Poll: Death Penalty

[Graustein]

Dude, Im not trying to debate who the evilest bastard in history was, I'm just (unsuccessfully) trying to make a point, using the highly publicized Hitler as an example. You do point out the grey area in the topic, is living in prison all your life better or worse than death? And which penatly do we bestow upon the worlds Hitlers, Stalins or Maos?

Me neither, but rossadti brought it up and the historian in me couldn't resist throwing in an analysis.

I say a lifetime in prison is both worse than death and reversible should a mistake be made. Hopefully the mistake would be recognised before it's too late.

 

[Ultrajoe]

Dude, Im not trying to debate who the evilest bastard in history was, I'm just (unsuccessfully) trying to make a point, using the highly publicized Hitler as an example. You do point out the grey area in the topic, is living in prison all your life better or worse than death? And which penatly do we bestow upon the worlds Hitlers, Stalins or Maos?

Me neither, but rossadti brought it up and the historian in me couldn't resist throwing in an analysis.

I say a lifetime in prison is both worse than death and reversible should a mistake be made. Hopefully the mistake would be recognised before it's too late.

And cheaper.

 

[Perwer]

Yes and no. No because you can in most cases not say with a 100% certainty say who did it. Yes because some people doesn't change, they will remain a menace to their surroundings for the rest of their lives. Also they are a lot more expensive to keep alive. Cold-hearted? Yes, but effective.

 

[ultra_v_89]

"Where would Christianity be if Jesus got eight to fifteen years with time off for good behaviour?" - James Donavon

Do... do you even read what you type?

Its all very well to re-word a sentence and call it a new one, but it would seem you have not learned a lesson!

You and i differ on fundamental points, making this a very pointless argument, and so i think it would be best if we swept those comments under the rug.

Sir, I included this quote soley for entertainment purposes. This was in no way, shape or form meant to add credence to either arguement. Also, its fundamental differences which make this such a contraversial topic, we all differ, which is why the poll results are fairly even.I respect your opinion and merely wished to add my own.

 

[Graustein]

Dude, Im not trying to debate who the evilest bastard in history was, I'm just (unsuccessfully) trying to make a point, using the highly publicized Hitler as an example. You do point out the grey area in the topic, is living in prison all your life better or worse than death? And which penatly do we bestow upon the worlds Hitlers, Stalins or Maos?

Me neither, but rossadti brought it up and the historian in me couldn't resist throwing in an analysis.

I say a lifetime in prison is both worse than death and reversible should a mistake be made. Hopefully the mistake would be recognised before it's too late.

And cheaper.

Well yes, but I don't consider the cost a valid reason in either direction. This IS a person's life we're talking about.

 

[rossatdi]

Frankly I think the Holocaust is overrated.

Funny how things seem out of context isn't it!

I'd like to think keeping in Hitler in jail for a lifetime would allow one representative for each murdered jew/gypsy/homosexual/catholic/disabled person/etc to kick him in the balls once. You'd need to go at a rate of about 500 a day, but I think the world would enjoy that.

500 kicks to the balls * 350 days (give him a couple of days off for interviews, medical treatment, we're not monsters after all.)

175,000/year

6 million/ 175,000 = 34 years.

That's comically close a standard life sentence.

 

[irrelevantnugget]

Bumbersticker: "Why do we kill people to show people that killing people is wrong?"

It's a common misconception.
People end up in court and get sentenced for their deeds, yes.
But the motive for the sentence is not revenge. People get put in jail so they would not hurt society any more. A person will be able to return to society when he/she has proven to be able to live there, which is why probation is sometimes allowed.

This is the theory. Personally, I think everyone can achieve redemption, but this will not always happen. Some cases have just degenerated into a vicious circle, rendering his/her situation very unlikely to recover in any way.

Now, let's look at the other side. Namely, the economical. Convicts are set apart from society, on an island, and they just live there under supervision. This all costs tax money from society, for people who might have a chance at redeeming themselves. But when a crime has been committed that a life sentence was decided upon, or even death penalty, I just don't see the point of keeping them alive. A life sentence is just a waste of money, the person him-/herself offers no merit to the people keeping him alive. It's a parasite, a free rider. People who get a life sentence won't return to society anyway.

So yeah. I support death penalty, but the motive of revenge is absent in my case.

PS: I'm Belgian. If you've ever heard of the Dutroux case and everything in its aftermath, you'll see what a disaster some convicts can be.

 

[Graustein]

Frankly I think the Holocaust is overrated.

Funny how things seem out of context isn't it!

I'd like to think keeping in Hitler in jail for a lifetime would allow one representative for each murdered jew/gypsy/homosexual/catholic/disabled person/etc to kick him in the balls once. You'd need to go at a rate of about 500 a day, but I think the world would enjoy that.

500 kicks to the balls * 350 days (give him a couple of days off for interviews, medical treatment, we're not monsters after all.)

175,000/year

6 million/ 175,000 = 34 years.

That's comically close a standard life sentence.

Brilliant idea! Although by the end of the first day I doubt he'd have anything left to kick, which'd be a bummer for the 10,999,500 others. (The 6 million were just the Jews, there were 5 million other victims. Of course this is just using the most common estimates)
So closer to 60-70 years really.

Oh, and take that quote out of context if you want, I stand by it. The Holocaust was horrible, but it was neither the biggest, nor the most efficient (in terms of kills/day) nor the least humane democide in the history of mankind, despite what common belief may hold.

 

[Surreysmith]

I think there would be no need for it if life meant that but it actually means 10-15 and then probation.

 

[rossatdi]

Oh, and take that quote out of context if you want, I stand by it. The Holocaust was horrible, but it was neither the biggest, nor the most efficient (in terms of kills/day) nor the least humane democide in the history of mankind, despite what common belief may hold.

But like percentage wise, he was pretty good for trying to take out an entire race of people. I guess he did pick a small target. There's only 14 million Jews in the world at the mo which means he managed to wipe out over 40% of the current population. I'm not overly learned on mass genocides but he definitely one of the major leaguers.

 

[Graustein]

Oh, and take that quote out of context if you want, I stand by it. The Holocaust was horrible, but it was neither the biggest, nor the most efficient (in terms of kills/day) nor the least humane democide in the history of mankind, despite what common belief may hold.

But like percentage wise, he was pretty good for trying to take out an entire race of people. I guess he did pick a small target. There's only 14 million Jews in the world at the mo which means he managed to wipe out over 40% of the current population. I'm not overly learned on mass genocides but he definitely one of the major leaguers.

That's using today's figures of Jews, I'm not sure on the specifics.

But there ARE some successful genocides in history, not to mention ones such as the natives of Australia and the Americas, of which there are less than 5% of the pre-white populations.

So even percentage-wise, I'm not sure how big Hitler was.

But this is dangerously close to a derail, so I think we'll stop here, k? Bottom line is that while the death penalty's too good for Hitler, there are others as well for whom the death penalty is too good.

 

[rossatdi]

But this is dangerously close to a derail, so I think we'll stop here, k?

Probably. Although I'm tempted to start up one to work out stats for all the great dictators of the world, for a kind of Top Trumps of Death.

Total kills:
Percentage of own population killed:
Countries invaded:
Years in power:
Average GDP growth per year of reign:

 

[vxicepickxv]

If it's not a serial killer, spree killer, or other mass murderer, life w/out parole is the best solution. It's not like other people are learning from the death penalty.

 

[Typecast]

If you kill someone, how can they continue to suffer?
Killing, whether it's 'sanctioned' or otherwise disgusts me. "I despise murderers." You win a lolly if you know where that comes from. Killing uncountable billions virtually however, is quite a turn on

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

revival!

I don't believe it should be about making them suffer horribly, it's punishment not torture.

 

[Di22y]

Thats up for the democracy of Britain to decide, if enough people want it then it's correct and if enough people don't want it then it's not.

Many of you are saying maybe it would better of locking offenders up for life, my response to locking people up for life is "wouldn't we be better of 'killing' them?".

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

Thats up for the democracy of Britain to decide, if enough people want it then it's correct and if enough people don't want it then it's not.

Many of you are saying maybe it would better of locking offenders up for life, my response to locking people up for life is "wouldn't we be better of 'killing' them?".

I have to disagree and answer with a Tommy Lee Jones quote "A person is smart, people are stupid", we are starting to get a mob mentality with the emphasis no longer on justice but vengeance.

 

[Di22y]

Dont take this the wrong way but how is locking somebody up for life better than executing them and how is one anymore just than the other another, what does it have to do with mob mentality?

Thats up for the democracy of Britain to decide, if enough people want it then it's correct and if enough people don't want it then it's not.

Many of you are saying maybe it would better of locking offenders up for life, my response to locking people up for life is "wouldn't we be better of 'killing' them?".

I have to disagree and answer with a Tommy Lee Jones quote "A person is smart, people are stupid", we are starting to get a mob mentality with the emphasis no longer on justice but vengeance.

Dont take this the wrong way but how is locking somebody up for life better than executing them and how is one anymore just than the other, what does it have to do with mob mentality?

 

[ThePlasmatizer]

Dont take this the wrong way but how is locking somebody up for life better than executing them and how is one anymore just than the other another, what does it have to do with mob mentality?

Thats up for the democracy of Britain to decide, if enough people want it then it's correct and if enough people don't want it then it's not.

Many of you are saying maybe it would better of locking offenders up for life, my response to locking people up for life is "wouldn't we be better of 'killing' them?".

I have to disagree and answer with a Tommy Lee Jones quote "A person is smart, people are stupid", we are starting to get a mob mentality with the emphasis no longer on justice but vengeance.

Dont take this the wrong way but how is locking somebody up for life better than executing them and how is one anymore just than the other, what does it have to do with mob mentality?

We don't have the right to take their lives, doesn't that make us guilty as well or do you believe in legal murder?

When I'm talking about mob mentatlity I mean people now turn into snarling packs of animals screaming for blood when they have been wronged.