Capital Punishment For Murderers

[Iriska]

I dont understand you at all. Well, see www.belhard.com and send me your opinion. That all

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you drive 100 mph if there was no punishment? Would you baseball bat some car windows if there was no punishment? Would you clothesline someone that just gave you a bad beat?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's questionable to think prison equates to "no punishment". In fact, it's not even questionable, it's just nonsense.

[jbeckern6]

People who live in a civilized society have a social contract with the other people in that society. When you live by that contract, you are entitled to the benefits that the Constitution and Bill of Rights grant. When you break that social contract, society no longer owes you those benefits and rights. Now, it might be debatable that all murders break the social contract, but certain crimes, eg. raping and murdering an 8 year old girl, clearly break all social norms and the contract is invalid. In these cases, society owes nothing to the individual and if it is less expensive to end their life, then so be it.

[ALLEN CONRAD]

I have a few problems with the death penalty which also happen to be problems I have with justice system as a whole. The first of which is trial by jury of peers. I happen to believe that a high percentage of people in the jury pool should not procreate let alone decide my guilt or innocence. And then decide if I should be killed back or not.

My second problem is going to be the unequal way in which the death penalty would be dished out. I feel it safe to say that your monetary wealth(ability to obtain the best council) will make a big difference in the odds of a person being sentenced to death and it being carried out before you die from other ways.

[TheCobra]

True. When I was referring to many people on here have said capital punishment does not disuade people from committing murder, maybe they meant it does not disuade any more people than are already disuaded by life in prison. That's probably true ... so I suppose capital punishment does not add anymore disuaders. Hypothetical here: if there was no punishment for murder at all, how much would murder rise? Is morality, religion, or some other forces enough to keep the number about the same as it is now?

[aross76]

1. NO
2. NO
3. NO
4. YES
Many citizens have been incarcerated for many years only to be cleared by DNA evidence years later. This fact does not hit the front page of the newspapers as often as when the cops catch a murder suspect.
Giving the government the right to decide who lives and who dies is not a good idea. If you need proof of this look at the disater in Iraq.

[StregaChess]

Replies in bold...

[ QUOTE ]


1. Will it dissuade others from committing murder? ( Of course, no repeat offenders )

2. Is there more than a micro chance that the life sentence will allow an eventual release or escape? ( "America's Most Wanted" has aired many cases, so yes )

3. Does it cost more to keep him alive? ( Change the model so death is cheapier. No prolem. )

4. Is there more than a micro chance that the defendent is innocent? (Greater chance you'll die in a car wreck, so let'em fry )

There may be other factors that deserve consideration that I haven't thought of but I doubt it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you have to add such pompous statements “I doubt it” of course you missed many arguments.
Does having a death penalty undermine our position with more civilized and enlightened countries? (NUKE THEM )

On a more ceral note...

There is the moral issue of retribution and a just society requirements for a death penalty.
The death penalty is applied unfairly and with clear discriminatory results and it selects an arbitrary group based on irrational factors, quality of defense counsel, race of the defendant of victim.

There are many "key factors" ...

Who cares... kill'em all...

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetical here: if there was no punishment for murder at all, how much would murder rise? Is morality, religion, or some other forces enough to keep the number about the same as it is now?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard to say because if the government stops prosecuting murders, that means that revenge killing is also legal. Meaning if you kill someone, you fear no retaliation from the government, but might have to fear retaliation from those close to the person who was killed.

[StregaChess]

Xhad,

[ QUOTE ]
Re: Capital Punishment For Murderers [Re: StregaChess]
#9199948 - 02/15/07 06:00 PM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply




Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hypothetical here: if there was no punishment for murder at all, how much would murder rise? Is morality, religion, or some other forces enough to keep the number about the same as it is now?


[/ QUOTE ]

If you are going to quote please attach it to the correct person or reference their name. Otherwise it makes folks look like they said something when they did not.
Sorry to be a pain, but it’s just common sense, logical and good netiquette

[etxel]

Well, first of all I think man (and his/her actions) is a product of things that can be summerized in 1. His/her biology 2. His/her sorroundings 3. (For religious people out there) His/her soul. There is nothing else that I'm aware of that essentially determines whether a man chooses to do one thing vs. the other. Therefore, I don't believe in true free will. I think it is an illusion. For example, if someone chooses to murder someone else, why did he make that choice? Well, maybe he/she is crazy, maybe the person couldn't handle jealousy, anger, stress or whatever and so he proceeded to kill. Whatever the reason may be, it can always be traced to the 1. biological qualities to handle the stresses affecting him/her and 2. the specific stresses affecting him/her. And those 2 factors were imposed on the person, meaning that the person didn't decide his/her biology or his/her sorroundings. Therefore, is essence a person doesn't really decide his/her actions! More specifically every action man takes is a product of how his/her neurons respond to some stimulus (whether it be a stimulus outside of the nervous system or within it).

So, in a perfectly fair system, I think no one would be guilty of anything, since they can blame their decisions on biology and sorroundings which they didn't have control of.

However, having said all that, we've evolved into a society which tries to maintain order in a wold that is naturally chaotic and killing disturbs that order so a punishment is made to try to stop it. Well, to me there's no right answer, it depends on the case, but for the most part death penalty is a little extreme, I don't think anyone should have the power to rationally decide whether a man deserves to die or not. But I think cutting the killer's thumbs off would make it very difficult to shoot a gun or use a knife again, so that might help : ) And maybe the killer will later thank you for helping him control an impulse he had no control over.
I don't know this is all theoretical what ifs, me thinking out loud.

In general I think our society functions the way it is now and if anything I would move towards less capital punishment.