderer's ourselves, should we be admnistered the death penalty as well?

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire

In order for life in prison to have a meaninful value as far as a punishment for murder, the murderer must feel remorse. If the murderer does not feel any regret or sorrow for his actions, life in prison does nothing but allow him free room and board, at the tax payers expense, for the rest of his life. I believe most of us are assuming that murder is somehow rational in nature, in which the person who commits the crime will feel "guilty" about his actions later on. This is simply not the case in all circumstances. When a person is uncapable of feeling true regret or sorrow, as is the case with many of the mass murderer psychopath types, life in prison does nothing as a punishment for them.
As far as the "two wrongs don't make a right" issue, what is "right" and "wrong" is a judgement call based upon the individual. You may think that killing is always wrong, in that case are you oppossed to war? What if someone was going to kill you, and you killed them first to save your own life, is that "wrong?" My point is, killing could easily be shown to be "right" in some situations, and I would argue that many times, juries, family and friends of murder victims, and society as a whole sees the killing of certain criminals as "right."

A life for a life.
It works.

Fuck this "5 years in prison, you are a changed man" bullshit.

Someone kills your mother because she woulden't let him steal her car.
You let him live? Why.. because it's the "honest thing to do?" He didin't mind killing your mother.

Fuck that.

Capital punishment should be implemented everywhere, all around the world.

I've had a close family member killed. Not only was she killed, but she was killed by her own husband. I want him to pay, dearly. But taking another person's life, what does that gain you?

Think of the people you affect with each person that you kill. If you kill him, think of those that love him, the anguish they will feel.

If you've ever suffered the loss of a loved one, you would know how it feels. Why put another through that anguish?

Who are we to decide whether to take someone else's life? Who granted us that power?

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire

quote:

Who are we to decide whether to take someone else's life? Who granted us that power?

And who granted the power to the killer to take another's life? They did. And when they performed that action, they gave the power to a jury of their own peers, as well as our legal system to determine if their life should be taken. So in answer to your question, the killer gave the power to have their life taken.

Another issue related to the death penalty is cost. While I havn't done enough reasearch on the topic Its my guess that the average amount of money put into each prisoner sentenced to death is greater than that of a prisoner sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.

The logic is this: at any given time there is aproximatly 3500 or so inmates on death row(3557 in 2001, and 3551 in 2000) while only about 70 are executed each year, so the rest of them require the same federal funding as those not sentenced to death. However because inmates on death row appeal there conviction or sentence far more often then those not sentenced to the needle it seems logical that sentencing someone to death is a bigger burdon to the state in terms of both financing and time.

Another argument I have against the death penalty is the relative painlessness involved. I think that a needle is too easy of a way out, some people argue that instead of the needle people should do hard physical labor, I think they desrve worse, and should have 20 or so hours of complete isolation a day, really mess with there minds, and make them suffer.

good points throughout this thread. I always swing back and forth between supporting it and not. I think I don't really like it in that it is very very hard to prove guilt in a lot of cases. Also circumstances play a huge role in it, self defence, too much self defence etc.

and yes, most serial killers and the like who are up for murder do not feel the slightest bit of regret nor is proson a challenge. Usually when a murderer is serving their sentence this is not the first time they have been in prison so it is nothing new and they know how it all works.

What I would call for is tougher prisons. They need more funding to build large enough prisons to house these criminals and they should not provide many of the ammenities that they do, like tv n such. But you could also say that more funding should be spent on keeping people away from prisons and not breaking the law....thats not gonna happen.


Plus I don't think we can judge how these kilelrs think or how prison is til we see it ourselves. The media paints a different picture of criminals and prisons imo. Of course they are going to try to show every murder case that is overturned and an innocent man goes free. But they never really report on the thousands that are rightly accused, unless they kill over 5 people over a period of time.

I especially hate that movie The life of david gale, I have never seen a movie with such a bias setup such a gross distortion.

I suggest that all those death penalty advocates read this:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/art...scid=45&did=539

Racism and hatred run VERY deep in the United States and that is shown very starkly in the criminal justice system.

quote:

Originally posted by rupert I suggest that all those death penalty advocates read this: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/art...scid=45&did=539 Racism and hatred run VERY deep in the United States and that is shown very starkly in the criminal justice system.

The criminal system is based upon the crime, not the race of the criminal.

There is a serious problem of black fathers abandoning their families, and fatherless children seem to have a much higher rate of becoming criminals then otherwise. That is why there is a skewed rate of the black minority making up such a vast number of criminals.

___________________
~Nessa

I believe most of us are arguing whether death penalty is a valid means of punishment, not if the current system is fair or unfair. I don't think anyone would want someone put to death unfairly, but in a system where it can be fair it is a justifiable means of punishment. I don't think you'll find any protests when you say the current system is not perfect. However, that does not change the validity of the death penalty if used under the right circumstances.

quote:

Originally posted by anuneventrade A life-long sentence of confinement in prison, seems like a much more horrible sentence to be given.

quote:

Originally posted by arctic I'm not sure about you, but I would almost rather die than spend the rest of my life locked up with no rights.

... then lets do the morally right thing and kill them!

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono And who granted the power to the killer to take another's life? They did. And when they performed that action, they gave the power to a jury of their own peers, as well as our legal system to determine if their life should be taken. So in answer to your question, the killer gave the power to have their life taken.

So if the killer gets his life taken away as well, shouldn't the executioner's life be taken? He is, after all, taking another's life. It would just go round in circles until the entire planet kills itself.

quote:

Another argument I have against the death penalty is the relative painlessness involved. I think that a needle is too easy of a way out, some people argue that instead of the needle people should do hard physical labor, I think they desrve worse, and should have 20 or so hours of complete isolation a day, really mess with there minds, and make them suffer.

I agree. For those of you who are for the death penalty.. You want the killers to have a merciful death such as this? Doesn't really make sense, considering you want them to suffer as much as those who were killed themselves.

quote:

What I would call for is tougher prisons. They need more funding to build large enough prisons to house these criminals and they should not provide many of the ammenities that they do, like tv n such. But you could also say that more funding should be spent on keeping people away from prisons and not breaking the law....thats not gonna happen.

I agree. A killer should be given no chance of interaction with anyone else (soiltary confinement), no television, only their own minds to converse with. It would drive them insane eventually.

quote:

I believe most of us are arguing whether death penalty is a valid means of punishment, not if the current system is fair or unfair. I don't think anyone would want someone put to death unfairly, but in a system where it can be fair it is a justifiable means of punishment. I don't think you'll find any protests when you say the current system is not perfect. However, that does not change the validity of the death penalty if used under the right circumstances.

Of course the justice system is unfair. If it weren't, we wouldn't have so many convicted innocents, and free guilty.

On that note. With the death penalty, it does not give a chance for perhaps an innocent man to be set free. Would you like the blood of an innocent on your hands?

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire