Bye Bye Death Penalty

reactor25

This will probably be an unpopular opinion - but it amazes me that there are any states in the US that still have the death penalty. It seems medieval to me.

(From Britain)

I agree with you. The death penalty is counterintuitive (and not at all a deterent - something that any "punishment" should be). Killing someone for killing (or whatever) someone else is just silly. It's not okay for YOU to do it to others, but we'll go ahead and do it to you. Illogical. Mr. Spock and Dr. Sheldon Cooper would be with me on this one.

Unfortunately, keeping all these criminals locked up for their entire lives is becoming very, very expensive. So, I don't have the answer. I just do not believe we have the right to end another life for any reason other than necessary self-defense (the real kind - not the Zimmerman kind).

You referenced Spock and Sheldon in your argument-- too funny

Marll

Also, rough estimates are that it takes roughly $35,000 a year to house a death row inmate, way more if you add in legal cost of appeals and the courts. I can buy a .45 round for less than $1. Simple economics to eliminate someone that has already been proven to be a scourge.

and if that person you shoot turns out to be innocent?

Sucks, move on with life.

While there are cases in which someone is later proven innocent through new DNA evidence or whatnot, the percentage I'd be willing to bet is lower than most would have us believe. There is also an appeals process, 3 appeals before you're done. Seems fair to me.

So you say that killing them with a bullet will save $35,000 plus the money from the appeals process and then point to the appeals process as the fair way for the innocent to be saved from getting innocently executed?

What if a member of your family was stuck in this process?

Look, this is how I'd run it:

You commit murder (or other horrible crime) and are put on trial. You are convicted and sentenced to death.
You now have 3 appeals available to you, that should be carried out and tried in no more than 5 years.
You loose all your appeals in court.
You are taken to a chamber behind the courthouse and an executioner blindfolds you and and then placed the barrel of a .45 to the back of your skull. 1 shot and it's over. Justice served.

This is closure for those that are victims.

And to your question, if I had a family member tied up in this system, it would be hard, it would be an emotional roller coaster, but if they are convicted and executed, I would stand by that ruling. Legislating to the minority of people that may be innocent is a sure fire way for the whole system to unravel.

10acity

So how does the state compensate someone who was executed then found to be not guilty later ? Factual speaking this happened dozens of times in the 20th century. It's easy to say only execute people who are 100% guilty but we live in a society of due process, are u sayin execute people who confess. Google the west Memphis 3 and see about so called confessions.

The death penalty is overwhelming given to poor minority people. Despite what Fox news and the other right wing fascists say in this country poor black men aren't the only people who commit murder. Is the OP life worth more than mine? Cause God forbid her or an other blonde white woman is a victim in my county the DA in my state (NC) couldn't charge capital murder fast enough.


And I'm not even going to go into what Jesus says.............

Oh, no, please. Go into what Jesus says. You've been so enlightening already.

MFPAddict

This debate would be better if we had some

Marll

This thread depresses me. Whether or not you believe the death penalty is moral, there are way too many people willing to bypass the justice system and say they'd do it themselves.

Not only does that probably make you among the 10% of the human population that would gladly inflict pain on others without blinking, but it's so un-American. A huge point of democracy is that punishments aren't arbitraily doled out by individuals or those in power. If you want that, go live in an authoritarian state, and pray you don't do anything that would garner someone's wrath.

My parents are in their 60's. My dad is on dialysis - his kidneys are dead, he has a pacemaker, he can barely walk. My mom is only 4'11". A few weeks ago they were robbed in their home at gunpoint by three young kids - my dad apparently can't sit in the garage with the door open late at night and read without his life being put in jeopardy - in a quiet - mostly senior - neighborhood in Myrtle Beach. My mom always said that guns have no place in the house. She has since changed her mind. She will put a bullet into someone if she has to protect her own life and her home. And I don't blame her.

My man went out of town for a week and a half. He made sure I knew how to use the shotgun and that gun sat by me the entire time he was gone. I also had two knives closeby too. I will protect my life and my property.

I didn't say that people don't have the right to protect themselves. I can shoot straighter than most police I've seen at the range I frequent.

What I do mean is the sentiment I've read that "save the money of a trial, of the appeals, and take him out back and put a 9mm between his eyes." That arbritary-ness is scary.

I must have missed the post about arbitrary executions? There still HAS to be a trial, and appeal IMO, but once those are exhausted, the execution is a viable punishment and should be carried out.

Now that being said, you break into my home, all bets are off, you are an intruder and I'll put a 12ga slug in your chest. I'll give you one chance to retreat and after that it's time to protect my family.

WildFlower7

I'm an "eye for an eye" kind of person but at the least, I think public hanging should be the death penalty. Lethal injection is too quick and not painful enough.

I don't have a problem with the way things were handled long ago. When a woman was beat by a man, you could easily find 10 men to kick his *kitten*. Someone hurt a kid, the dad would probably take care of it himself. Now, criminals get some many rights and so much protection, tv's in jail, video games. It's almost like a strcit but free vacation for some of them.

THIS 100% ^^ Well said.:drinker:

ArroganceInStep

Look, this is how I'd run it:

You commit murder (or other horrible crime) and are put on trial. You are convicted and sentenced to death.
You now have 3 appeals available to you, that should be carried out and tried in no more than 5 years.
You loose all your appeals in court.
You are taken to a chamber behind the courthouse and an executioner blindfolds you and and then placed the barrel of a .45 to the back of your skull. 1 shot and it's over. Justice served.

This is closure for those that are victims.

I had stated previously that I was for closing loopholes, but why the push for doing it behind the courthouse? Those 5 years are what costs real money, not the piddance of the gas to get back to the jail, or the time for the accused's loved ones to say goodbye and find their own closure.

And to your question, if I had a family member tied up in this system, it would be hard, it would be an emotional roller coaster, but if they are convicted and executed, I would stand by that ruling. Legislating to the minority of people that may be innocent is a sure fire way for the whole system to unravel.

A) I'm not sure I can believe you here (nothing to do with you personally) but how could you possibly stand beside when you believe a loved one is being executed unjustly?
Some pretty smart people disagree with you. They wrote the U.S. constitution.

zoeluiisa

This thread has been really interesting. I think I assumed that most Americans wished they didn't have the death penalty- because all the Americans I know do. But from this thread it seems that they're in a tiny minority!

Thats fair enough, but what has made me feel sick are the number of comments along the lines of "Fry the *kitten*! Lol! Lol!!!" Whatever your stance, that's just wrong.

fightingdissonance

And how about the argument that keeping extremely violent offenders imprisoned for life poses a direct and immediate threat to other inmates jailed alongside them?? If there's no greater punishment over life without possibility, you become untouchable, and can do, frankly, whatever you want.

With respect, that argument is flawed in many ways. I'm not going to pretend to understand the US prison system, but I understand Canada's to a limited extent. First off, extremely violent offenders (we call them dangerous offenders who can be jailed indefinitely) are housed in separate prisons entirely with specific systems to keep them from killing everything in sight. Second, not all killers are by necessity "extremely violent". Third, many extremely violent people do not commit murder, commit other crimes and are jailed for them, yet seem to manage not to kill their cellmates. I have more, but I'm going to stop there because I think I've made my point that this is complex and there are systems in prisons to keep inmates from killing other inmates.

I interpret your untouchable argument to mean that already jailed for life inmates would kill other inmates because there was no greater punishment. That's really straying from the issue itself and mixing contexts, so I'm not going to respond to that point as I don't think the sub-society within a prison is the concern here, we're looking at society at large.

ArroganceInStep

I'm an "eye for an eye" kind of person but at the least, I think public hanging should be the death penalty. Lethal injection is too quick and not painful enough.

I don't have a problem with the way things were handled long ago. When a woman was beat by a man, you could easily find 10 men to kick his *kitten*. Someone hurt a kid, the dad would probably take care of it himself. Now, criminals get some many rights and so much protection, tv's in jail, video games. It's almost like a strcit but free vacation for some of them.

THIS 100% ^^ Well said.:drinker:

Because there was definitely no injustice back then.

CharityEaton

We all should have learned it by kindergarten: two wrongs don't make a right. It works for big stuff too.
[/quote]

Two wrongs don't make a right but every human being and animal alike uses some form of punishment. Not saying I would wanna be the one to carry out the action of a death penalty but I do believe that prisoners have a pretty easy life in prison for the most part(excluding the prison violence...I kow it can get pretty bad in some prisons) also, yes, there are many that have been wrongly accused but I blame that totally on the judicial system and the ability of lawyers to totally twist the truth around. Of course NO one can fully say that they can judge someone as guilty beyond a reason of doubt. ****, I can't even decide what's for dinner without some doubt that I should have done something different. They play on your basic emotions that MAYBE something was not right or maybe the person really is a decent person. That's why I say make prison a living hell, make it an actual punishment to go to prison. Don't give them an education and access to the internet and a tv. Lock them in a tiny cage and make them grow their own food, make their own clothes, clean up after themselves etc......make them work their butt off and be worried that ther might not be another meal....oh but that is cruel and unusal punishment..my *kitten* it should be cruel punishment otherwise it is NOT a punishment. When you punish your child are they asking you to do it again?? No way, you make sure it is something that will make their life unpleasant for a short time depending on the behavior that is how you determine the severity of the punishment.
you wouldn't send your 16 year old to the time out corner for punching another kid at school...first f all they wuld be expelled and you would probably take their phone, laptop, car away for at least a week...UNPLEASANT..not fun totally sucks...so why in the heck do we send an accused murder "to his room" so to speak, allow him fitness time, the opportunity to educate themself, the option to watch tv, and socialize with other prisoners? Sounds like a vacation to me. Sure we send him to his room for 15 years but really we just follow the whole "out of sight out of mind" theory. No state should have a DOT road patch crew...it should all be done by the states prisoners...they should be out ther manually repairing the roads. All those sections of grass that need mowed along the interstates.....inmates mowing with a push mower. They decide to get crazy and mow one another over so be it. Just saying!

DavetheHYNIC

@ marll <sigh> I'm not tryin to make u look silly..... But my blue crack was about your profile pic. If you have no profile pic on Mfp you are usually called a little blue person. See the color of the little man in the avatar is BLUE!! ( leaves this thread forever and has a better understanding of how a moron like Rush Limbaugh has 3m listeners)

Azdak

I don't have a problem with abolishing the death penalty, although doing so is not at the top of my priority list. My reasons against the death penalty are a combination of what I consider the practical and the personal.

1. The death penalty does not work as a deterrent--never has in any society and it never will.

2. There is no way to administer the death penalty that is 100% error-free. This is not a situation where 90%, 95% or even 99% accuracy is good enough. If taking a human life for unjustified reasons is such a heinous act that it deserves the death penalty, then there is NO circumstance in which mistakenly executing someone can be allowable. Ever. Especially since there is no practical justification for the death penalty.

3. I respect that it is possible that those who support the death penalty can do so for sincere reasons, even though I know few death penalty supporters that I respect.

4. I think it is important for society to model the behaviors that are expected in others. I think it sends a conflicting message to say that taking a human life is a horrible act and then justify society's taking of a human life. Instead of reaching for a higher level of moral behavior, we give in to our more base emotions, and I think that demeans our culture (I fully admit that this is a personal opinion, not supported by any data whatsoever).

5. By supporting the death penalty, we ally ourselves morally more with countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Cuba, the Sudan, etc. Is that really the moral standard we want to set for the US? Shouldn't we aspire to more?

I would also like to make it clear that being against the death penalty has NOTHING to do with being "soft on crime" or not recognizing the seriousness of the crime. That is a pernicious lie that seems to come up in every death penalty discussion.

ArroganceInStep

And how about the argument that keeping extremely violent offenders imprisoned for life poses a direct and immediate threat to other inmates jailed alongside them?? If there's no greater punishment over life without possibility, you become untouchable, and can do, frankly, whatever you want.

With respect, that argument is flawed in many ways. I'm not going to pretend to understand the US prison system, but I understand Canada's to a limited extent. First off, extremely violent offenders (we call them dangerous offenders who can be jailed indefinitely) are housed in separate prisons entirely with specific systems to keep them from killing everything in sight. Second, not all killers are by necessity "extremely violent". Third, many extremely violent people do not commit murder, commit other crimes and are jailed for them, yet seem to manage not to kill their cellmates. I have more, but I'm going to stop there because I think I've made my point that this is complex and there are systems in prisons to keep inmates from killing other inmates.

I interpret your untouchable argument to mean that already jailed for life inmates would kill other inmates because there was no greater punishment. That's really straying from the issue itself and mixing contexts, so I'm not going to respond to that point as I don't think the sub-society within a prison is the concern here, we're looking at society at large.

The reason death row inmates are so costly is because they're housed seperately and have added security.

People on death row are exclusively violent offenders (someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's the case everywhere in the U.S.)

Your point about violent offenders being jailed is precisely my point, they have the potential for a higher punishment.

Life without the possibility absolutely has everything to do with the argument at hand, because if the accused isn't executed that's the alternative. Violent offenders imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole are an extreme threat to other inmates. Knowingly exposing other inmates to that kind of threat, is in and of itself, inhumane, regardless of if they are a 'sub-society' or not.

MFPAddict

We all should have learned it by kindergarten: two wrongs don't make a right. It works for big stuff too.

You are so right. We should just have murderers sit in the corner!!!

fightingdissonance

Another thing: no one is born a killer. Killers are a product of society, then society kills them and calls it justice. We might do well to look at societies with low murder statistics and ask why ours produces so many more killers, rather than calling to just kill them all.

CharityEaton

I'm an "eye for an eye" kind of person but at the least, I think public hanging should be the death penalty. Lethal injection is too quick and not painful enough.

I don't have a problem with the way things were handled long ago. When a woman was beat by a man, you could easily find 10 men to kick his *kitten*. Someone hurt a kid, the dad would probably take care of it himself. Now, criminals get some many rights and so much protection, tv's in jail, video games. It's almost like a strcit but free vacation for some of them.

THIS 100% ^^ Well said.:drinker:

Because there was definitely no injustice back then.

sure thre was injustice BUT most people thought about what they were about to do. I can promise you people look at mecompletely different when they realize that yes, I own a gun and YES, I enjoy shooting it an NO I am not afraid to use it to defend my self and I also have every intention of teaching all three of my daughters how to use it...in fact my nine year old is a better shot than me. Do you think she will EVER have a boy try to be forceful with her.....heck no. They aren't gonna mess with a girl whose entire family knows how to use a gun. They are gonna be real nice to her. Not saying it won't happen but it is less likely to happen to her because if it does she will be prepared and ready to defend herself. Yes, we do plan on making it very clear that we are a family that owns and uses our guns regularly. You come to my door unannounced and I don't know you, there is a good chance I am holding a loaded gun when I answer the door.....for my own protection( I live in the middle of nowhere so this is a neccesary precaution for a stay-at-home mom, no police would ever get here before I would be long dead and yes, we have door-to-door people come all the way out here at least a few times a year and it scares the crap out of me). So, do you think many people in my town are going to try anythng funny with me??? Most likely they won't. I'm not dumb enough to think that random criminal acts don't happen but statistically speaking most violent crimes against women are not random acts...it is almost always someone they knew.

doorki

Look, this is how I'd run it:

You commit murder (or other horrible crime) and are put on trial. You are convicted and sentenced to death.
You now have 3 appeals available to you, that should be carried out and tried in no more than 5 years.
You loose all your appeals in court.
You are taken to a chamber behind the courthouse and an executioner blindfolds you and and then placed the barrel of a .45 to the back of your skull. 1 shot and it's over. Justice served.

This is closure for those that are victims.

I had stated previously that I was for closing loopholes, but why the push for doing it behind the courthouse? Those 5 years are what costs real money, not the piddance of the gas to get back to the jail, or the time for the accused's loved ones to say goodbye and find their own closure.

And to your question, if I had a family member tied up in this system, it would be hard, it would be an emotional roller coaster, but if they are convicted and executed, I would stand by that ruling. Legislating to the minority of people that may be innocent is a sure fire way for the whole system to unravel.

A) I'm not sure I can believe you here (nothing to do with you personally) but how could you possibly stand beside when you believe a loved one is being executed unjustly?
Some pretty smart people disagree with you. They wrote the U.S. constitution.

agreed

fightingdissonance

We all should have learned it by kindergarten: two wrongs don't make a right. It works for big stuff too.

You are so right. We should just have murderers sit in the corner!!!

Wow, an elementary wisecrack really makes your point. I'm convinced, let's totally kill them all.

pineapple1989

I'm in the UK, death penalty always makes me think of back in the "olden days" when we used to chop peoples heads off for their religion etc, crime seems to be manageable here without the death penalty, if somebody does something particularly horrible then they will be put away for life with the judges recomendation that they never be released. Seems to work. I always think of the death penalty in a small group of laws including euthanasia and prostitution that would cause too much uproar to be changed and too much of a backlash on the party that enforced it so I am suprised that a state has abolished it!

I think the death penalty could be a good deterrant but only should be used if there is DNA evidence proving guilt or something. But in my lifetime its never been legal so I think that I wont really know what its like unless I've lived somewhere where it is legal.