The Death Penalty

[Jimmy Higgins]

The thing is, is "life in prison" punishment enough? We have created these large box stores of prisoners where they endure inhumane conditions... and we are saying that is punishment. It costs money, a good deal of money, to think "wasting their entire existence" is a benefit for the crime(s) the people have committed. We don't want to make prisoners better, we want them to suffer. But while wasting away, do they care about what they did (merely cause they were caught?). Society gets nothing out of it.

The death penalty is just revenge... and in some egregious cases, it is probably valid.

In the end, neither solution is particularly great and that is mostly because of the harm they did to get us to this point in the first place. But with things as they stand, people should have to pay the same prices for the same crimes, and that is not what our system does either.

 

[bilby]

Prison is a fairly new idea. It has the sole benefit of not being quite as corrosive to law and order as its predecessor, which was a mixture of corporal punishment and the death penalty, with death being the sole option for a wide range of fairly minor crimes.

We could probably do much better; But nobody wants to be seen to not be horrible to criminals. Despite the observation that being horrible to criminals doesn’t seem to be a very effective way to reduce crime, or to prevent people from joining the ranks of the criminal.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The thing about threads like this that always bothers me is the way that the victim(s), their family/friends are quickly forgotten about. It all becomes about the criminal.

No, not in America. Whether you get the death penalty matters heavily, not on the identity of the criminal, but the identity of the victim(s). Kill a white person, more likely to die. Kill a white women... they string up a noose in the courtroom. That isn't to say the families of white women get a larger say, but it indicates that the identity of the victim does carry a heavy weight. In Canada, if you are an indigenous female... they don't even care to investigate.

We rarely consider the life sentence without parole or reduction of sentence for them and to them.
And that is most unkind and callous.

We are a society, and rules regarding law and judgement need to be based on a level playing field. A person should suffer the same fate for the same crime, regardless.

I don't think it's so much about race as social status. The higher the social class of your victim the the more the hammer comes down on you.

 

[WAB]

There are certain crimes so heinous that, given the opportunity, I would gladly pull that lever over and over and over again, until my arm could pull no more.

This is one of the reasons that I oppose the death penalty.

Brilliant!

 

[Tigers!]

There are certain crimes so heinous that, given the opportunity, I would gladly pull that lever over and over and over again, until my arm could pull no more.

This is one of the reasons that I oppose the death penalty.

I was the last telephone technician at the notorious Pentridge prison (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HM_Prison_Pentridge) in Melbourne, Australia. The last governor, Mr Groves, once made the comment that if he put an ad in the papers for a hangman the queue the next morning would have stretching in both directions along Sydney Rd, Coburg. There would have had been no shortage of applicants. This was in the early 90s.

 

[Tigers!]

There are certain crimes so heinous that, given the opportunity, I would gladly slam that cell door over and over and over again, until my arm could slam no more.

This is one of the reasons that I support the death penalty.

FIFY

 

[Toni]

There are certain crimes so heinous that, given the opportunity, I would gladly slam that cell door over and over and over again, until my arm could slam no more.

This is one of the reasons that I support the death penalty.

FIFY

But you did not ‘fix’ anything. I meant what I wrote. Still do.

I am extremely well acquainted with my reaction to certain crimes, the outrage, the horror, the nausea and disgust. The anger. The hatred. Execution seems like the very best way to rid society of such a creature ( see how I’ve already dehumanized them?) as could commit such a crime. Or crimes. And, of course, to allow me to discharge MY feelings.

Licking someone up for life without any chance for parole is really very nearly the same thing. The life let’s are removed from the possibility of re-offending, at least against innocent or ‘innocent’ victims. To punish them and to protect us.

But really, they are locked up forever so we dont have to think about them any more.

And to give us a release—closure—for our feelings of anger and outrage. And grief.

To make us feel safe and secure.

The dead do not need us to punish anyone. If the dead require anything of us, surely it is to learn something—about them, about the circumstances of their death, and the causes and just how those responsible got to the point where committing their crimes seemed reasonable or even inevitable.

I think that it is rarely the correct thing to do to execute someone.

I think it is only somewhat less rarely the right thing to do to sentence someone to life imprisonment.

I also think that a sentence of death or life imprisonment is lazy. It lets us off the hook for having to think too hard about rehabilitation for those we might otherwise allow to walk among us, after they have served their sentences.

I feel differently, of course.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There are certain crimes so heinous that, given the opportunity, I would gladly pull that lever over and over and over again, until my arm could pull no more.

This is one of the reasons that I oppose the death penalty.

*nods* Rotator Cuff issues.

 

[TSwizzle]

But you did not ‘fix’ anything. I meant what I wrote. Still do.

I am extremely well acquainted with my reaction to certain crimes, the outrage, the horror, the nausea and disgust. The anger. The hatred. Execution seems like the very best way to rid society of such a creature ( see how I’ve already dehumanized them?) as could commit such a crime. Or crimes. And, of course, to allow me to discharge MY feelings.

Licking someone up for life without any chance for parole is really very nearly the same thing. The life let’s are removed from the possibility of re-offending, at least against innocent or ‘innocent’ victims. To punish them and to protect us.

But really, they are locked up forever so we dont have to think about them any more.

And to give us a release—closure—for our feelings of anger and outrage. And grief.

To make us feel safe and secure.

The dead do not need us to punish anyone. If the dead require anything of us, surely it is to learn something—about them, about the circumstances of their death, and the causes and just how those responsible got to the point where committing their crimes seemed reasonable or even inevitable.

I think that it is rarely the correct thing to do to execute someone.

I think it is only somewhat less rarely the right thing to do to sentence someone to life imprisonment.

I also think that a sentence of death or life imprisonment is lazy. It lets us off the hook for having to think too hard about rehabilitation for those we might otherwise allow to walk among us, after they have served their sentences.

I feel differently, of course.

Some of your sentiments I agree with but the idea that certain people can be rehabilitated and let loose if we just try a bit harder is just silly. Mass murdering psychopaths can't be rehabilitated, their brain is busted. Far better for society and the mass murdering psychopath to be euthanized.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Okay, but "mass murdering psychopaths" really is a very small number of people on death row.

 

[Toni]

But you did not ‘fix’ anything. I meant what I wrote. Still do.

I am extremely well acquainted with my reaction to certain crimes, the outrage, the horror, the nausea and disgust. The anger. The hatred. Execution seems like the very best way to rid society of such a creature ( see how I’ve already dehumanized them?) as could commit such a crime. Or crimes. And, of course, to allow me to discharge MY feelings.

Licking someone up for life without any chance for parole is really very nearly the same thing. The life let’s are removed from the possibility of re-offending, at least against innocent or ‘innocent’ victims. To punish them and to protect us.

But really, they are locked up forever so we dont have to think about them any more.

And to give us a release—closure—for our feelings of anger and outrage. And grief.

To make us feel safe and secure.

The dead do not need us to punish anyone. If the dead require anything of us, surely it is to learn something—about them, about the circumstances of their death, and the causes and just how those responsible got to the point where committing their crimes seemed reasonable or even inevitable.

I think that it is rarely the correct thing to do to execute someone.

I think it is only somewhat less rarely the right thing to do to sentence someone to life imprisonment.

I also think that a sentence of death or life imprisonment is lazy. It lets us off the hook for having to think too hard about rehabilitation for those we might otherwise allow to walk among us, after they have served their sentences.

I feel differently, of course.

Some of your sentiments I agree with but the idea that certain people can be rehabilitated and let loose if we just try a bit harder is just silly. Mass murdering psychopaths can't be rehabilitated, their brain is busted. Far better for society and the mass murdering psychopath to be euthanized.

Oh, I don’t disagree except for the extermination part. They are people. We have to face that and accept it.. There certainly are those who should be locked up forever—the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world leap to mind. But I think far too often we cry lock him up and throw away the key! I’m thinking those third strike offenses that land you permanently in jail. But it is incredibly more difficult to really try to determine who can be rehabilitated and returned to society and who should be rehabilitated and remain incarcerated. And then, of course, the rehabilitation itself. We don’t do enough of that or enough to figure out what drives people to do the usually stupid things they do or how to help them heal enough to give themselves better chances. Some people really are born without much of a shot at life.

 

[TSwizzle]

Oh, I don’t disagree except for the extermination part. They are people. We have to face that and accept it..

So what if they are people? That's not an argument for anything.

There certainly are those who should be locked up forever—the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world leap to mind. But I think far too often we cry lock him up and throw away the key! I’m thinking those third strike offenses that land you permanently in jail.

Yeah but I'm not thinking about that. I am specifically thinking about the Jeffrey Dahmers, just off them. They can't be fixed.

But it is incredibly more difficult to really try to determine who can be rehabilitated and returned to society and who should be rehabilitated and remain incarcerated.

Not really.

And then, of course, the rehabilitation itself. We don’t do enough of that or enough to figure out what drives people to do the usually stupid things they do or how to help them heal enough to give themselves better chances. Some people really are born without much of a shot at life.

I'm not advocating executing stupid or unlucky people.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oh, I don’t disagree except for the extermination part. They are people. We have to face that and accept it..

So what if they are people? That's not an argument for anything.

There certainly are those who should be locked up forever—the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world leap to mind. But I think far too often we cry lock him up and throw away the key! I’m thinking those third strike offenses that land you permanently in jail.

Yeah but I'm not thinking about that. I am specifically thinking about the Jeffrey Dahmers, just off them. They can't be fixed.

I've seen a bunch of people that "can't be fixed". We killing all of them? Or are we taking advantage of a crime committed to exterminate an invalid?

But it is incredibly more difficult to really try to determine who can be rehabilitated and returned to society and who should be rehabilitated and remain incarcerated.

Not really.

It is when sticking a needle in someone. There is a finality to it that requires a level of clinical certainty that is hard to actually obtain.

And then, of course, the rehabilitation itself. We don’t do enough of that or enough to figure out what drives people to do the usually stupid things they do or how to help them heal enough to give themselves better chances. Some people really are born without much of a shot at life.

I'm not advocating executing stupid or unlucky people.

No, just the mentally ill.

I mean you talk about it like mental illness is something that is easy to just conclude on. You talk like a person who has nothing more than a "gut" level understanding of psychology.

Heck, we going to put a needle in a psychopath, but let the guy who murdered his wife so he could pork someone half his age live in the prison until he can get parole? At least the mentally unwell person might have not actually known better. The Menendez Brothers who murdered their parents and tried to cover it via lies of abuse live in prison while we kill the mentally ill. It'd almost seem like it should be the other way around.

 

[TomC]

So what if they are people? That's not an argument for anything.

To me it is.
An important argument.

The premise that some human beings are entitled to choose death for other human beings doesn't work for me. That premise is one of the worst assumptions humans make. The biggest cause of degradation to the human situation.

To me, that's the meaning of "immoral". People feeling entitled to degrade the human situation. From war to environmental destruction, from abortion to capital punishment, it's all immoral.

People choosing death for other people is the root of all evil.
Tom

 

[DBT]

Oh, I don’t disagree except for the extermination part. They are people. We have to face that and accept it..

So what if they are people? That's not an argument for anything.

There certainly are those who should be locked up forever—the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world leap to mind. But I think far too often we cry lock him up and throw away the key! I’m thinking those third strike offenses that land you permanently in jail.

Yeah but I'm not thinking about that. I am specifically thinking about the Jeffrey Dahmers, just off them. They can't be fixed.

But it is incredibly more difficult to really try to determine who can be rehabilitated and returned to society and who should be rehabilitated and remain incarcerated.

Not really.

And then, of course, the rehabilitation itself. We don’t do enough of that or enough to figure out what drives people to do the usually stupid things they do or how to help them heal enough to give themselves better chances. Some people really are born without much of a shot at life.

I'm not advocating executing stupid or unlucky people.

But you are arguing for expediency.

 

[Coleman Smith]

I oppose the death penalty because the cops make mistakes, judges make mistakes, jurors make mistakes, and appeal judges make mistakes.

My opposition is also based on my experience handling claims for insurnace companies that insured police departments.

All large employs bodies have some things in common.


Most people are honest, competent and hard working and some are not.

The claims I handled involving police departments included every thing from simple automobile accidents to bad changes ending in death and destruction to uniformed officers operating burgulary rings out of their patrol cars.

I suggest that every one go to U-tube and enter a query "cops planting evidence" and look at the Reponses.

 

[TSwizzle]

I oppose the death penalty because the cops make mistakes, judges make mistakes, jurors make mistakes, and appeal judges make mistakes.

How about Jeffrey Dahmer. Do you think there were any mistakes made in his conviction and he was possibly innocent?

 

[Toni]

I oppose the death penalty because the cops make mistakes, judges make mistakes, jurors make mistakes, and appeal judges make mistakes.

How about Jeffrey Dahmer. Do you think there were any mistakes made in his conviction and he was possibly innocent?

Jeffrey Dahmer was not sentenced to death but sentenced to life imprisonment for 17 murders. Should he have instead been committed to an institution for the criminally insane? Perhaps. I find it difficult to muster any sympathy for Dahmer’s death at the hands of a fellow prisoner.

Do I think he should have been executed by the state? My emotional response is that I would gladly pull that lever over and over and over again. My rational response is that he should have been sentenced to life, without any chance of parole, my only concern for him being in the general population being for the safety of his fellow prisoners and everyone who came into contact with him.

When the state decides to execute someone, it is making every citizen a party to the taking of another human being’s life. If it is wrong for a person to kill another person, except in limited circumstances such as self defense, or through accident, then it is even more wrong for the state to execute a prisoner, even when there is no possibility that the prisoner is innocent of the charges for which they’ve been convicted.

 

[Bomb#20]

Licking someone up for life without any chance for parole is really very nearly the same thing. The life let’s are removed from the possibility of re-offending, at least against innocent or ‘innocent’ victims.

That's ridiculous. People serving life sentences have every opportunity to reoffend -- against other prisoners. And since the criminal justice system is imperfect and makes mistakes, some of those other prisoners are innocent. And since we routinely coerce confessions, even some of the other prisoners who pled guilty are innocent.

To punish them and to protect us.

Exactly. To protect us. Once we convict somebody he becomes them, so we stop caring about protecting him. That's why the "removed from the possibility of re-offending" meme keeps getting propagated.

 

[Bomb#20]

The premise that some human beings are entitled to choose death for other human beings doesn't work for me. That premise is one of the worst assumptions humans make. The biggest cause of degradation to the human situation.

To me, that's the meaning of "immoral". People feeling entitled to degrade the human situation. From war to environmental destruction, from abortion to capital punishment, it's all immoral.

People choosing death for other people is the root of all evil.
Tom

Or in other words, "I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill."

It's worth keeping in mind, though, that the reason Gandhi was able to save India with nonviolence was that the people oppressing India were good people. Gandhi recommended to his country's British oppressors that they likewise save their own country from their own oppressor with nonviolence too. Are any of us in any doubt about how that would have worked out?