• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

(Ed) Capital punishment - for or against?

Cheeseman531

New Blood
C
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Messages
17
I was wondering what everyone here tought of capital puishment? As a staunch advocate of it, i'd like to hear someone else's point of view.
 
Last edited:
One vote against.

There's a variety of reasons. One of them is that it hasn't adequately been shown to be a deterrent. The most important reason, though, is that there have been mistakes in the past. People have been released from death row after DNA evidence showed their innocence. What if they hadn't discovered that evidence? What if they had discovered it a year or two after they were executed? We would all be complicit in the cold blooded murder of an innocent person.

My opinion is, well, we have to err on the side of "not killing innocent people."
 
Admiral said:
One vote against.

There's a variety of reasons. One of them is that it hasn't adequately been shown to be a deterrent. The most important reason, though, is that there have been mistakes in the past. People have been released from death row after DNA evidence showed their innocence. What if they hadn't discovered that evidence? What if they had discovered it a year or two after they were executed? We would all be complicit in the cold blooded murder of an innocent person.

My opinion is, well, we have to err on the side of "not killing innocent people."
Click to expand...
What he said.

I'd like to see a few logical reasons why capital punishment should exist. I know I'll see this one...

- the criminal will never commit another crime or harm another person.

Then again neither would a properly incarcerated person.

Anything else?
 
Admiral said:
One vote against.

There's a variety of reasons. One of them is that it hasn't adequately been shown to be a deterrent. The most important reason, though, is that there have been mistakes in the past. People have been released from death row after DNA evidence showed their innocence. What if they hadn't discovered that evidence? What if they had discovered it a year or two after they were executed? We would all be complicit in the cold blooded murder of an innocent person.

My opinion is, well, we have to err on the side of "not killing innocent people."
Click to expand...

Agreed.



I also predict we will see the normal European/US split on views on this issue.
 
One vote against.

There's a variety of reasons. One of them is that it hasn't adequately been shown to be a deterrent. The most important reason, though, is that there have been mistakes in the past. People have been released from death row after DNA evidence showed their innocence. What if they hadn't discovered that evidence? What if they had discovered it a year or two after they were executed? We would all be complicit in the cold blooded murder of an innocent person.

My opinion is, well, we have to err on the side of "not killing innocent people."
Click to expand...

Also agreed. Although I believe that certain people have committed such heinous crimes that I no longer care whether they live or die, the price of having the death penalty is too high. Whatever satisfaction I and others might get from seeing certain murderers killed isn't worth one innocent life. If it could be shown that the death penalty is a deterrent then I might be persuaded to support it.
 
Against, on empirical grounds (mistakes, lack of deterrent effect etc.) and also the nearest I get to an "ideological" objection - I just don't believe in giving the state the power to kill me.
 
Against. IMO the state has a business in correcting and deterring criminal behaviour and should exercise the appropriate force to do so with no more curtailment of liberty than is necessary.

Capital punishment is a "nuclear option" for correcting. It ends the individual's criminal activity definitively.

Capital punishment should logically be a deterrent. At least—no less of a deterrent than imprisonment.

It falls short of the standard because it curtails liberty more than necessary to achieve either of these things IMO. It also smacks of vengeance. I don't believe that the state has any business meting out revenge on its citizens.
 
In principle, I have no objections to the death penalty for the most heinous of crimes. In practice, I don't have enough trust in any justice system to give it the power over life and death. To have such power, it should not only be 100% unerring but also totally blind to things like skin color, socioeconomic status, gender, etc.
 
Against. I won't go into the whys and hows.

It's obvious that the more civilized and advanced a society is the less room there is for the death penalty. Just look at the death penalty map and see what countries are on par with the US as far as death penalty is concerned. Also it's obvious that in the future the death penalty will be abolished everywhere. Those states in the US that don't have are not going to reinstate it and those that have it will eventually abolish it.
 
Capital punishment should logically be a deterrent. At least—no less of a deterrent than imprisonment.
Click to expand...

Yes, I should clarify - I might be persuaded to support capital punishment if it could be shown to be a more effective deterrent than life in prison.
 
For it if you harm a member of my family.

Against it if you are a member of my family.


Just being honest.
 
Admiral said:
One vote against.

There's a variety of reasons. One of them is that it hasn't adequately been shown to be a deterrent. The most important reason, though, is that there have been mistakes in the past. People have been released from death row after DNA evidence showed their innocence. What if they hadn't discovered that evidence? What if they had discovered it a year or two after they were executed? We would all be complicit in the cold blooded murder of an innocent person.

My opinion is, well, we have to err on the side of "not killing innocent people."
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

It's no deterrent, it's more costly than imprisoning the person for life, and, the cost of mistakening executing an innocent person is too high.
 
Katana said:
It's no deterrent
Click to expand...
I have to disagree with that. it stands to reason that the threat of the state putting you to death is a credible deterrent, compared to—say—no punishment at all.

it's more costly than imprisoning the person for life
Click to expand...
Really? I would have thought that the (economic) cost of lifetime incarceration is higher than the cost of execution (to the state, that is).

the cost of mistakening executing an innocent person is too high.
Click to expand...
Would you support capital punishment if innocent people did not get wrongly executed though?
 
acuity said:
I have to disagree with that. it stands to reason that the threat of the state putting you to death is a credible deterrent, compared to—say—no punishment at all.
Click to expand...

Sure, but generally this is framed as a "put'em to death" vs. "lock'em up for life" discussion, not a "hang'em high" vs. "let'em go" discussion. As far as I understand, the chances of getting caught has more to do with the deterrent factor than the severity of punishment.

Really? I would have thought that the (economic) cost of lifetime incarceration is higher than the cost of execution (to the state, that is).
Click to expand...

The appeals process can cost really big bucks. The grub & striped shirt costs for one inmate aren't that high.
 
timhau said:
Sure, but generally this is framed as a "put'em to death" vs. "lock'em up for life" discussion, not a "hang'em high" vs. "let'em go" discussion.
Click to expand...
Generally it is. But Katana wrote "It's no deterrent."

As far as I understand, the chances of getting caught has more to do with the deterrent factor than the severity of punishment.
Click to expand...
"more to do with [. . .] than" suggests that the severity of punishment has something (non zero) to do with deterrence though—even in your words

The appeals process can cost really big bucks. The grub & striped shirt costs for one inmate aren't that high.
Click to expand...
Do you think that the economic cost of life imprisonment is higher than the cost of execution, inclusive of all state expenditure?
 
schplurg said:
What he said.

I'd like to see a few logical reasons why capital punishment should exist. I know I'll see this one...

- the criminal will never commit another crime or harm another person.

Then again neither would a properly incarcerated person.

Anything else?
Click to expand...
And, if properly incarcerated includes guaranteed, felony charges *if they ever do, permanent prison stay (assuming no evidence comes up proving innocence) and assuming the crime is not against a friend, family member, etc. of mine maybe. In our catch and release system, it is needed - more than it occurs.

*that's for the judge or parole board or pardoning public official - not the criminal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom