NationStates Jolt Archive

I can't figure it out. Really. I mean, I know there are bad people in the world, but...and trust me, I know about bad people that I wouldn't mind seeing kick the can...Like Scott Peterson for example. But, really? :headbang:

The purpose is to kill people. I thought that was fairly obvious.

The purpose is to kill people. I thought that was fairly obvious.
Well, I understand that :rolleyes: ...I mean, what purpose does it have in a government?

Well, I understand that :rolleyes: ...I mean, what purpose does it have in a government?

To get votes. Look at me, I'm tough on crime! (Pushes button)

Too either deter people from getting caught or deter them from doing it in the first place. Also it might give consolement to those who were effected by the criminal.

Well, votes are good, but...still. I guess I'm too much of a compassionate person.

Well, I understand that :rolleyes: ...I mean, what purpose does it have in a government?
Okay, seriously this time. In some cases there are criminals who just can not be rehabilitated. These criminals are put to death because they can no longer provide anything for society, and would be nothing more than a drain. Also, it provides some measure of revenge. Both of these can be debated, I suppose, but I imagine they are two of the main reasons for advocating the death penalty.

EDIT: Plus ye olde deterrant argument mentioned above.

Negative; I've always been an advocate of no death penalty. Year after year after year is a much worse punishment. Imagine; you're locked in a solitary cage for your entire life. Think about how their mind would slowly descend into madness...much more of a punishment.

It is supposed to deter people from committing murder. Unfortunately, it seems only to guarantee those that get the death penalty won’t commit murder again.

In light of recent cases where DNA cleared some people on death row, I’m having to re-think my pro death stance.

Okay, seriously this time. In some cases there are criminals who just can not be rehabilitated. These criminals are put to death because they can no longer provide anything for society, and would be nothing more than a drain. Also, it provides some measure of revenge. Both of these can be debated, I suppose, but I imagine they are two of the main reasons for advocating the death penalty.

EDIT: Plus ye olde deterrant argument mentioned above.

While I don't disagree with what you are saying (with regards the reason for advocating the death penalty, as opposed to being in favour myself) I seem to recall reading that it costs the US more to execute someone, than to keep them in prison for tthe rest of there natural life. I don't have a source for this, so I could be wrong.

It is supposed to deter people from committing murder. Unfortunately, it seems only to guarantee those that get the death penalty won’t commit murder again.

In light of recent cases where DNA cleared some people on death row, I’m having to re-think my pro death stance.

Seeing as how we don't have the power to restore life, how do we figure we have the right to take it? The death penalty is revenge, pure and simple. The politicians play off that desire for paybacks in order to get votes. It's all a ridiculous situation.

Negative; I've always been an advocate of no death penalty. Year after year after year is a much worse punishment. Imagine; you're locked in a solitary cage for your entire life. Think about how their mind would slowly descend into madness...much more of a punishment.
Solitary confinement is by far one of the worst punishments we have ever come up with; people who get the death penalty as opposed to this should be thankful.

While I don't disagree with what you are saying (with regards the reason for advocating the death penalty, as opposed to being in favour myself) I seem to recall reading that it costs the US more to execute someone, than to keep them in prison for tthe rest of there natural life. I don't have a source for this, so I could be wrong.
I've heard this too, but I also heard that it has to do more with legal red tape than anything else. So I don't really know.

Too either deter people from getting caught or deter them from doing it in the first place. Also it might give consolement to those who were effected by the criminal.I guess that's true. But, thinking along those lines, if you were to kill every person who does something wrong to make someone feel better...something sounds off...

Gods all. Its frustrating. The nice thing about the DP is that it clears out jails for petty criminals, but it is costly, messy (paperwork wise) and there is the DNA factor...

I am completely opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances as it is brutal, barbaric and has no place in modern society. It is wrong for the state to stoop to the same level as those who commit appalling crimes. The death penalty has never been shown to deter crime and the USA has a far higher murder rate than Europe. In Canada and the UK when the death penalty was abolished the crime rate went down.

There is no point in being tough on crime unless you are also tough on the causes of crime. I believe most crime is caused by social problems which are a direct result of the flawed economic system of capitalism. An end to the exploitation of the working people, a radical redistribution of wealth and a strong welfare state would be the best way to reduce crime.

The rehabilitation of people who commit crime is far more important than punishment. For this reason I am also opposed to life imprisonment which leaves no chance for rehabilitation. Fortunately in most European countries a life sentence does not mean life and in the UK it is usually between 9 and 15 years.

That's true. The life sentence is thirty years. Total.

- Politics
- Respect for some victims wishes
- Humane (versus life incarceration - especially in third world prisons)
- Save money (versus thousands of dollars for 25+ years)
- "Just Desserts" Revenge
- Limited General Deterrent
- Punishment fits with Gravity of Offence


I've heard the "costs more" argument too from an Amnesty International spokeswoman. Lets do some math.

Rope + Tree + Labor = Less
Round + Rifle + Labor + Cleanup = Less
Prison Construction + Food + Shelter + Labor/Supervision * X Years = More

Solitary confinement is by far one of the worst punishments we have ever come up with; people who get the death penalty as opposed to this should be thankful.
Exactly my point; it's worse, plus, if they're proven innocent, you can take them out and console them. Whereas if you kill them and they're innocent, they're dead period.

I personally like the idea that was used by old nomadic Gypsy tribes in Hungary, I think. If someone commited a murder, that person would be given to the victom's family. The family could then either try to rehabilitate, kill, enslave...their choice. Interesting idea, eh?

I personally like the idea that was used by old nomadic Gypsy tribes in Hungary, I think. If someone commited a murder, that person would be given to the victom's family. The family could then either try to rehabilitate, kill, enslave...their choice. Interesting idea, eh?

Victim based justice. The only problem is disparity in punishment.

Victim Family 1 has their son murdered, decides to be lenient on murderer and is set free.

Victim Family 2 has their son murdered, decides to kill murderer.

Messed.

Exactly my point; it's worse, plus, if they're proven innocent, you can take them out and console them. Whereas if you kill them and they're innocent, they're dead period.

If your going to put all major criminals in Solitary confinement, then thats a lot of single cells.

Unfortunately, a life sentence does not necessarily mean you will spend your whole life in jail. Sometimes parole is possible, even when they sentence you to "life without parole." Then there is always the possibility of commutation or pardon. If life without parole really meant that, I think more people would be willing to accept it as an alternative to the death penalty.

Just because someone is sentenced to, life doesn't mean they will be kept in solitary, they could be placed in the general population where they will have some sort of work and association with other prisoners. I'm not so sure that would be worse than death.

I've heard the "costs more" argument too from an Amnesty International spokeswoman. Lets do some math.

Rope + Tree + Labor = Less
Round + Rifle + Labor + Cleanup = Less
Prison Construction + Food + Shelter + Labor/Supervision * X Years = More
Um, you've forgoten about the legalizing paperwork, form of death used...this isn't the 1920's where white supremisists could just string up some unlucky African man and not deal with the consequences. Then there is also dealing with the family of the "soon to be deceased". Legal fights, paperwork, lawyers...there expencive.

Victim based justice. The only problem is disparity in punishment.

Victim Family 1 has their son murdered, decides to be lenient on murderer and is set free.

Victim Family 2 has their son murdered, decides to kill murderer.

Messed.Well, yeah. Just an interesting idea. Most of the time, though, the family just killed the murderer. Very few cases of letting the person live. It didn't work at all...creating family fueds and such, but interesting idea none the less...

Criminals should not be killed... They just should be locked up in prison for some time. Maybe for a lifetime, depending their crimes. Pedophiles, rapists and such should experience some 'clip-clip' -action before being locked up.

No, besides, rotting and getting beat (depending on your crime, your inmates might not like you very much at all) in jail is much more of a punishment.

I suppose the big question is :
"Why do we kill killers to show that killing is wrong?"
I forgot who said that, but it's a good quote.

In the UK, a life sentence equates to about 14 years in a prison, and you can probably get out in 8 for good behaviour.

I disagree with the death penalty, but I think the UK needs to take crime a bit more seriously. The human rights people have decided that television is the right of every criminal, as is excercise, education and keys to your cell (ok, I made the last one up).

I like the idea of them being rehabilitated, but shouldn't they be getting punished also?

There is also the idea that is beautiful about jail time. It is interesting to note that murderers, thieves, rapists, and the like can be in a jail together, but when you put in someone who harmed (emotionaly, physically, or sexually) a child, they dont usually last long before put throught what they did. There are so many cases and child molestors being raped and killed by a cellmate... :rolleyes:

Criminals should not be killed... They just should be locked up in prison for some time. Maybe for a lifetime, depending their crimes. Pedophiles, rapists and such should experience some 'clip-clip' -action before being locked up. :D *laughs*I TOTALLY agree... :p

There is also the idea that is beautiful about jail time. It is interesting to note that murderers, thieves, rapists, and the like can be in a jail together, but when you put in someone who harmed (emotionaly, physically, or sexually) a child, they dont usually last long before put throught what they did. There are so many cases and child molestors being raped and killed by a cellmate... :rolleyes:

In the UK, sex offenders have their own wing in the prisons

In the UK, sex offenders have their own wing in the prisons
Now that's wrong...but then, well...i guess a government has to look out for all of it's people... :(

There is also the idea that is beautiful about jail time. It is interesting to note that murderers, thieves, rapists, and the like can be in a jail together, but when you put in someone who harmed (emotionaly, physically, or sexually) a child, they dont usually last long before put throught what they did. There are so many cases and child molestors being raped and killed by a cellmate... :rolleyes:From what I have heard, Finnish prisoners don't care if someone in the same prison is a murderer or a thief. But rapists take some heavy damage... :D

Um, you've forgoten about the legalizing paperwork, form of death used...this isn't the 1920's where white supremisists could just string up some unlucky African man and not deal with the consequences. Then there is also dealing with the family of the "soon to be deceased". Legal fights, paperwork, lawyers...there expencive.

Paperwork? Meaning more paperwork than paperwork documenting 25 years inside, evaluations, rehabiliation sessions, parole hearings etc?

Families can be dealt with like they are with any other business regarding the state.

killing them is the only way to insure that they won't or can't escape and I also believe that the executioner should be put on trial for murder of the first degree in a never ending cycle. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

In the UK, sex offenders have their own wing in the prisons

Same in Canada. Some criminals have the decency to beat on pedophiles, so the institute slots them in a different wing once they've been identified as a 'goof'.

Families can be dealt with like they are with any other business regarding the state.If that is how you treat your people, I feel sorry for them.
And when I speak of paperwork, Seerdon, I understand that there would be much for one who had jail time, but the expences of punishment by death to obtain the paperwork for a DP positional takes time and a bankload to actually go through. So many people on death row spend almost as many years waiting to die as they would without the DP.

The purpose of it is to make right wing nutjobs look stupid when they want the ten commandants up in the court and to sentence people to death at the same time.

Same in Canada. Some criminals have the decency to beat on pedophiles, so the institute slots them in a different wing once they've been identified as a 'goof'.
I love decent criminals. *nods*

The purpose of it is to make right wing nutjobs look stupid when they want the ten commandants up in the court and to sentence people to death at the same time.
*waves goodbye to Ashcroft* :upyours: Woops! ;)

The death penalty is based on emotional revenge. Because really, the death penalty does not improve society in anyway. Nor does it scare criminals into not committing crimes, like many think it does, because the vast majority of criminals are depressed, and wouldnt mind leaving their horrible life anyway.

If that is how you treat your people, I feel sorry for them.
And when I speak of paperwork, Seerdon, I understand that there would be much for one who had jail time, but the expences of punishment by death to obtain the paperwork for a DP positional takes time and a bankload to actually go through. So many people on death row spend almost as many years waiting to die as they would without the DP.

The costs of life imprisonment, even for paperwork, outweigh the costs for capital punishment.

This is not so much about death row (I assume your speaking of American states and their death rows) as it is about aiming a rifle at someone and pulling the trigger. If we want to get into death row and specific examples, now were getting into the entire justice system (courts, appeals, blaaa) and that just sounds really unappealing :)

Logistical arrangements for capital punishment, ideally, will be better than logistical arrangements for life imprisonment.

The death penalty is based on emotional revenge. Because really, the death penalty does not improve society in anyway. Nor does it scare criminals into not committing crimes, like many think it does, because the vast majority of criminals are depressed, and wouldnt mind leaving their horrible life anyway.
That's a good point. Like someone mentioned before, having the DP doesn't mean lowering crimerates.

I like the Chinese death sentence, someone locks and loads an AK-47 and the family of the murderer/whatever gets sent the bill for the bullet.

I'd just take it one more step, and have them also be sent the bill for the fuel to get the murderer to the firing squad, the firing squads pay for that day, as well as money for biletting.

Oh well, I'm just a bit extremist, but if someone doesn't have the self-discipline not to kill someone then they deserve to be shot, and the family deserves to be out a few hundred dollars for not getting her/his arse squared away.

Plus, for us the death penalty would be cheaper because we use the 5.56mm shell instead of 7.62 which is about 2-3 times the price. :)

Seriously though, the money saved on taxes could (SHOULD!) go to the public education system.

The costs of life imprisonment, even for paperwork, outweigh the costs for capital punishment.

This is not so much about death row (I assume your speaking of American states and their death rows) as it is about aiming a rifle at someone and pulling the trigger. If we want to get into death row and specific examples, now were getting into the entire justice system (courts, appeals, blaaa) and that just sounds really unappealing :)

Logistical arrangements for capital punishment, ideally, will be better than logistical arrangements for life imprisonment.
Naturally. And dealing with such ideas might work in some cases, I do agree. And yes, I do live in the American states. Not that I like that fact either...*sighs*. But because I am dealing with the American Government and recognize it's many, many faults, I want to look at the purposes of certain political standings that I never really understood and am taking a healthy look at other countries and their views, systems, and power...

There are so many cases and child molestors being raped and killed by a cellmate... :rolleyes:

Not true.

I like the Chinese death sentence, someone locks and loads an AK-47 and the family of the murderer/whatever gets sent the bill for the bullet.

I'd just take it one more step, and have them also be sent the bill for the fuel to get the murderer to the firing squad, the firing squads pay for that day, as well as money for biletting.

Oh well, I'm just a bit extremist, but if someone doesn't have the self-discipline not to kill someone then they deserve to be shot, and the family deserves to be out a few hundred dollars for not getting her/his arse squared away.

Plus, for us the death penalty would be cheaper because we use the 5.56mm shell instead of 7.62 which is about 2-3 times the price. :)

Seriously though, the money saved on taxes could (SHOULD!) go to the public education system.Well well...that's interesting. O.o
Although, what would you do if the family refused to pay? Kill them too? THEN how would you pay for the bullets, firing squads pay, and whatnot?

The purpose of it is to make right wing nutjobs look stupid when they want the ten commandants up in the court and to sentence people to death at the same time.


Murder and killing are two different things, quiz-kid!

I suppose the big question is :
"Why do we kill killers to show that killing is wrong?"
I forgot who said that, but it's a good quote.

Actually it's to deter those who haven't kill, but think of killing (would be killers), that their going to get caught, and their not going to get away with it.

I'm for Death Penalty. Thats it's only for serious serious crimes.

Anyway, we have to take into consideration, that how many death penalties are there in a certain high criminal place every year? 1, maybe 2? It's not like it's happening on a normal basis.

And there's always going to be a 'one off' where someone was eventually proven innocent though he has already been executed. Our legal system ain't perfect.

Not true.Depending on your country. I know for a fact that there is a large (quiet) community of molestors being treated as they treated a child.


And I ment to write raped OR killed. sorry.

Actually it's to deter those who haven't kill, but think of killing (would be killers), that their going to get caught, and their not going to get away with it.

I'm for Death Penalty. Thats it's only for serious serious crimes.

Anyway, we have to take into consideration, that how many death penalties are there in a certain high criminal place every year? 1, maybe 2? It's not like it's happening on a normal basis.

And there's always going to be a 'one off' where someone was eventually proven innocent though he has already been executed. Our legal system ain't perfect.
But darling, look at the facts. It DOESN'T deter those who haven't killed. Yet.

Depending on your country. I know for a fact that there is a large (quiet) community of molestors being treated as they treated a child.


And I ment to write raped OR killed. sorry.

Sorry but I worked in one of the worst prisons in the US (San Quentin) for 15 years. This is a popular urban legend, just like that when you are in prison you are someones bitch. First of all, unless you told your cellmate that you were a child molestor, they would never know. You are more likely to get stabbed or strangled for insulting someone or stepping on their turf (disrespecting). I should know as I had to break up many potentially lethal fights during my time there. The secret to surviving prison is keep to yourself, don't take things when offered to you, keep your hands off of others stuff, don't stare at people, and keep to your own kind. There is a reason why people stick to their own race in prison, it is for survival of the herd.

Anal rapes of the prisoners are exaggerated to a pretty high standard. Most of those commiting those rapes are gay infact.

Murder and killing are two different things, quiz-kid!
How are murder and killing two different things? They both mean death, loss, legal action, costs, not to mention the emotional effect.

mur·der
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Slang. Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.


v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders

To kill (another human) unlawfully.
To kill brutally or inhumanly.
To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
Slang. To defeat decisively; trounce.



kill
v. killed, kill·ing, kills

To put to death.
To deprive of life: The Black Death was a disease that killed millions.
To put an end to; extinguish: The rain killed our plans for a picnic.

To destroy a vitally essential quality in: Too much garlic killed the taste of the meat.
To cause to cease operating; turn off: killed the motor.
To tire out completely; exhaust: “The trip to work, and the boredom and nervousness of jobs, kills men” (Jimmy Breslin).
To pass (time) in aimless activity: killed a few hours before the flight by sightseeing. To consume entirely; finish off: kill a bottle of brandy.



...looks the same to me...

Sorry but I worked in one of the worst prisons in the US (San Quentin) for 15 years. This is a popular urban legend, just like that when you are in prison you are someones bitch. First of all, unless you told your cellmate that you were a child molestor, they would never know. You are more likely to get stabbed or strangled for insulting someone or stepping on their turf (disrespecting). I should know as I had to break up many potentially lethal fights during my time there. The secret to surviving prison is keep to yourself, don't take things when offered to you, keep your hands off of others stuff, don't stare at people, and keep to your own kind. There is a reason why people stick to their own race in prison, it is for survival of the herd.

Anal rapes of the prisoners are exaggerated to a pretty high standard. Most of those commiting those rapes are gay infact.Im not trying to diminish the fact that you worked in a prison. I agree...the whole "prison bitch" thing is a total urban legend. And also, if you didn't tell someone what you did, they might never know. But I'm talking about a small, moderate security prison in Illinois. I happen to know -fact- that there have been multiple problems there regarding "punishment-by-prisoner" actions. No, I didn't work there, and no, I've never been. But when my father was sent there (hadn't seen the bastard in over 15 years) for molesting a girl who was my age (at the time), we were sat down by the arresting officer as well as a jail matron (can't recall his name) and they asked us if we would like him placed in a single cell. As it is, he was already there having serious problems with other inmates because *someone* had let it slip why he was in. We decided to keep him with his *buddies*.

[QUOTE=Johnny Wadd]The secret to surviving prison is keep to yourself, don't take things when offered to you, keep your hands off of others stuff, don't stare at people, and keep to your own kind. There is a reason why people stick to their own race in prison, it is for survival of the herd.
QUOTE]
Some people, many infact, just don't know the survival of the fittest rules...

...looks the same to me...


Nope, sorry, one is legal, one is not. Even God declares the two as different.

I'm against the Death Penalty not because we have the right to live - IMO it's TOO humane for the people who commit crimes of that nature. Those people should be forced to live out the rest of their lives, and be forced to remember OVER and OVER what they did.

Oh and ppl who say it would cost taxpayers money - force em to do a labor sentence

Nope, sorry, one is legal, one is not. Even God declares the two as different.
Murder: To kill brutally or inhumanly.
Kill:To put to death.

And how can God actually declare something...goodness. Don't tell me that he did for it is written in the bible. I've read it. I know. The bible said many things. Does that mean that what isn't in the bible can't be? Because we have cars...not in the bible...television...not in the bible...internet...definitly not in the bible. So, for the sake of the argument, lets leave god out of this conversation....

I suppose the big question is :
"Why do we kill killers to show that killing is wrong?"
I forgot who said that, but it's a good quote.
Beause life is ironic that way :)
But I've always thiught it was a terrible way to deter people from doing it: it rarely works. It only stops those who did it. But that helps little.

I'm against the Death Penalty not because we have the right to live - IMO it's TOO humane for the people who commit crimes of that nature. Those people should be forced to live out the rest of their lives, and be forced to remember OVER and OVER what they did.

Oh and ppl who say it would cost taxpayers money - force em to do a labor sentencemmm...labor sentence...

Murder: To kill brutally or inhumanly.
Kill:To put to death.

And how can God actually declare something...goodness. Don't tell me that he did for it is written in the bible. I've read it. I know. The bible said many things. Does that mean that what isn't in the bible can't be? Because we have cars...not in the bible...television...not in the bible...internet...definitly not in the bible. So, for the sake of the argument, lets leave god out of this conversation....
Actually that means cars are neither hood or evil, as is television, and more. Something not in bible is neurtal.

Murder: To kill brutally or inhumanly.
Kill:To put to death.

And how can God actually declare something...goodness. Don't tell me that he did for it is written in the bible. I've read it. I know. The bible said many things. Does that mean that what isn't in the bible can't be? Because we have cars...not in the bible...television...not in the bible...internet...definitly not in the bible. So, for the sake of the argument, lets leave god out of this conversation....

Just refering to the Ten Commandments.

Actually that means cars are neither hood or evil, as is television, and more. Something not in bible is neurtal.Right...anyways.

Well, I'm off. I need to work on some proposals and whatnot. Can't stay around all day. Thanks, though, to everyone who tried to help answer my question and for voting! :) Have a nice rest of the day!

While I don't disagree with what you are saying (with regards the reason for advocating the death penalty, as opposed to being in favour myself) I seem to recall reading that it costs the US more to execute someone, than to keep them in prison for tthe rest of there natural life. I don't have a source for this, so I could be wrong.

I think Amnesty international said it

I am completely opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances as it is brutal, barbaric and has no place in modern society. It is wrong for the state to stoop to the same level as those who commit appalling crimes. The death penalty has never been shown to deter crime and the USA has a far higher murder rate than Europe. In Canada and the UK when the death penalty was abolished the crime rate went down.

There is no point in being tough on crime unless you are also tough on the causes of crime. I believe most crime is caused by social problems which are a direct result of the flawed economic system of capitalism. An end to the exploitation of the working people, a radical redistribution of wealth and a strong welfare state would be the best way to reduce crime.

The rehabilitation of people who commit crime is far more important than punishment. For this reason I am also opposed to life imprisonment which leaves no chance for rehabilitation. Fortunately in most European countries a life sentence does not mean life and in the UK it is usually between 9 and 15 years.

I agree

Well, if we can bring up the bible and all that how a bout Gandhi?

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

Also, I think a labor system could work if we are carefull to not go all Gulog on the inmates.

I thought one of the 10 Commandments was "Thou shall not kill"

Not...

"Thou shall not murder, though thou can kill if most of everyone agrees it's ok"

Look, murder is just the name of a crime, but most people think it means killing a person wrongfully. Killing people is always a bad thing, folks, no matter what.

Case in point: A 15 year old girl was hanged in Iran for three counts of prostitution. The killing wasn't "murder", but hey, if the law of the land says so...it's ok!