Should the death sentence be used more?
- Thread starter Arizona Kyle
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I stand by my stance of within 15-20 minutes of conviction and sentencing they should be arriving at the morgue with a .45 in their headsJumpingbean3 said:
It's certainly a permanent 'solution' to a problem, if we can even call it that; and obviously locking people into cubes for decades isn't effective either. More thought needs to be placed into this area; instead of relying upon classical, often ineffective, methods.
Like killing someone?Master Steeds said:
Hell yeah the death penalty should be used more it would teach people that, hey yeah you can commit this crime but if you do you die simple as that, and I mean not a long winded trial to see if you die I mean if you are caught commiting the crime you get shot on the spot no chance to be found innocent. That sounds like a hell of a deterrant.
Well, if I was to order another person's death then I would want to be sure that they deserve it, possibly by reading their memories using a neuro-binary converter? And if they are guilty then death is probably not the best solution, I'd personally prefer to use them in medicine testing, much more ethinical than using innocent animals, at least from a animal rights viewpoint. Plus the convict contributes to the protection of humanity (possibly a mass murder could save thousand if he is used to test cancer treatments, I find this deliciously ironic).
I hate to break it to the kid who posts this, but keeping inmates on death row is actually the most expensive part of maintaining a jail, some states pay up to $1 billion. Moral iffiness normally isn't something i'm concerned about, but considering how hysterical people can get over a crime, i'm going to have to say scrap the entire fucking concept and get rid of capital punishment. There is no evidence that it is actually an effective crime deterrent, and besides, the prison system as a whole is too focused on punishing criminals and often has a way of making things even worse for petty criminals who turn into even worse criminals during their stay in the correctional facility of the United States of OhChristHowTheHellCanTheMostPowerfulDevelopedNationBeSoFuckingInept.
There are multiple cases of people being convicted and executed only to be proved innocent later. We have an appeals system for that reason, we have a court system for that reason. People so obsessed with punishing criminals have constantly without fail caused more damage than they will ever mend with their perverted and sadistic idea of "Criminal Justice."Swny Nerdgasm said:
If a murder/rape/child abuse case is considered serious enough that the person will never be allowed out of prison and the case is proven beyond all doubt (reasonable doubt is not good enough) then yes the death sentence should be used more.
I always think it's strange that deals are made to allow people to avoid the death penalty and instead serve life, if it was me I'd be asking for a quick kill rather than spending twenty odd years waiting. And it would save the government a fortune in keeping them cared for during their incarceration.
I always think it's strange that deals are made to allow people to avoid the death penalty and instead serve life, if it was me I'd be asking for a quick kill rather than spending twenty odd years waiting. And it would save the government a fortune in keeping them cared for during their incarceration.
wow didnt think that i would get this much response from people but i do like all your ideas and i do like that i can see both sides of the specturm on this both for and against
But what if it's like... a zombie or something.Grouchy Imp said:
Also I would actually support easing restrictions on the death penalty immensely. I think once a case is determined to be premeditated 1st degree or especially egregious examples of 2nd degree crimes that it should be the jury and judge who make that decision, I don't like the idea of determining whether or not its a death penalty allowed case, if its a serious violent crime it should be automatically up for consideration. I would even support adding additional crimes to the list of capital ones, I feel that drug possession for personal use is tragic but not as deserving of punishment as drug smuggling, which should warrant death.
I have very mixed feelings on the death penalty. My gut answer is yes, everybody sentenced to life in prison or granted the death penalty should be the proud owners of a (not so) shiny new casket within a year of receiving their sentence. However, whenever I give the subject some thought, I consider the people that are or may be wrongly accused. Good examples of this are to be found in Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. Should people be killed for a crime they didn't commit? And what about people that are undoubtedly guilty but mistakes were made in the trial? Should there be vigilantes to hunt these people down as well?
In summary, I guess I'm trying to say that I am in favor of the death penalty, but our judicial system needs work to ensure that the right people are actually imprisoned and given the proper sentence.
In summary, I guess I'm trying to say that I am in favor of the death penalty, but our judicial system needs work to ensure that the right people are actually imprisoned and given the proper sentence.
Unjustified feeling would quickly change when it's their family members are on the wrong side of a murderer. If someone has proven themselves unworthy of living in our community by murdering it's citizens, I see no reason to keep them around in any capacity. I personally would have no issues with kicking them out of the community whether this means the state or country. Issue here is that I'd guess Australia wouldn't want them either. If it wasn't so expensive I'd have no issues with kicking them off the planet so long as they ceased to be a load or threat to society. Maybe if it was feasible we could make Mars into New Australia. Until then, we have to work within our limits.LegendaryGamer0 said:? That should answer itself. No question to you might be "unjustified" to someone else. :/
The dog analogy is flawed, because in many cases the dog is provoked. :/ Either way, that is another case of humans having a God Complex.
Humans can also be provoked. Not speaking of self defense.
A while back in the news a convenience store clerk disabled a robber. The tape clearly showed that the robber was no threat as he was laying on his back. After disabling the robber the clerk proceeded to unload his gun into the robber, killing him. It was decided by the police that the case had moved from self defense to murder as the threat had been clearly removed before the robber was killed.
This is presented as an example of provoked murder in humans. Other examples could include road rage, lover's scorn, parents fearing for their children, etc. Dog, lion, monkey, Martian, or human killing another human is all on the same playing field in my eyes. If an entity has proven it's self unworthy of living by killing people..... yada yada
I'm not touching the god thing.
This is a solid argument. However, it is not the job of the government to make everyone happy. It's just not possible. Tax dollars are going to go where many people don't want. However, the beautiful thing here (atleast in the U.S.) is that the federal government has left this up to the states to decide. If one doesn't like it and if it's that important to them, they can move. (Staying the hell away from Texas would helpLegendaryGamer0 said:
) They can give their tax dollars to a state that represents their view point on the death penalty. Don't bother with "They shouldn't have to...". I'm not asking them to move to Mars, just driving a few hours to another state or country would do just as well.
The death penalty has two problems:
Bleeding hearts who don't want to execute people
It's cheaper to keep people in prison for life
If someone is on the death row, they can appeal and appeal, which takes up tax payer money. It's more ethical and cheaper to give life sentences. In my opinion, it should be used more, but only once it becomes cheaper than the alternative.
And yes, we do need to install a form of self control in children, not self rightousness.
Bleeding hearts who don't want to execute people
It's cheaper to keep people in prison for life
If someone is on the death row, they can appeal and appeal, which takes up tax payer money. It's more ethical and cheaper to give life sentences. In my opinion, it should be used more, but only once it becomes cheaper than the alternative.
And yes, we do need to install a form of self control in children, not self rightousness.
But who are you to judge if they are unworthy of living?YouEatLard said:Unjustified feeling would quickly change when it's their family members are on the wrong side of a murderer. If someone has proven themselves unworthy of living in our community by murdering it's citizens, I see no reason to keep them around in any capacity. I personally would have no issues with kicking them out of the community whether this means the state or country. Issue here is that I'd guess Australia wouldn't want them either. If it wasn't so expensive I'd have no issues with kicking them off the planet so long as they ceased to be a load or threat to society. Maybe if it was feasible we could make Mars into New Australia. Until then, we have to work within our limits.LegendaryGamer0 said:
The dog analogy is flawed, because in many cases the dog is provoked. :/ Either way, that is another case of humans having a God Complex.
Humans can also be provoked. Not speaking of self defense.
A while back in the news a convenience store clerk disabled a robber. The tape clearly showed that the robber was no threat as he was laying on his back. After disabling the robber the clerk proceeded to unload his gun into the robber, killing him. It was decided by the police that the case had moved from self defense to murder as the threat had been clearly removed before the robber was killed.
This is presented as an example of provoked murder in humans. Other examples could include road rage, lover's scorn, parents fearing for their children, etc. Dog, lion, monkey, Martian, or human killing another human is all on the same playing field in my eyes. If an entity has proven it's self unworthy of living by killing people..... yada yada
I'm not touching the god thing.
This is a solid argument. However, it is not the job of the government to make everyone happy. It's just not possible. Tax dollars are going to go where many people don't want. However, the beautiful thing here (atleast in the U.S.) is that the federal government has left this up to the states to decide. If one doesn't like it and if it's that important to them, they can move. (Staying the hell away from Texas would helpLegendaryGamer0 said:
To respond to the Mars bit, I hope Negadon awakens and comes to earth. :/
Same point as before, who is to judge who is unworhy? You would be making the exact same decision they made to kill another, with no way to justify it without justifying their reason.
Now... the next bit brings in many more issues. What if someone lives in a certain place out of necessity? Be it job, family or what have you? Then, they have no choice to put up with murder.
Even then, there is also the argument that even if you move, other states are still committing murder. But, I am not even touching that one.