The Death Penalty

[perfect_fat]

China, Iran, the United States and Vietnam were the world's top users of the death penalty in 2003, accounting for 84 percent of known executions, human rights body Amnesty International said Tuesday.

More than half of known executions were in China, where the true toll could be more than 10 times higher, according to the British-based Amnesty's annual report.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=4764966

It's kind of a manipulative headline, china is responsible for the vast majority of that 84%, us has around 65 executions and china over 600.

Anyways, what do you guys think of the death penalty? I'm against killing in general, but if you've got a totally deranged psycho who's out of touch with reality, isn't it better to put them out of their misery sometimes, instead of paying for their meals until they finally die?

On the other hand, as many as 10% of all deathrow inmates are innocent, I heard that on A&E.

What's your take on it?

[Chrissi]

They not always 100% sure the people are guilty. I remember a long time ago when they found out that a guy who had been put to death ALREADY was completely innocent.. they gave the family a few billion dollars or something to "make up for it".

This is the main reason why I'm against the death penalty (and we don't have it here in Canada, yay). They're often not as sure as they think they are.

[lightdarkness]

I belive if there is enough evidence that i can be proven many different ways that they did the crime, then they should be put to death.

[usamablackbelt]

Why?
Money?
Because it will save us money?
It takes the perpetrator off the streets.

Then why execution?
There is a simple pill of a compound unknown to me.
Simple, nearly instant. Painless.

Electrocution.
Lethal Injection.

My understanding of Capital punishment is not a painless death.
Can the state not have humanity in its killing?

People want revenge.
Suffering.
We're not sure of afterlife. Even those who see hellfire in the executee's future. So there is the desire for his eye. From the taking of ours.

The state is made of the people.


Capital Punishment.

Toward our willingness to exact this punishment,
And our individual willingness to accept it,

Specforces

[Specforces]

^For some reason FFR is glitching and signed me in as that person above me, I've never seen that screenname before, weird, huh?

Specforces

[boccobrock]

I believe that the death penalty is not correct or right and that the people that are put to death should be given a second chance. The thing is, is that it is not possible to just not put them to death. Often the family members of the person that was killed, as that should be the only reason to put someone to death, wan't the murderer to get the death penalty. The thing is even though nobody really wants the person to die, we don't have any alternative. Putting them in jail for life isn't giving them a second chance, its just putting them in a concrete room, and wasting the goverments money. The best thing to do would be to try and find a talent they have, get them to contribute to society. But this can't be done without endangering other people if the murderer still is set on killing. So They can't give them a second chance and nothing can be done. That is why the death penalty is wrong and I do not like it, but I do realize that it is neccesary until we can find a way to let them become a better person without endangering others. So that is my statement on that.

On the subject of china killing so much, I simply think that they need to realize that by not being very friendly with other countries and by not having a vrey good goverment, they are effectively killing themselves. I think all of the asian countries need to try and make themselves better goverments.

Thanks for reading,
Boccobrock

[perfect_fat]

You also have to remember that china is a dictatorship and their population is 10 times the size of the united states, so they're close to equal per capita.

You can get the death penalty if you get caught with weed in Indonesia (i'm pretty sure it's indonesia). That's crazy.

But if somebody won't be rehabilitated, and I think we will all agree that drugging them up to the point where they're barely in touch with reality is cruel, and they are set on murdering more, they attack guards and other inmates, should they be put to sleep like a rapid dog?

[Specforces]

Firing squads, simple way to kill a killer. Cost-effective too.

Specforces

An unjust punishment.

MYTH: The death penalty is a fair punishment, because "the punishment suits the crime."
FACT: We do not use that same philosophy with our other punishments. We do not mug muggers. We do not rape rapists. We do not abuse abusers. There is no reason for us to kill killers.

MYTH: The death penalty is cheaper than life-in-prison
FACT: Because states require more prosecutors and longer cases and allow more appeals on death penalty cases, the average death penalty sentence costs the taxpayers tens of thousands more than the average life-without-parole sentence. In addition, while all the court proceedings are occuring, the defendant is spending years in prison spending the same amount of taxpayer money he would anyway.

MYTH: Lethal injection is painless.
FACT: There are many cases in which lethal injection has gone horribly wrong. Either not enough drug has been given to kill the person (sending them into excruciating pain) or a usable vein cannot be found (on heroin addicts.)

[perfect_fat]

chardish, got any sources to back up the cost comparison?

Originally Posted by perfect_fat

chardish, got any sources to back up the cost comparison?

Originally Posted by From: The Case Against The Death Penalty

The latest mode of inflicting the death penalty, enacted into law by
nearly two dozen states, is lethal injection, first used in Texas in 1982.
It is easy to overstate the humaneness and efficacy of this method. There
is no way of knowing that it is really painless. As the U.S. Court of
Appeals observed, there is "substantial and uncontroverted evidence ...
that execution by lethal injection poses a serious risk of cruel,
protracted death.... Even a slight error in dosage or administration can
leave a prisoner conscious but paralyzed while dying, a sentient witness
of his or her own asphyxiation." (Chaney v. Heckler, 718 F.2d 1174 [1983])

Nor does the execution always proceed smoothly as planned. In 1985 "the
authorities repeatedly jabbed needles into ... Stephen Morin, when they
had trouble finding a usable vein because he had been a drug abuser."(40)
In 1988, during the execution of Raymond Landry, "a tube attached to a
needle inside the inmate's right arm began leaking, sending the lethal
mixture shooting across the death chamber toward witnesses."(41)

Indeed, by its veneer of decency and by subtle analogy with life-saving
medical practice, death by lethal injection makes killing as punishment
more acceptable to the public. Even when it prevents the struggles of the
condemned person and avoids maiming the body, it is no different from
hanging or shooting as an expression of the absolute power of the state
over the helpless individual.

http://users.rcn.com/mwood/deathpen.html

[perfect_fat]

I didn't see anything about the cost there?

But I think it's logical to assume that after somebody dies, you can't ask them if their lethal injection hurt.

By the same logic, you can say "After somebody dies, you can't ask them if their brutal multiple stabbings hurt."

[perfect_fat]

Yeah, maybe it felt good. An orgy of pain so overwhelming it actually felt good.

See the movie "The Passion Of The Christ" and then tell me that would feel good.

[chillywilly]

There is an easy way to solve the whole inaccurate death injection thing. Shoot them in the back of the head. That is a kill 100% of the time (in video games). Or to many this more interesting, they could do six executions in a row (with suspected innocent people), and play russian roulette. Sure, it would piss a lot of people off, but theres a new reality show on FOX.

[frankiesmithra24]

Originally Posted by chillywilly

There is an easy way to solve the whole inaccurate death injection thing. Shoot them in the back of the head. That is a kill 100% of the time (in video games). Or to many this more interesting, they could do six executions in a row (with suspected innocent people), and play russian roulette. Sure, it would piss a lot of people off, but theres a new reality show on FOX.

The movie directors also use that in action movies.

[FishFishRevolution]

Don't bump CT topics with nothing to add.

[Kilroy_x]

It's possible to take a bullet through the head and live. People have done it. As for the death penalty, it's excessively costly, results in the deaths of innocents, doesn't serve as a deterrent to other criminals, is used highly disproportionately on minorities, and on top of that violent crime in states with the death penalty is generally much higher than in other states. Some have argued this is why the death penalty needs to be in place, others argue that the perpetuation of a mentality of justifiable violence through the death penalty erodes cultural mechanisms which prevent violent behavior.

There's absolutely no justification for the death penalty. The emotional rage of the family is hardly a basis for murdering someone, even when they're a murderer themselves. The only conceivable use would be if the death penalty was opted for by the criminal, but in that case that would imply life in prison was the less desirable sentence.

[devonin]

There's absolutely no justification for the death penalty.

What, to you, is the purpose of the justice/prison system? You've already said that it isn't much of a deterrant. The usual second listed purpose is rehabilitation.

What do you do for violent, dangerous criminals who are not deterred by prison terms, who have been determined by experts to be completely uninterested in rehabilitation, and who, if released are almost 100% certain to simply continue offending and being a violent dangerous person? Such a person is a danger to society, and themselves.

I'm not actually advocating for the death penalty here, I'm just pointing out a situation where one could argue it would be justified. If someone is a serial killer, unrepentant, intending to continue, and the best psychologists and psychiatrists have determined that they are simply never going to "see the error of their ways" and rehabilitate, do you really think that the justice system lives up to its name to make taxpayers financially support such a person forever?