The Death Penalty

I continue with the argument that the death penalty weakens the State, and is the downfall of authentic government. Have a good look at your prison system, and the nature and attributes of punishments. They have all come home to roost on the people, who have to face more vicious criminals who have been hardened by the system. Rehabilitation is the solution, not some vicious self gratification in the twisted logic of punishment, which in the secret confines of prison is no deterrent. Public punishments are banned, because no public and no informed electorate would tolerate it.

The death penalty is as obsolete as the entire idea of retribution and blood feuds. Maybe capital punishment should only be reserved for those who torture people under color of authority and punish people for their own sick gratification. But even that idea should melt away eventually, once the cycle of punishment and retribution yields to the sublime depth of real civilization.

[Edited on 13-3-2004 by SkipShipman]

All you pro-death penalty people: What do you propose to make it fair(er) to minorities...whites time and time again go to jail and blacks are killed. ?

How about if you cold-bloodedly murder someone you die. PERIOD.

That would be fair.

We should be able to Protect others from harm without having to Premtively Identify, Locate and Destroy any and all possibilities which might harm others.

We are not premetively doing anything he has already killed someone, we are just making sure that he doesnt hurt anyone else.

Would you feel the same if this was the Man who tortured, raped and killed your 5 year old daughter?

Would he still just need understanding and rehabilition?

A little time out from socitey?

Or would you want his head on a stake?

Originally posted by Amuk
Or would you want his head on a stake?

hah, I think that we as a society are sophisticated enough to not resort to medieval-type punishment. I really don't see the difference (as far as making the victim's family feel better) between someone being killed, or putting them in prison for the rest of their life; if you want revenge, then go find the guy and kill him yourself, otherwise he can just be locked up. And there is also no way to be absolutely SURE in many cases that you have the right guy..if he is sentenced to death, theres no bringing him back once you realize he was innocent.

Originally posted by Amuk

We should be able to Protect others from harm without having to Premtively Identify, Locate and Destroy any and all possibilities which might harm others.

We are not premetively doing anything he has already killed someone, we are just making sure that he doesnt hurt anyone else.

First of all, the Premtive thing was only part of the example I was giving. As you will notice, when you continue and include the rest of my original post, it makes sense. I added in the Premtive part simply to include that also.

We should be able to Protect others from harm without having to Premtively Identify, Locate and Destroy any and all possibilities which might harm others. As far as repeat offenses go, that is more the result of 'failure to protect' others from an already detained individual. That doesn't make sense, unless we admit that with all our combined effort and ability, we cannot contain a single person effectively, and therefore shouldn't be entrusted to protect anyone in the first place.

As you can see, I immediately go into discussing someone who is a Convicted Murderer already as the post continues.

Just as you said, 'we are just making sure no one else gets hurt.' I agree that that is what should be done. The thing is, you're talking about someone who is already CAPTURED and CONTAINED away from doing harm to others. To then Kill them with Intent and with Premeditated Planning, is not only what makes 'Murder' a 'Murder', but it's also not nessissary. The proper containment of a dangerous individual should be possible, otherwise we should simply admit our failure to provide security, even from someone in Maximum Security.

Would you feel the same if this was the Man who tortured, raped and killed your 5 year old daughter?

Would he still just need understanding and rehabilition?

A little time out from socitey?

Or would you want his head on a stake?

Of course I would be insane with rage and would want him tortured in a million ways for eternity if I could have it. That is because we have emotions and they make us feel pain for reasons of personal loss, betrail, etc. Otherwise we'd all be like Data on star trek or something. However, that doesn't mean that is what should happen. Asking me in that state of mind isn't going to result in me giving a very stable answer obviously. But this isn't the point either.

What is done is done, and even though it is a horrible thing, the problem is contained. The duty of 'Protecting the People' from this Murderer is fullfilled. That is what it should do, we don't need our Legal System to Kill or Seek Revenge for anyone's Personal Reasons, Just catch the Dangers and Remove them from the rest of Peacefull Society.

That doesn't mean he needs a time out and it's all ok. Nor does it mean that he could ever be allowed back into the civilized area. They're extremely dangerous after all. They can no longer do any damage, no executioner nor a Body of Government needs to participate in an act of killing another person, either.

I guess in a way, the whole idea is not to have to drop to their same criminal level to get things done. Like they say, 'Talk is cheap' it's your actions that define who you are. We may say, Murder is wrong, but words come easy. How many different ways have we found to justify The Intentional and Premeditated Act of Killing Others?? I can think of a few without even trying very hard.

Yes it is f*cked up to have something like that happen to your or a loved one, nobody is saying it isn't. However, Our Civilized Society and Justice System shouldn't be about taking upon the responsibility of fullfilling personal revenge or payback punishments. It's supposed to remove the dangers and keep people safe, that's it.

I really don't see the difference (as far as making the victim's family feel better) between someone being killed, or putting them in prison for the rest of their life; if you want revenge, then go find the guy and kill him yourself, otherwise he can just be locked up.

And if it were my family that he killed I would cheerfully do just that. After all the chances are I will just be in prison 2-3 years a small price to pay. I guess I am just not as enlightened as some of you.

What most of you dont seem to understand is these animals dont get life they usualy get about 10 years around here. 10 years means they are out in TWO AND ONE HALF YEARS. Even if they get life that is only 20 years which means they are out in 5 years.

Does that sound like a fair price for your son or daughters life?

Originally posted by Amuk

I really don't see the difference (as far as making the victim's family feel better) between someone being killed, or putting them in prison for the rest of their life; if you want revenge, then go find the guy and kill him yourself, otherwise he can just be locked up.

And if it were my family that he killed I would cheerfully do just that. After all the chances are I will just be in prison 2-3 years a small price to pay. I guess I am just not as enlightened as some of you.

What most of you dont seem to understand is these animals dont get life they usualy get about 10 years around here. 10 years means they are out in TWO AND ONE HALF YEARS. Even if they get life that is only 20 years which means they are out in 5 years.

Does that sound like a fair price for your son or daughters life?

Most people who are on trial with the death penalty as an option have either that or life without paroll...we are talking about first degree homicide, people who kill for pleasure, and show no remorse, the kind who would gladly do it again. These aren't the kind of people who get out in 10 years.

I think the death penalty is a great idea if we actually used it. Yes people will die who are on death row that's why it's called the death penalty. We need to use it not say we have it and not use it. If we used it as intended then overtime we would have less violent crimes. I think the death penalty should be frightning say gunshots, hangings,etc. not lethal injection because it doesn't deter crime. Right now a murderer can go to prison on death row and be fed better than some free people. They get education and fitness. Violent people take the chance knowing that they won't die in prison...just better living for most of them. In the long run a death penalty that is used will be better for society. Why pay for a lowlife that will spend the remaining years of his life in prison? Why should he get free health care, education,etc.? I could think of better things for our tax dollars than taking care of murderers. How about you?

[Edited on 13-3-2004 by I See You]

Quote from Amuk:
What most of you dont seem to understand is these animals dont get life they usualy get about 10 years around here. 10 years means they are out in TWO AND ONE HALF YEARS. Even if they get life that is only 20 years which means they are out in 5 years.

Does that sound like a fair price for your son or daughters life?

No it doesn't. AND, in Canada, if you're a young offender, under 18, you get even less time, the MAXIMUM is 5 years, and all this does is give the kid a venue to network with others of his/her kind.

The proper containment of a dangerous individual should be possible, otherwise we should simply admit our failure to provide security, even from someone in Maximum Security.

That is the problem they are not.

How many of you have actually been to a prison or even understand the why one works?

I have.

These people are not in prison for life (see my other post) nor are they seperated for other prisoners they are in the general population which means that they are raping or killing that young pothead you used to know yhat got picked up for a half of pound or so.

I do not have the stats but I would be willing to bet here in Arkansas the average killer stays behind bars less than 5-6 years.

I'm not taking that bet.

Originally posted by Amuk

I really don't see the difference (as far as making the victim's family feel better) between someone being killed, or putting them in prison for the rest of their life; if you want revenge, then go find the guy and kill him yourself, otherwise he can just be locked up.

And if it were my family that he killed I would cheerfully do just that. After all the chances are I will just be in prison 2-3 years a small price to pay. I guess I am just not as enlightened as some of you.

What most of you dont seem to understand is these animals dont get life they usualy get about 10 years around here. 10 years means they are out in TWO AND ONE HALF YEARS. Even if they get life that is only 20 years which means they are out in 5 years.

Does that sound like a fair price for your son or daughters life?

You're right Amuk. However, the problem there is that the system fails to 'keep the dangers, which have been already removed and stopped, from becoming dangers on the loose again.

That is just retarded! They don't need death. Just simply keep the dangers properly removed. Killing everything will work. But so will correctly storing the harmful and convicted elements, which you already have and should be easy to do. Doing so also includes not having to 'Justify' specialized types of Murder. Or giving the power to Execute those special types of Murder to the System that has been made to Protect People from Harm!! Can you see how that is good for everyone??

Mojom, are you saying that neither Mohammed or Malvo deserve death?

Originally posted by intrepid
Mojom, are you saying that neither Mohammed or Malvo deserve death?

Killing them won't bring back the people that they killed. How is it any more desirable than sentencing them to life in prison? How do we determine who deserves to die, and who deserves to live in murder cases? We shouldn't, it is murder still.

I'm not talking about the removal of this problem, but where is the deterent. What about the next nutjob that comes by and decides "it's O.K. because the worst I have to look forward to is 3 meals a day, cable T.V., time to work on my memoirs and a slightly uncomfortable bed." I'm sure looking at death would stop some from getting their jollies from killing.

Originally posted by intrepid
Mojom, are you saying that neither Mohammed or Malvo deserve death?

What I'm saying is that neither Myself nor anyone else is Justified in making such a choice as you describe.

Unless of course, they believe that Murder is ok. Squabbling over the details of how this reason makes it ok and this one doesn't. or it's ok as long as it falls within such and such conditions...bla bla bla........is all just rationalizing it. So if you allow it under certain conditions, then someone else can have their conditions also and you should not complain.

Or it's NO all the way around.

Does this also include killing in millitary operations, be it war or otherwise?

Originally posted by intrepid
I'm not talking about the removal of this problem, but where is the deterent. What about the next nutjob that comes by and decides "it's O.K. because the worst I have to look forward to is 3 meals a day, cable T.V., time to work on my memoirs and a slightly uncomfortable bed." I'm sure looking at death would stop some from getting their jollies from killing.

Who said anything about Prison being some 'Getaway Spa' and all that sh*t. Repeatedly, this same thing is used to once again, Justify why this makes it ok to Murder the Scumbag. I've already said, the entire system is f*cked up and in many ways. However, this isn't about the various ways Prison Life and Prisons themselves are run. This is about Capital Punishment.

At the same time, I think if I was mentally disturbed or whatever, the Death Penalty isn't a bad trade for killing some people either. I don't even need 3 meals and all that stuff. So in this case, I suppose the Right thing to do would be to allow the system to Use Horrific Styles of Torture too along with normal capital punishment. Then that should be enough to make people stop, right???

Exactly how low do we have to go?? How much more must we become like the Murderers until we are finally safe???

Have you actually been INSIDE a prison? I work at a maximum security facility, and I was wrong, they don't get 3 meals a day. I forgot about jug-up, before lock-down(bedtime), so that makes it 4. As to lowering ourselves, I just don't see it. We didn't debase them, they did that to themselves. What about killing by the millitary??????

Originally posted by intrepid
Does this also include killing in millitary operations, be it war or otherwise?

In many ways I don't see how PrePlanned, Intentional and Willfull acts of WAR is different then other forms of Justified killing either. Just cause it's labeled as Military doesn't change anything. When England Invaded Scottland they used their Military, while the Scotts were just a large bunch of guys. This was still an actual WAR whether or not it's Military or just a bunch of people from different Geographical Regions Fighting to the death of something.

I'm not passing judgement on anyone here either. I'm not saying my way is right and anyone is wrong. This is just how I see it. Personally, I feel that every possible alternative should be explored before having to solve our problems that way. I'm NOT saying I have the answer on how to do it either.

A defense that is so well devised so that your attacker get's his force put back on himself, while protecting the target would be the optimal idea. That way the more they continued to strike out the more they hurt themselves. Hopefully, at some point they would then learn the error and stupidity of what they are doing. If not, then they kill themselves as a result.

The point is, if I desire a world without Murder, War, etc. but instead want a world of Peace and Harmony, that is what I must work for. Since I cannot control all the World and make it the way I want but can only control myself and my actions, then that is what I must do, and I must do it without compromise. Peace is only going to be by Creating and Allowing Peace. To think that I can achieve the Result of Peace but using Muderous acts to remove everything which is Murderous and against peace is just not possible. Do you see what I'm saying?? If I desire Apples then I should create apples, I don't need to go destroy all the oranges, bannans, lemons, etc. Does that make more sense??

EDIT: I'm NOT saying I have the answer on how to do it either......(sorry, I wish I had the answer here)

[Edited on 13-3-2004 by mOjOm]