Time To Get Rid Of The Death Penalty, Worldwide

[Jarhyn]

As I'm sure you're aware, the death penalty is a lot more expensive than imprisonment.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dea...57.2502j0j1&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

Only because of the way we handle and administer it, and adjudicate it. It could easily be as cheap as a gram of heroin, and incredibly rare. It just means turning our backs on our revenge fetish.

 

[coloradoatheist]

As I'm sure you're aware, the death penalty is a lot more expensive than imprisonment.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dea...57.2502j0j1&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

it's costlier because we spend more money to make sure of the person being sentenced to death was guilty and the standards followed. Shouldn't we complain that we aren't spending that money to make sure every person we put in jail has the same legal protections?

 

[Jarhyn]

As I'm sure you're aware, the death penalty is a lot more expensive than imprisonment.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dea...57.2502j0j1&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

it's costlier because we spend more money to make sure of the person being sentenced to death was guilty and the standards followed. Shouldn't we complain that we aren't spending that money to make sure every person we put in jail has the same legal protections?

Or because we put people in jail rather than in school or rehab or homes, or communities separated from non-offending society until they are capable of showing they are reformed. Only because we insist on revenge and fear of revenge rather than on redirection into worthwhile people.

 

[coloradoatheist]

As I'm sure you're aware, the death penalty is a lot more expensive than imprisonment.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dea...57.2502j0j1&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

it's costlier because we spend more money to make sure of the person being sentenced to death was guilty and the standards followed. Shouldn't we complain that we aren't spending that money to make sure every person we put in jail has the same legal protections?

Or because we put people in jail rather than in school or rehab or homes, or communities separated from non-offending society until they are capable of showing they are reformed. Only because we insist on revenge and fear of revenge rather than on redirection into worthwhile people.

i agree in part. But i disagree with revenge, but rather justice. A difference and that is one thing at issue, what is the difference between justice and revenge.

But our court system and prison system is horrible, but not because of our death penalty.

 

[rousseau]

I find it shocking that some countries still implement the death penalty. These are my reasons for objecting to it-

1) It's barbaric.

2) It's uncivilised.

3) The state should never have the power of life or death over it citizens.

4) It gives perpetrators of crime no actual punishment, ie, 30 years in a prison with a tough regime and time to reflect on what they have done.

5) Miscarriages of justice will happen.

6) It's just revenge.

7) Humans should have enough empathy with and compassion for another human being that would make killing one unthinkable.

8) In the US relatives of the victim watch on as the perpetrator is put to death. Whats that about? Its just nauseating.


In my view the death penalty shows a real lack of compassion and humanity in a society.

You make some good points, but to counter-point: execution is just so much fun. Not only that but it's very traditional and something we've been doing ever since Ancient times when women were objects and slaves were legal like they should be. If it's the only fun thing to survive since that era in history I don't know why we'd want to quash it?

 

[Jarhyn]

As I'm sure you're aware, the death penalty is a lot more expensive than imprisonment.

https://www.google.com/search?q=dea...57.2502j0j1&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

it's costlier because we spend more money to make sure of the person being sentenced to death was guilty and the standards followed. Shouldn't we complain that we aren't spending that money to make sure every person we put in jail has the same legal protections?

Or because we put people in jail rather than in school or rehab or homes, or communities separated from non-offending society until they are capable of showing they are reformed. Only because we insist on revenge and fear of revenge rather than on redirection into worthwhile people.

i agree in part. But i disagree with revenge, but rather justice. A difference and that is one thing at issue, what is the difference between justice and revenge.

But our court system and prison system is horrible, but not because of our death penalty.

Justice comes from the same place as revenge; I see them as no different other than in one small facet: we just don't let ourselves get off to it when we call it justice. It's still just as wasteful, and we don't even get good feels from it.

 

[PyramidHead]

The death penalty is not expensive because of how we kill people (thus putting the lie to Jarhyn's ignorant "gram of heroin" suggestion). The death penalty is expensive because we take an insane amount of precautions to be sure we're not doing something very, very bad. Even given those measures, we still occasionally do something very, very bad.

How would you suggest we make it the cheaper option?

Assume you don't know ahead of time that the person is 100% guilty and utterly incapable of rehabilitation. What's the bargain method for making that judgement?

 

[Jarhyn]

The death penalty is not expensive because of how we kill people (thus putting the lie to Jarhyn's ignorant "gram of heroin" suggestion). The death penalty is expensive because we take an insane amount of precautions to be sure we're not doing something very, very bad. Even given those measures, we still occasionally do something very, very bad.

How would you suggest we make it the cheaper option?

Assume you don't know ahead of time that the person is 100% guilty and utterly incapable of rehabilitation. What's the bargain method for making that judgement?

Instead of using it as punishment, use it as toxic waste disposal. Generally that means someone chooses it themselves, through consent or action which is clearly communicated as being consent at the far end of an escalation of force. Choose how you want to be treated: rehabilitation through education? Exile to a separate community where you will have a roof, and food and are expected to do what work you can find there? Asylum in a foreign country? Rehabilitation through chemical or surgical means? Or death? If we can't educate you, choose again! If you are tired of exile, retry education! If it still doesn't work, see if anyone else wants you, or see if we can go under the hood to fix the problem. And if you try to circimvent the walls, or the system, then you choose death. No long waits, no appeals. Just disposal.

The expense comes from the process of 'justice' we use, and our model of prisons, courts, and assumptions about how to prevent and deal with unethical behavior, and what constitutes ethical behavior.

I say do only what is necessary to prevent someone from doing it again, and if they utterly refuse to allow that prevention, keep pushing until they do stop or are dead.

 

[PyramidHead]

The death penalty is not expensive because of how we kill people (thus putting the lie to Jarhyn's ignorant "gram of heroin" suggestion). The death penalty is expensive because we take an insane amount of precautions to be sure we're not doing something very, very bad. Even given those measures, we still occasionally do something very, very bad.

How would you suggest we make it the cheaper option?

Assume you don't know ahead of time that the person is 100% guilty and utterly incapable of rehabilitation. What's the bargain method for making that judgement?

Instead of using it as punishment, use it as toxic waste disposal. Generally that means someone chooses it themselves, through consent or action which is clearly communicated as being consent at the far end of an escalation of force. Choose how you want to be treated: rehabilitation through education? Exile to a separate community where you will have a roof, and food and are expected to do what work you can find there? Asylum in a foreign country? Rehabilitation through chemical or surgical means? Or death? If we can't educate you, choose again! If you are tired of exile, retry education! If it still doesn't work, see if anyone else wants you, or see if we can go under the hood to fix the problem. And if you try to circimvent the walls, or the system, then you choose death. No long waits, no appeals. Just disposal.

You're not actually advocating the death penalty, then. You're just saying, we're going to lock you up and give you the chance for rehabilitation, but if you try to escape, you'll be shot. We do that anyway!

 

[Jarhyn]

The death penalty is not expensive because of how we kill people (thus putting the lie to Jarhyn's ignorant "gram of heroin" suggestion). The death penalty is expensive because we take an insane amount of precautions to be sure we're not doing something very, very bad. Even given those measures, we still occasionally do something very, very bad.

How would you suggest we make it the cheaper option?

Assume you don't know ahead of time that the person is 100% guilty and utterly incapable of rehabilitation. What's the bargain method for making that judgement?

Instead of using it as punishment, use it as toxic waste disposal. Generally that means someone chooses it themselves, through consent or action which is clearly communicated as being consent at the far end of an escalation of force. Choose how you want to be treated: rehabilitation through education? Exile to a separate community where you will have a roof, and food and are expected to do what work you can find there? Asylum in a foreign country? Rehabilitation through chemical or surgical means? Or death? If we can't educate you, choose again! If you are tired of exile, retry education! If it still doesn't work, see if anyone else wants you, or see if we can go under the hood to fix the problem. And if you try to circimvent the walls, or the system, then you choose death. No long waits, no appeals. Just disposal.

You're not actually advocating the death penalty, then. You're just saying, we're going to lock you up and give you the chance for rehabilitation, but if you try to escape, you'll be shot. We do that anyway!

Oh, I'm advocating the death penalty. I'm just saying that if someone gets shot trying to escape, we keep shooting until the job is done.

 

[PyramidHead]

The death penalty is not expensive because of how we kill people (thus putting the lie to Jarhyn's ignorant "gram of heroin" suggestion). The death penalty is expensive because we take an insane amount of precautions to be sure we're not doing something very, very bad. Even given those measures, we still occasionally do something very, very bad.

How would you suggest we make it the cheaper option?

Assume you don't know ahead of time that the person is 100% guilty and utterly incapable of rehabilitation. What's the bargain method for making that judgement?

Instead of using it as punishment, use it as toxic waste disposal. Generally that means someone chooses it themselves, through consent or action which is clearly communicated as being consent at the far end of an escalation of force. Choose how you want to be treated: rehabilitation through education? Exile to a separate community where you will have a roof, and food and are expected to do what work you can find there? Asylum in a foreign country? Rehabilitation through chemical or surgical means? Or death? If we can't educate you, choose again! If you are tired of exile, retry education! If it still doesn't work, see if anyone else wants you, or see if we can go under the hood to fix the problem. And if you try to circimvent the walls, or the system, then you choose death. No long waits, no appeals. Just disposal.

You're not actually advocating the death penalty, then. You're just saying, we're going to lock you up and give you the chance for rehabilitation, but if you try to escape, you'll be shot. We do that anyway!

Oh, I'm advocating the death penalty. I'm just saying that if someone gets shot trying to escape, we keep shooting until the job is done.

Do you honestly not see any way that could lead to killing a person who isn't actually guilty of a crime other than wanting to escape prison?

 

[Jarhyn]

The death penalty is not expensive because of how we kill people (thus putting the lie to Jarhyn's ignorant "gram of heroin" suggestion). The death penalty is expensive because we take an insane amount of precautions to be sure we're not doing something very, very bad. Even given those measures, we still occasionally do something very, very bad.

How would you suggest we make it the cheaper option?

Assume you don't know ahead of time that the person is 100% guilty and utterly incapable of rehabilitation. What's the bargain method for making that judgement?

Instead of using it as punishment, use it as toxic waste disposal. Generally that means someone chooses it themselves, through consent or action which is clearly communicated as being consent at the far end of an escalation of force. Choose how you want to be treated: rehabilitation through education? Exile to a separate community where you will have a roof, and food and are expected to do what work you can find there? Asylum in a foreign country? Rehabilitation through chemical or surgical means? Or death? If we can't educate you, choose again! If you are tired of exile, retry education! If it still doesn't work, see if anyone else wants you, or see if we can go under the hood to fix the problem. And if you try to circimvent the walls, or the system, then you choose death. No long waits, no appeals. Just disposal.

You're not actually advocating the death penalty, then. You're just saying, we're going to lock you up and give you the chance for rehabilitation, but if you try to escape, you'll be shot. We do that anyway!

Oh, I'm advocating the death penalty. I'm just saying that if someone gets shot trying to escape, we keep shooting until the job is done.

Do you honestly not see any way that could lead to killing a person who isn't actually guilty of a crime other than wanting to escape prison?

Having the intent and will to escape correction or quarantine and be dangerous in society is pretty much the worst thing I can think of. It is the most and only worthy thing of death. If someone who is innocent can't prove at the very least that he understands what right is, and has the will and intent to stick to applying those principles, then perhaps he belongs there anyway.

 

[Unbeatable]

To which I would add, prisoners should have the option to commit suicide just like everybody else. Nothing about opposing the death penalty means we have to keep people from killing themselves.

Agreed (though I don't technically oppose the death penalty, I do oppose retributivism and the disingenuous positions people pretend to hold in order to disguise their retributivism).

what is the difference between justice and revenge.

In some people, the only difference is that "revenge" is a more honest description while "justice" is a euphemism. In others, there's a genuine belief in non-retributivist theories of justice.

I hear all your arguments and you made some valid points.

What I may ask you is this:

What if someone in your family was the victim of a crime such as murder or rape? How could you guarantee that they would be incarcerated indefinitely? Would you be able to forgive them enough to see them live? Would you be happy to see them out in society again? And how would you feel if they did to someone else what they did to you?

Just food for thought. Put YOURSELF into the picture rather than seeing it from outside the issue.

Unlike you, I can put myself into more than one part of the picture. I can imagine being the perpetrator or their family just as easily as I can imagine being the victim or their family or the guards or their family.

I think some of you may think differently if it was someone you love that is/was on the receiving end of a vile hideous act.

There are specific terms for that different way of thinking. Terms like "irrational" and "biased". Is it your position that the criminal justice system should be irrational and biased in its sentencing? Is it your position that the criminal justice system should kill people so that the families of the victims will feel better? Is this "food for thought" business a way of arguing for your position through an appeal to emotions so you don't have to come up with something more reasonable e.g. evidence that the families of victims in countries without the death penalty are worse off than the families of victims in countries where the offender is put to death?

 

[dystopian]

Agree.

Some people are conscienceless. They're not going to grow one later in life.

So what? The fact that some people don't have a conscience does not imply that they will commit crimes or commit them again. Most sociopaths do not in fact break the law.

They are sick individuals who are never going to get any better. They are not an asset to a prison or to society in general. They are a waste of resources.

I find it disappointing that you would complain about people lacking conscience and then make an argument for killing them that sounds like it was made by someone themselves lacking conscience. Who gives a shit if they are or are not an asset, and a waste of resources? It takes a lack of a conscience to think that's a valid reason to execute people. Should we just go ahead and execute people who've been paralyzed? They're not an asset to society after all. They just waste resources. What if they're a huge asshole?

I have no problem with execution of such heinous criminals.

And because of that expressed sentiment, I'd have no problem with one of them breaking out and executing you like you want to do to them; but that doesn't mean I'm going to go around and advocate leaving the prison gate unlocked and leaving him a map to your house. Good thing neither of us decides who lives and die.

 

[dystopian]

Having the intent and will to escape correction or quarantine and be dangerous in society is pretty much the worst thing I can think of.

Really? Someone having the intent and will to escape prison to be 'dangerous' in society is pretty much the worst thing you can think of? You don't have a very active imagination.

It is the most and only worthy thing of death.

What complete rot. What does the intent/will to be dangerous in society even mean? Because it isn't synonymous with 'killing people'. It could include almost any lesser crime. Some accountant wanting to escape prison so he can embezzle millions from a company is 'dangerous' in that he's putting people's jobs at risk; but he sure as fuck doesn't deserve death because of it.

Oh, and by the way: you've just created a thought crime. No, really, that's what you did. "Having the intent and will..."; shit, Tom Cruise is just waiting for that pre-crime ball to drop.

If someone who is innocent can't prove at the very least that he understands what right is, and has the will and intent to stick to applying those principles, then perhaps he belongs there anyway.

Alright, you don't get to bitch about retributive justice anymore.

Throwing people in prison purely as a form of retribution for their crimes may not be the way we ought to dispense justice;

But arguing that someone who is innocent of all crimes has to jump through your hoops in order to prove that he is a moral person or else *belongs in prison anyway* is downright evil as fuck. I'd take a system that punishes people for actual crimes over one that imprisons them for not being able to prove they live up to some arbitrary (or even objective) standard of morality. How the hell do you even prove something like that in a way that can't be dismissed by some asshole who wants to keep you in jail?

 

[credoconsolans]

So what? The fact that some people don't have a conscience does not imply that they will commit crimes or commit them again. Most sociopaths do not in fact break the law.

Uh, they already proved that they're willing to do it and not having a conscience means that they have no social or emotional or mental reasons not to do it again.

They are sick individuals who are never going to get any better. They are not an asset to a prison or to society in general. They are a waste of resources.

I find it disappointing that you would complain about people lacking conscience and then make an argument for killing them that sounds like it was made by someone themselves lacking conscience.

If you can't tell the difference between a normal person on the street and a heinous murderer, I certainly don't want you on any jury.

Society is defending itself by executing people who have no conscience and have killed innocent people.

To sentence a heinous killer to prison means we value the lives they took as no better than a property crime.

Society must react beyond the bounds of expectation when a murder is committed otherwise we risk cheapening the lives violently taken to no better than an every day crime.

 

[gmbteach]

I would want revenge, but revenge is mine; the state applies justice which is quite different. It is not for the state to dispense revenge on my behalf.

Then you would be perpetrating a similar crime, which is why you should leave it up to the justice system.

 

[gmbteach]

The answers to all of these questions are *irrelevant* to whether or not we as a society should employ the death penalty.

Just food for thought. Put YOURSELF into the picture rather than seeing it from outside the issue.

I think some of you may think differently if it was someone you love that is/was on the receiving end of a vile hideous act.

Like I said, irrelevant. If you're trying to argue that we should be pro-death penalty because 'what if they killed someone we cared about?', then you might as well argue for the return of blood feuds. Besides, you've gone and proved my point for me: that there is no rationally valid reason for the death penalty. It's purely about revenge; and that just isn't an acceptable way for a civilized society to act.

How did I prove it? It is not revenge, it is justice.

 

[Underseer]

The answers to all of these questions are *irrelevant* to whether or not we as a society should employ the death penalty.

Just food for thought. Put YOURSELF into the picture rather than seeing it from outside the issue.

I think some of you may think differently if it was someone you love that is/was on the receiving end of a vile hideous act.

Like I said, irrelevant. If you're trying to argue that we should be pro-death penalty because 'what if they killed someone we cared about?', then you might as well argue for the return of blood feuds. Besides, you've gone and proved my point for me: that there is no rationally valid reason for the death penalty. It's purely about revenge; and that just isn't an acceptable way for a civilized society to act.

How did I prove it? It is not revenge, it is justice.

When I eat sandwiches, that's not eating, that's working out.

 

[gmbteach]

I hear all your arguments and you made some valid points.

What I may ask you is this:

What if someone in your family was the victim of a crime such as murder or rape? How could you guarantee that they would be incarcerated indefinitely? Would you be able to forgive them enough to see them live? Would you be happy to see them out in society again? And how would you feel if they did to someone else what they did to you?

Just food for thought. Put YOURSELF into the picture rather than seeing it from outside the issue.

I think some of you may think differently if it was someone you love that is/was on the receiving end of a vile hideous act.

Probably, but since my position isn't based on what I feel, why would that matter?

Let's say that I got so emotionally overwrought that I took up a big machete and tried to chop the guy to pieces in the high street. Is that an argument for making machete slaying legal? You might not think so, but you'd probably feel differently if you were the guy on the murderous rampage, right?

The issue I have, is you are now talking about YOU taking matters into your own hands. I am talking about Justice being administered.

A number of people do get 'emotionally overwrought' and go on killing sprees. They seem to happen almost monthly in America at the moment (sorry to my American Buddies). These people usually end up taking their own lives, thus sparing us from having to administer justice upon them.