The death penalty is wrong, if only because criminals (murderers) deserve a much worse punishment—life in prison.
well most murders would want to be dead anyway so you would be just granting them their wish. so i disagree with it. it doesn't work.
Alrighty, I think I am prepared for everyone to eat me alive. I believe in the death penalty. One may say, two wrongs do not make a right. They may say an eye for an eye will make the world go blind. But, think of another situation. For example, domestic violence. Haven't we been warned of it. "If they do it once, shame on them. When they do it twice, shame on you." A person who does bad things (i.e. murder) should deserve the death penalty. I even think sexual offenders should receive the same punishment. Prison for life is NOT a punishment. People have committed crimes ON PURPOSE so that they could go to jail. Think about it: free food, free shelter, free drinks. You can have some outside time to get your exercise in. Family can visit, so you're never out of touch. Life in prison is not as bad a punishment. And why should someone who killed other humans, innocent or not, be allowed to live? Do you really believe that rehabilitation will work?? Newsflash people!! Rehab may work on addicts, but it will not work on murderers. They have already killed a person or people. Who is to say they won't do it again? I believe in the death penalty, and I believe that the process of getting there should be faster. Then, it will serve as a greater deterrent.
So how does the Death Penalty directly affect you? Those of you who are against it. Are you against it because you've committed serious acts of crimes that could lead to that? I hope not. I'm pretty sure when put up to a vote, Society would vote that they'd rather have mass serial killers in a box 8 feet underground with no hopes of coming back up, then in a Supermax 20 miles outside the city limits, which is prone to prison riots and the occassional escaping from jail.
Those of you who are against it. Have you ever had a family member or friend killed by someone and you wish that someone was dead, or you'd kill them yourself? What then? What if someoen told you that they would be going to prison for the rest of their lives. Say the guy was expected to die in a few years. Is a few years necessarily long enough to understand their wrong?
That's my question. Guaranteed until you are sitting in that courtroom and staring at the back of the killer's head. Then again you could be Pope John Paul the second and forgive your shooter.........
Wait for it
Wait for it
wait, wait, are YOU affected by it?
We (who are against it) are talking about morality. About the hypocrisy of killing a killer. And then again, a lot of us are looking at this from a religious standpoint. Only God has the right to end a life.
So you see, each of us has a right to our own opinion. If someone killed one of my family members, would I want that person to die? OF COURSE!!!!!!!!! But why in the easter bunny's name should my emotion, my BIAS decide someone else's fate? A court decision is not based off of emotion. Just because I feel like that person should die, does not mean it's right.
Wait for it
Wait for it.....
Nah, I don't really care :P Why get heated, Gryffindor?
No, I don't think that any of us have been directly affected by the death penalty. Then again, most of us aren't directly affected by school shootings or ab.ortion laws either... but that doesn't stop us from debating them. :)
Eh, my bad it was on the spur of the moment and I was already pissed. My apologies.
Yes, I have been affected by it. Twice.
So if your BIAS doesn't decide it, shouldn't the courts? After all that is why they are there. The Death Penalty has been around since the beggining of time, lethal injection, hanging, electric chair, stoning, shooting, ect. Why mess with several thousand years of tradition? Why now? What makes today so much different than the past several thousand years?
Go figure. Censors are back everyone!
First question from Jaded. Yes I have. Twice.
Second, my bad for sounding so "heated" as you put it. I was already pis.sed when i posted it. My apologies.
Why mess with thousands of years of tradition and common sense. "He/She killed so and so, or tortured so and so. That person has broken the laws of society and must be punished. What is a simple punishment that one deserves for killing another? Keep him locked away to spend the rest of his life in a room doing nothing? Alright sure. What about those few who commit several acts of wrongdoing on society? Well they are too dangerous to keep around anymore. They had their chance."
Sit in the judges' stand. Before you is a terrorist who planned the bombings and mass murders of thousands of American lives. You are the decider of his fate. Life sentence at Gitmo, or face the needle. Remember your decision makes history. Also remember, that you might want to make an example out of him. Also remember that his buddies will go to the ends of the earth to get him back should he still be alive and in a cell. And finally, remember as a United States citizen(I think youa re, can't check as I type this out), WE do not negotiate with terrorists.
Wooooo that was heated for me.
Ok first off Gryffindor I'm sorry that you've been affected by the death penalty somehow, but people who aren't directly affected by it are still entitled to their opinion because of their own set of morals and beliefs.
Secondly, the whole thing about not messing with years of tradition is just an ignorant contention for the death penalty. As time goes on, we have to go on too, and if that means changing our morals and laws, then it has to be done. This is 2013. If we could still legally enslave someone where would we be today? Probably killing each other over the physical and emotional disaster that slavery caused.
If we didn't have the death penalty, a weight could be lifted off of America's shoulders and we could finally move more progressively towards bettering the other parts of our country. Also, then we could be like the other 97 countries that have abolished the death penalty which includes every country in Europe except one.
Thirdly, this hypothetical terrorist sitting before the judge waiting for the decision that will change his life may have some "buddies" who will "go to the ends of the earth to get him back should he still be alive and in a cell" but wouldn't they go after whoever killed him? Wouldn't they want revenge for the death of their "buddy"? So either way I see it with your hypothetical story, life or death, people will get killed. And if we believe that revenge is okay, the killing would go on and on and on....
So yeah, for me the reasons above and many more make me stand firm with my position to abolish the death penalty. For me, revenge is an endless barbaric practice. If we want the world to reach any amount of inner peace, America--and other countries--have to start by trashing legal execution.
'We could be like the other 97 countries that have abolished the death penalty'...
I'm sorry, but 'keeping up with the Joneses' doesn't strike me as a good argument for... just about anything.
But Mooo-ooom, all the other countries have cell phones! Why can't I have one!? :)
Yea, I had to reread my post again and I find a few mistakes as well.
From the Washington Post on the Death Penalty,"Retired British prison psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple has pointed out that after Britain abolished capital punishment in 1965, its homicide rate doubled. The types of killings that once would have led to the death penalty, such as murders by those on parole for lesser crimes, "increased disproportionately." Further, improved trauma medicine has reduced fatalities from violence by up to four-fifths. So, Dalrymple has said, in effect "the rate of homicidal violence has increased by up to 10 times."
Of course that is Britain.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah. That made me laugh for like 10 minutes. I'm not entirely sure why, but . . . :D
I've heard Dalrymple lecture online before. Man knows what he's talkin about. He seems like an amazing person.
2) I would argue that your shallow Progressivism is itself ignorant and outdated. Most Americans left it behind after the World Wars. Also, Europe is lame. :p
3) You cannot claim that legal punishment for a crime is "revenge" only when it involves the taking of life. That simply makes no sense. It is "revenge" in that sense even if the judge just makes the criminal pay a $5 fine. The Death Penalty is no different in any way other than its severity, which is why it is reserved strictly for very severe crimes.
Then again, I am from Texas originally. ;)
There's a difference between due punishment and petty revenge. When someone steals something we don't steal something of theirs; we put them in jail which is what we should do for every crime including murder.
And if it wasn't obvious, I'm a liberal so progressionism and moving forward is just my thing. ;)
Yes, there is. One is the work of an offended biased individual, while the other is the work of a disinterested third party. The difference does not lie in your own subjective concept of how far is too far. What if I think jail is too cruel a punishment?
Jail is not and neither should it be the sole punishment used by the legal system. We don't lock people up for J-walking, and neither should we for psychotic serial killers. Reserve it for those on on the two polar ends of the spectrum.
*Forced smile* yay Utopia.
I mean for those NOT on the two polar ends of the spectrum. Typo. :)