Capital punishment
-
@unknownuser said:
@bellwells said:
Stinkie, do you think 911 was the fault of George W Bush's foreign policy?
Not just his, regrettably. Remember that Sudanese pharmaceutical plant Clinton decided to bomb? Or the missiles that Bush Sr. had shot at the centre of Bagdad? (I was 13 or so, but I was shocked at hearing the reasoning.)
I think the perception of the US as a country that does exactly as it pleases, with no respect for international law or civilian lives, is severely p*ssing people off.
The sooner the US realises that "the others" aren't the agressors, the better. Should I add I'm not an America hater?
There is no question that the US does more good than harm. Just look at the level of our foreign aid. Who's first on site when there's a tsunami in Indonesia or any other disaster? I don't sense the same level of disdain for those who actually have "no respect for international law or civilian life", ie. radical Islamists, Robert Mugabe, the Mujahadeen in the Sudan, etc, etc, etc.
Edit: Sorry about continuing the off-topic nature of this subject.
-
@bellwells said:
There is no question that the US does more good than harm. Just look at the level of our foreign aid. Who's first on site when there's a tsunami in Indonesia or any other disaster?
So? I'm sorry, but surely you're not implying we should all go "oh, please, help yourselves, blow something up" because of the level of the US's foreign aid?
@bellwells said:
I don't sense the same level of disdain for those who actually have "no respect for international law or civilian life", ie. radical Islamists, Robert Mugabe, the Mujahadeen in the Sudan, etc, etc, etc.
Sigh. Sorry. I forgot to mention all the other baddies. That "actually" is funny.
-
@unknownuser said:
So? I'm sorry, but surely you're not implying we should all go "oh, please, help yourselves, blow something up" because of the level of the US's foreign aid?
No but it's a bit hypocritical when the U.S. and the UK trained those people to blow stuff up and supplied them with arms only a decade or so ago.
Back on topic, I think you lead by example, if "an eye for an eye" is the law then we are no better than the taliban.
-
@unknownuser said:
Back on topic, I think you lead by example, if "an eye for an eye" is the law then we are no better than the taliban.
Yup!
@bellwells said:
I know how fashionable it is for Europeans, especially, to turn their enlightened nose up at us. I can assure you that most of us here don't care. You will think that as arrogant, I know.
Right!
-
@unknownuser said:
@bellwells said:
There is no question that the US does more good than harm. Just look at the level of our foreign aid. Who's first on site when there's a tsunami in Indonesia or any other disaster?
So? I'm sorry, but surely you're not implying we should all go "oh, please, help yourselves, blow something up" because of the level of the US's foreign aid?
@bellwells said:
I don't sense the same level of disdain for those who actually have "no respect for international law or civilian life", ie. radical Islamists, Robert Mugabe, the Mujahadeen in the Sudan, etc, etc, etc.
Sigh. Sorry. I forgot to mention all the other baddies. That "actually" is funny.
I know how fashionable it is for some Europeans to turn their enlightened nose up at us. I can assure you that most of us here don't care. Don't take this as arrogant, take it as fact.
Edit: I did alter some wording to more accurately reflect my sentiment.
-
@bellwells said:
I know how fashionable it is for some Europeans to turn their enlightened nose up at us. I can assure you that most of us here don't care. Don't take this as arrogant, take it as fact.
Not "most" nor a "fact" in my book!Back on track:
Is there no sentiment toward less "compassionate" incarcaration...short of the death penalty? I'm kinda serious about the stock...and dead serious about compensation!
-
@remus said:
Mr s, i believe your argument is flawed.
In the situations you describe there is a risk of death, although in all these situations the benefits far outway the risks.
Capital punishment on the other hand cant really be argued to provide any measurable benefit to society. What difference does it make wether someone who has truly commited a crime is in prison for the rest of their life or dead? There are only disadvantages, in that innocent people may be wrongly killed.
You have demonstrated that my argument is not flawed.
Your response is painfully flawed.Capital punishment is exactly the same as all the other examples I quoted.
It is something that could possibly lead to the loss of innocent lives.
However, driving cars, for example, will lead to the loss of many thousands of innocent lives every year.
Most of us accept this as a price to be paid, albeit reluctantly, because of the many other advantages cars provide us with. Most of us are able to accept these deaths because they are usually reported to us very briefly on the news. We don't really have a chance to identify with them as fellow human beings. They are just statistics. In other words, we are prepared to accept this loss of innocent life because the benefits overall to society outweighs the disadvantages. We don't feel comfortable admitting it, but we have all made and accept this judgement call.Here in the UK a life sentence can mean 15 years. Often with "good behavour" taken in to account they can be released after as little as 8 years. They, unlike their victims, get to enjoy the rest of their lives.
That, to me, to quote a previous poster is immoral.Capital punishment does provide measurable benefits to society.
It provides justice (not revenge, before the liberal types start wailing) to the victims loved ones.
In a civilised society the state should have as its first duty to provide this justice to its citizens.
When the state fails to provide this justice then lynch mobs or vigilantes are the result.
It also serves as an example to those who would consider killing others. Most criminal types weigh up the pros and cons of their crimes. Put simply, is it worth commiting the crime and paying the price if caught?
It will not deter all of them, but I believe it deters very many.
Finally, and most importantly, if nothing else it ensures that the perpetrator cannot repeat their crimes.Regards
Mr S -
"Compensation", that sounds good. We'd be talking forced labour then? Acceptable to me, if organised in a humane manner.
Of course, not all work is suitable. We don't want Dennis Rader calling people to sell 'em magazine subscriptions.
In the case of people like Rader, I'm not opposed to life long solitary confinement. Though I must add that's just my sentiment speaking.
@mr s said:
When the state fails to provide this justice then lynch mobs or vigilantes are the result.
Really?
There's no death penalty in Belgium, but I have yet to see my first lynch mob. -
I don't want to get involved into a deep discussion, but as I think of myself being a caring person, I just can't justify a death penalty.
The strange thing is that the US is both the land of Christian fanaticism as the land of death penalties.
I just can't seem to remember the bible stating 'returning the favor' (=kiliing the killer) was a good thing. Quite the opposite actually.
Hey, but I am a humanist, so what do I know?
-
The strange thing when talking about death penalty is, that as long as people debate this on a distant level, they are oohhh so human and can't justify death penalty etc... etc...
However, most people - especially people who have children - would be the executioner, if someone did something very, very bad to their closest family/children...
Myself included...
-
Another slightly abstract note, i notice most (all?) of the people who support the death penalty on here are american. I wonder if the policies of your country of residence have much to do with the way people view it.
i.e. are people who have grown up with the death more likely to penalty consider it acceptable compared to those who have been brought up in societies where the death penalty doesnt exist?
-
Frederik, id like to say that i wouldnt kill anyone in revenge, although obviously that is purely hypothetical. The truth is i dont know how id react in such a situation as ive never had the misfortune of it occurring.
Having said that, i would be pretty happy knowing that such a person would be in prison for a considerable length of time.
-
@frederik said:
The strange thing when talking about death penalty is, that as long as people debate this on a distant level, they are oohhh so human and can't justify death penalty etc... etc...
However, most people - especially people who have children - would be the executioner, if someone did something very, very bad to their closest family/children...
Myself included...Points for being honest.
But I hope I will never hear myself saying something like that. -
There are plenty convincing reasons against the use of capital Punishment:
-
Denial of basic right - According to Humans Right Association capital punishment overrules our most basic human right - the right to life. Human life has fundamental value. The blessedness of human life is denied by the death penalty. Live is precious.
-
The possibility of error – Later investigations revealed many convicted individuals innocent which got death penalty in the past, and have been pardoned. Recent DNA investigation studies have shown the same thing.
-
Unfair Judgment - Generally, it is observed that Capital punishment is inflicted unduly on the poor and minorities. If you follow the data of these victims, you will find that the mentally ill, poor and people belonging to minorities form a large chunk of the total number. You can also notice a kind of racial discrimination this happens due to varied reasons. Because the poor can offer very low compensation the defense lawyers are often incompetent, resulting in losing the case. Due to prejudice and bias, poor people, and people from minority sections become soft target for such capital punishments, as unrestricted discretion has offered to District attorney. If any one wants to appeal then it becomes a burdensome process for him often resulting in denial of justice.
-
Lack of Deterrence - The purpose of any punishment should be deterrence from repeating the same act. But, according to the statistics available, the death penalty has not been effective in controlling the homicide rate. The studies have revealed the shocking truth that executions actually increase the murder rate. That means the capital punishment does not deter violent crime. According to a New York Times study, the last 20 years witnessed 48% homicide rate in states with the implementation of capital punishment compared to 23% in the states without capital punishment.
-
The prolonged uncertainty – The validity to the deterrence argument is annulled by the delays, endless appeals, retrials, and technicalities that keep persons predestined to capital punishment waiting for execution for years. In fact, we are not competent enough to carry out execution. This uncertainty and incompetence offers another great injustice. It is itself cruel and a form of torture.
-
Justifying circumstances - Sometimes, persons suffering from emotional trauma, abandonment, violence, neglect or destructive social environment commit such heinous crimes. These mitigating situations can have devastating effect on their humanity. So, it is unfair to hold them fully responsible for their crimes. It is our communal responsibility to show some sympathy to some extent.
-
By giving capital punishment, the family of the victim is permanently traumatized and victimized. They are often punished by their loved ones without their fault, even though they are innocent.
-
Effects on society – Capital Punishment is itself a premeditated murder. This is unacceptable even it is inflicted by state authority as it lowers the value of life. In fact, such act can only brutalize the society. "Revenge is essential" can become a society attitude. By witnessing such acts, our own mental makeup starts believing that violence is necessary to curb the wrongdoings.
In conclusion, capital punishment is a moral dishonor. The mockery is that the very civilizations that have no right to impose it, are in particular leading the traditions of capital punishments.
The economic malfunctions and cultural diseases in those very societies contribute to the violence. So, instead of inflicting Capital punishment, it’s our duty to provide opportunities for all people to accomplish a good life in a rational culture.
As Most Rev. David B. Thompson, Bishop of Charleston, S.C. said, "Capital punishment feeds the cycle of violence in society by pandering to a lust for revenge. It brutalizes us, and deadens our sensitivities to the precious nature of every single human life."
Jayashree Pakhare
-
-
Yeh, that about sums it up
.Great post Pete !
-
I didn't say that I can justify death penalty...!!
However, I do have my wild thoughts about it...@remus said:
Frederik, id like to say that i wouldnt kill anyone in revenge, although obviously that is purely hypothetical. The truth is i dont know how id react in such a situation as ive never had the misfortune of it occurring.
Thankfully nobody knows how they will react... I don't know that but I have a wild imagination...
@kwistenbiebel said:
But I hope I will never hear myself saying something like that.
It all depends on the severity of such an incident - thinking about it on a hypothetical level...
I don't know if you have any children, Chris... If you do, imagine what you would do to a person who had done something very, very (and I mean VERY!!) terrible to your son/daughter...
-
@kwistenbiebel said:
Which I hope will never happen to any of us.
Of course not... I was speaking about this on a hypothetical level...!!
-
@frederik said:
I don't know if you have any children, Chris... If you do, imagine what you would do to a person who had done something very, very (and I mean VERY!!) terrible to your son/daughter...
I don't have children yet (even though I got the age for it) ,but I can imagine it would be an overwhelming feeling. I can only hope I will be a sensible human being when something like that would happen.
For me, There's no way of telling that unless one experiences it at first hand. Which I hope will never happen to any of us. -
Self defense might be a better term than revenge, or even punishment...is taking another's life never so justified?
-
@unknownuser said:
Hey, if you don't see it that way, I'll snap your neck!!
I find that a very convincing argument.
Advertisement