The Death Penalty 2014-01-24, 16:59:32 We have several countries represented here, each with its own approach to this matter, so there should be lots of views on it. Maybe you agree with the approach in your country or maybe you don't.The question is;When can a Death Sentence be appropriate punishment?
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #2 – 2014-01-24, 18:12:17 This is a boring topic. There can only be two views: for and against. However, the nuances or reasons to support one or the other can make it interesting. I think capital punishment is justifiable if it's propertionate to the crime, just, swift, and secure. To be proportionate, it must be applied only to murderers. For the punishment to be just, the murderer must have pre-meditated the act and show no signs of regret. To be secure, the convicted must be the actual murderer beyond any doubt. Also the legal system and courts of law must be free from delay, ill will and corruption. Since all these aspects never come together, my answer is that death penalty is hardly ever justifiable. The courts and laws in my country are so corrupt that it's only right that the capital punishment is not applicable here.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #3 – 2014-01-24, 23:25:55 Murders, pedifiles and stupid people. They should designate one whole state to those types of people and let them have at it. That way the system isn't necessarily eliminating them, just setting it up.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #4 – 2014-01-24, 23:54:46 The world would be a lot safer without a lot of people - not just murderers.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #5 – 2014-01-25, 04:04:32 I feel that the Death Penalty is appropriate for the most heinous of crimes only when it is absolutely certain, either by confession, & corroboration -- or -- by irrefutable evidence by a unanimous vote of a jury of peers, & the sentence of death must be carried out swiftly if not immediately. If that can't be the case, then I am against the death penalty.......Otherwise, for those most heinous of crimes, as I have outlined in another thread, I'm all for bringing back the 1930's style of American penal institution that featured 'chain gangs', slop on the plate twice daily, & 'hard' labor -- emphasis on the word 'hard', without any possibility of parole, for life. Here 'Chain Gang' criminals dig out the mountain track with hand tools (sledge hammer, shovels, pick axe, etc), remove all the rubble, & then lay all the track from dawn to dusk, 6 days a week, every week of the year.....year after year under armed guard, until death separates them from their tools.BTW.....no Cable Color TV or other similar niceties on their off day. On that day they bury the dead, & wash....not necessarily in that order. Last Edit: 2014-01-25, 05:09:55 by SmileyFaze
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #6 – 2014-01-25, 11:47:52 Quote from: ersi on 2014-01-24, 18:12:17I think capital punishment is justifiable if it's propertionate to the crime, just, swift, and secure.Military laws are one thing, civilian laws a different one. I suppose that the thread refers to death penalty regarding civilian societies. In such case, death penalty is never justifiable for the following reasons.The reason to be for penalties, in advanced civilized societies, has three objectives, all of them fundamental:a) To be a punishment for the individual so he doesn't commit the same behavior/practice again.b) To be an example for the other individuals so they don't do it.c) To be a way of rehabilitation so the once criminal can reintegrate into society again.As obvious, death penalty contradicts the last objective - in fact, it is substituted by a primitive impulse, Revenge. It's not even clear if death penalty has any value regarding objective b). Ahh, it is reported to work very well regarding a)...But there's more reasons against death penalty from a pure law point of view, its irreversibility in case of error being just the first one. The second problem would be indemnity in case of error, how much does your life values? And there's torture. All forms of death penalty are, as obvious, simultaneously a torture. There's a third order of reason, which is more from philosophy of politics, has the State - basically just a concept - the right to kill the ones it represents? I think not.And there's moral. To kill, in times of peace and out of legitimate self defense, it's morally wrong. Period.Therefore, no one should endorse the "State" to kill in his name.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #8 – 2014-01-25, 12:49:37 Quote from: Belfrager on 2014-01-25, 11:47:52Military laws are one thing, civilian laws a different one. I suppose that the thread refers to death penalty regarding civilian societies. In such case, death penalty is never justifiable for the following reasons.I agree with all the reasons you provide to reject the death penalty. However, I disagree with the generalisation that it's never justifiable and that military law and civilian law are strictly apart. Wars may last for years or decades, so the "order" under them is not so temporary or irrelevant to the discussion.My generalisation is that death penalty looks impracticable in every way, no matter how well intended. Still, there are cases when it has an effect to deter a bigger evil. Granted, those cases are specific and limited. In general the death penalty is impracticable.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #9 – 2014-01-25, 15:20:08 I'm against the death penalty under any circumstances. The major problem with it is that people have been executed who were later found to have been innocent. The following site provides 10 examples of justice gone wrong. It's clear to me that this is the tip of an historical iceberg.http://listverse.com/2013/04/09/10-innocent-people-sentenced-to-death/
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #10 – 2014-01-26, 14:26:13 Actually I did not mean just civilian penalties.In the latter case there's a whole plethora of considerations for example one could argue that war itself is a form of outsourcing the death penalty to the commanders in the field This is because a commander can decide who his troops are going to attack and thus, probably kill. I don't know how far one can take that downwards in the chain of command, from the politician who declares war, through the general planning an attack that will maximise fatalities on the enemy's side to the soldier tasked with deciding who to aim at on a battlefield.I was watching a debate on the justifiability of wars, and the concept of a "Just War" was brought up. Apparently a Just War is not about murder but about killing on behalf of a legitimate government. A curious notion, no doubt of interest to the usual culprits, the politicians. Then it's OK.Apparently.As has been mentioned, a major difficulty in agreeing the concept of a death penalty is the security of the verdict. There have been so many cases where mistakes have been made and, from my perspective, where th penalty was in accordance with the law but that the law was daft and merely itself an instrument of murder. One things of religious excesses and verdicts handed down to the mentally ill who were not responsible for anything they did.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #11 – 2014-01-26, 15:33:43 Since the prehistoric, State of War has ever been a separate "legal" occurrence. It hasn't borrowed from or intersected with laws of "times of peace"."Kill/not kill a criminal"? You consider death sentencing and remember "penitentiary" (ie confinement), but what about seeing the whole spectrum weighing in treating perps? E.g., depriving some of additional rights along with imprisoning? Then - maiming, or some other - more up-to-date - methods of "taming" the 'bad guys'?Because you know what? 1) You sentence a VERY bad guy to death - then it MAY appear that that guy was not so bad or not bad at all -- or 2) fearing killing a "good guy" by mistake, you confine all :bandit:s whatever they've been proven by court to have done, then -- what is the statistics about isolated "devils" having got to make themselves or otherwise occur free and not confined? Be it a parole/pardon after a long period and with the political circumstances changed - or just drastically changed "political circumstances" -- such as an uprising or war?
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #13 – 2014-01-26, 17:50:22 Quote from: Barulheira on 2014-01-26, 17:43:40Dead people cannot be punished. Ask a Catholic.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #14 – 2014-01-26, 21:22:52 Honestly, I think the death penalty is the easy way out. If it was worth it to them to commit the crime then it was worth spending the rest of their lives rotting somewhere.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #15 – 2014-01-27, 20:23:21 Quote from: Mandi on 2014-01-26, 21:22:52Honestly, I think the death penalty is the easy way out. If it was worth it to them to commit the crime then it was worth spending the rest of their lives rotting somewhere. See here
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #16 – 2014-01-27, 20:44:16 Sounds kind of harsh. It doesn't apply to all crimes/criminals in my book. Just the one's that would be up for possible execution.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #17 – 2014-01-27, 20:56:54 Quote from: Mandi on 2014-01-24, 23:25:55Murders, pedifiles and stupid people. They should designate one whole state to those types of people and let them have at it.Wow, that state would be the most populous state of our planet
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #18 – 2014-01-28, 11:03:37 Quote from: Mandi on 2014-01-24, 23:25:55They should designate one whole state to those types of people and let them have at it.I think they already did
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #19 – 2014-01-28, 11:05:32 Quote from: Jimbro3738 on 2014-01-25, 15:20:08I'm against the death penalty under any circumstances. The major problem with it is that people have been executed who were later found to have been innocent. Exactly. We cannot rule out errors, human or not, therefore no punishment should be irreversible.
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #20 – 2014-01-28, 11:20:11 Quote from: Macallan on 2014-01-28, 11:05:32Quote from: Jimbro3738 on 2014-01-25, 15:20:08I'm against the death penalty under any circumstances. The major problem with it is that people have been executed who were later found to have been innocent. Exactly. We cannot rule out errors, human or not, therefore no punishment should be irreversible.Irreversible? You mean keep the death penalty, but along with each such judgement also execute the judges?
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #21 – 2014-01-28, 11:46:25 Often, the lack of punishment is irreversible. (Here, at least.)
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #22 – 2014-01-28, 11:48:57 Quote from: Barulheira on 2014-01-28, 11:46:25Often, the lack of punishment is irreversible. (Here, at least.)Do you mean double jeopardy?
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #23 – 2014-01-28, 12:00:19 No. I mean something like this:Brazil: Criminal gangs set buses alight in Sao Luishttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-25607753
Re: The Death Penalty Reply #24 – 2014-01-28, 20:02:44 Quote from: ersi on 2014-01-28, 11:20:11Irreversible? You mean keep the death penalty, but along with each such judgement also execute the judges?That's a very nice idea...and the jury members, too.Quote from: Barulheira on 2014-01-28, 11:46:25Often, the lack of punishment is irreversible.You live in Brazil which needs to punish its football fans.
Topic: The Death Penalty (Read 17612 times)
