Is the death penalty as a punishment moral?

[GameSnake]

Also related: what would be your last meal?!
iago suggested to make this thread, basically asking your opinion on if execution for punishment is moral/should be allowed. Most countrys do not have the death pentalty, infact I think USA is the only common wealth nation to have it instated.
Myself? I believe the punishment should fit the crime, an eye for an eye of sorts.

[iago]

As I was going to say, it depends on the reason. 

The main argument I have against it is that people become accustomed to death solving their problems.  They (the families of victims, say) want revenge, and they feel like they get it when somebody is put to death.  When people get used to having problems solved by killing somebody, it doesn't seem so severe anymore.  The average person doesn't see to consider the death penalty a big deal.  When people get used to killing as a way to solve problems, it seems to me that they will be more likely to commit a murder. 

The main argument FOR the death penalty, I believe, is that it's a deterrant; however, I believe that statistics have shown that it makes no difference. 

[Joe]

They should be given life in prison, under most cases. However, if they're known to escape prison, and are master tactitions and stuff, making it to risky for them to live, they should be put to death.

[rabbit]

I am personally against it, but as a factual stance (my sister did a paper for this, I'll try and find it).  The United States is one of three major (I don't remember how "major" is defined, probably as a member of the UN) countries which uses the death penalty.  It has been statistically proven that all three nations which use capitol punishment have higher crime rates than any other countries.

[Blaze]

I don't have a problem with the death penalty except for the fact its possible to wrongly accused of a crime.  Sentencing people to death for a crime they didn't commit is just terrible.

[Armin]

Only if the crime is mass murder. Somebody mentioned in this thread that "eye for eye" is reasonable. If that was the case, the entire world would be blind. Everybody does something wrong at one point. Vengence isn't the answer, yet justice is (justice is considered a punishment that would prevent the person from breaking the law again). We're only human.

[GameSnake]

Eye for an eye as in you get what you deserve of equality, ie you kill you deserve to be killed, in lamen tearms.

[Screenor]

This is interesting, I watched a "horror" movie last night that somewhat has to do with this, it was called Se7en.

You should get the movie, old or not, extremely good.



I beleive death is too much, I prefer torture, death simply puts them out of their misery. Never death.

[Sidoh]

Yeah, but it also removes them from our world.

[iago]

This is interesting, I watched a "horror" movie last night that somewhat has to do with this, it was called Se7en.

You should get the movie, old or not, extremely good.



I beleive death is too much, I prefer torture, death simply puts them out of their misery. Never death.

Yeah, I've seen that movie many times.  They keep playing it on movie channels. 

Any way, what's the reason for the torture?  Revenge?  To make everybody else feel better?  That shouldn't be why people are put to death, because you don't want the common person being comfortable with using death (or torture) to solve their problems.  To be continues below...

Yeah, but it also removes them from our world.

If that's the only reason, then it's fine.  The person should be put to death behind closed doors.  They disappear, the world moves on.  When you start publisizing it, and when people want to WITNESS the death (I seem to remember them letting families watch somebody put to death?), that's when I think it makes the world a worse place. 

That kinda reminds me of 1984, actually.  The ideal solution is to make them realize that they did something wrong, and apologize for it, then be put to death.  Then nobody is going to end up viewing them as a hero/martyr

[Armin]

Eye for an eye as in you get what you deserve of equality, ie you kill you deserve to be killed, in lamen tearms.

I know what eye for an eye means, I don't think you understood/read my post.

[GameSnake]

Eye for an eye as in you get what you deserve of equality, ie you kill you deserve to be killed, in lamen tearms.

I know what eye for an eye means, I don't think you understood/read my post.

Somebody mentioned in this thread that "eye for eye"

I did read your post it and yes maybe I don't understand your post but it is my opinion if you kill somebody then you probably deserve to die, this is "eye for an eye" as far as I understood, and I was just pointing out my opinion on the matter anyway there isn't something to argue.

[Sidoh]

Hehe, that is pretty 1984-ish.  That was a great book.

Yes, I agree.  I don't know though... I can see exceptions to not publicizing a death.  The one I have in mind is Saddam Husein.  They were thinking of putting him to death by a public hanging.

[GameSnake]

Hehe, that is pretty 1984-ish.  That was a great book.

Yes, I agree.  I don't know though... I can see exceptions to not publicizing a death.  The one I have in mind is Saddam Husein.  They were thinking of putting him to death by a public hanging.

I would support that. 

[Ender]

It has been statistically proven that all three nations which use capitol punishment have higher crime rates than any other countries.

This doesn't mean that capitol punishment cause higher crime rates. It's that the high crime rates cause the countries to use capitol punishment as an answer for murders.

I'm personally undecided. iago says that it was statistically proven to be much of a deterrant, but I would think that it would be one. If those statistics are accurate, then I would say that it would be more advantageous to put these men on therapy in secure jails, in order to find out more about why he killed this person, what things in his life caused him to be a killer... basically do studies on the murderers to find out why they came to be murderers. It would be interesting to see those statistics though.

[iago]

Hehe, that is pretty 1984-ish.  That was a great book.

Yes, I agree.  I don't know though... I can see exceptions to not publicizing a death.  The one I have in mind is Saddam Husein.  They were thinking of putting him to death by a public hanging.

I would be absolutely against that.  You're telling people, "If somebody really pisses you off, it's a good idea to kill them".  That's not what you want people seeing. 

On the other hand, if Saddam were to apologize for what he did, and admit that he was wrong, then proceed to disappear complete (ie, be put to death silently), the world would be a better place. 

[Sidoh]

The thing is he'll never appologize for what he did.  Did you not see the footage from his trial?

[Super_X]

Eye for an eye as in you get what you deserve of equality, ie you kill you deserve to be killed, in lamen tearms.

I know what eye for an eye means, I don't think you understood/read my post.

Somebody mentioned in this thread that "eye for eye"

I did read your post it and yes maybe I don't understand your post but it is my opinion if you kill somebody then you probably deserve to die, this is "eye for an eye" as far as I understood, and I was just pointing out my opinion on the matter anyway there isn't something to argue.

If some one was killing some one that killed some one else, (ie. exicutioner killing murderer) Who would kill the exicutioner? That's why that doesn't work, every one'd be dead.

It has been statistically proven that all three nations which use capitol punishment have higher crime rates than any other countries.

This doesn't mean that capitol punishment cause higher crime rates. It's that the high crime rates cause the countries to use capitol punishment as an answer for murders.

I'm personally undecided. iago says that it was statistically proven to be much of a deterrant, but I would think that it would be one. If those statistics are accurate, then I would say that it would be more advantageous to put these men on therapy in secure jails, in order to find out more about why he killed this person, what things in his life caused him to be a killer... basically do studies on the murderers to find out why they came to be murderers. It would be interesting to see those statistics though.

The thing with that is the U.S. has most of it's prisons over stocked. It'd cost more money to build more prisons that can hold all of those prisoners, not even counting caring for them and feeding them for the next 20 years,  then it would cost to kill them.

Oh, also you owuld have to pay more gaurds more money to watch the prisoners.

[iago]

The thing is he'll never appologize for what he did.  Did you not see the footage from his trial?

Killing him publicly isn't going to fix what he did.  It's not going to stop anybody else from doing what he did.  But it WILL cause any of his supporters to be angered, causing more violence, and killing more people.  And for what, revenge?  How will making a spectacle of him dying make the world a better place?

The thing with that is the U.S. has most of it's prisons over stocked. It'd cost more money to build more prisons that can hold all of those prisoners, not even counting caring for them and feeding them for the next 20 years,  then it would cost to kill them.

Oh, also you owuld have to pay more gaurds more money to watch the prisoners.

"over stocked"?  Like at the grocery store?

And from what I've been told, executing somebody the way it's done in the US is more expensive than imprisoning them for life. 

[Armin]

Eye for an eye as in you get what you deserve of equality, ie you kill you deserve to be killed, in lamen tearms.

I know what eye for an eye means, I don't think you understood/read my post.

Somebody mentioned in this thread that "eye for eye"

I did read your post it and yes maybe I don't understand your post but it is my opinion if you kill somebody then you probably deserve to die, this is "eye for an eye" as far as I understood, and I was just pointing out my opinion on the matter anyway there isn't something to argue.

If some one was killing some one that killed some one else, (ie. exicutioner killing murderer) Who would kill the exicutioner? That's why that doesn't work, every one'd be dead.

Not really what I was trying to say. What I was trying to say is that everybody fucks up at one time and vengance just isn't the answer. Just today, I was accused of attempted arsen. We were at the carnival after it closed, and there was this car that EVERYBODY from my school had trashed. We decided we'd light it on fire because we thought it'd be cool and we were all really pumped up. There was cation tape inside of it that my friend and I ended up lighting, and the next second a cop put it out, grabbed my arm and basically said he was going to give me a felony which would stay with me for the rest of my life and fuck up my entire life. My parents, my friends parents, and the cop ended up discussing it, and they let us go home. I'll probably be let off with community service or something. See, I did something stupid and fucked up, would it really be fair for them to give me a felony and ruin my life over it? That seems more like vengence instead of justice if you ask me.

[Super_X]

The thing is he'll never appologize for what he did. Did you not see the footage from his trial?

Killing him publicly isn't going to fix what he did. It's not going to stop anybody else from doing what he did. But it WILL cause any of his supporters to be angered, causing more violence, and killing more people. And for what, revenge? How will making a spectacle of him dying make the world a better place?

The thing with that is the U.S. has most of it's prisons over stocked. It'd cost more money to build more prisons that can hold all of those prisoners, not even counting caring for them and feeding them for the next 20 years, then it would cost to kill them.

Oh, also you owuld have to pay more gaurds more money to watch the prisoners.

"over stocked"? Like at the grocery store?

And from what I've been told, executing somebody the way it's done in the US is more expensive than imprisoning them for life.

Well, we're talking about reforming the syster, kind of, why not reform all of it, instead of just part of it. We could do away with expencive gases, and melt down pennies and shoot them with american curency. (That's all it will be good for in like 20 years.)

[iago]

Eye for an eye as in you get what you deserve of equality, ie you kill you deserve to be killed, in lamen tearms.

I know what eye for an eye means, I don't think you understood/read my post.

Somebody mentioned in this thread that "eye for eye"

I did read your post it and yes maybe I don't understand your post but it is my opinion if you kill somebody then you probably deserve to die, this is "eye for an eye" as far as I understood, and I was just pointing out my opinion on the matter anyway there isn't something to argue.

If some one was killing some one that killed some one else, (ie. exicutioner killing murderer) Who would kill the exicutioner? That's why that doesn't work, every one'd be dead.

Not really what I was trying to say. What I was trying to say is that everybody fucks up at one time and vengance just isn't the answer. Just today, I was accused of attempted arsen. We were at the carnival after it closed, and there was this car that EVERYBODY from my school had trashed. We decided we'd light it on fire because we thought it'd be cool and we were all really pumped up. There was cation tape inside of it that my friend and I ended up lighting, and the next second a cop put it out, grabbed my arm and basically said he was going to give me a felony which would stay with me for the rest of my life and fuck up my entire life. My parents, my friends parents, and the cop ended up discussing it, and they let us go home. I'll probably be let off with community service or something. See, I did something stupid and fucked up, would it really be fair for them to give me a felony and ruin my life over it? That seems more like vengence instead of justice if you ask me.

Btw, that WAS really dumb to do.  You're damn lucky. 

[Armin]

Yeah, but did you listen to my point or my story? It wouldn't of been right for them to ruin my life over a mistake like this. If you've ever been in a situation like this, I'm sure you'd understand.

[Furious]

They should be given life in prison, under most cases. However, if they're known to escape prison, and are master tactitions and stuff, making it to risky for them to live, they should be put to death.

Them getting life in prison is dumb.  It takes our tax money, and feeds criminals.  Hell, some people may do crimes just to get the free two meals per day and have a roof over their heads, I go with GameSnake on the eye for an eye statement.

 "In Texas we have the death penalty, and we USSSE it...if you kill someone we will kill you back."

[zorm]

Yeah, but did you listen to my point or my story? It wouldn't of been right for them to ruin my life over a mistake like this. If you've ever been in a situation like this, I'm sure you'd understand.

It is absolutely right for them to ruin your life for doing something like that. Its called deterrence so that other people who have more than 2 brain cells think twice before doing stupid shit.

I'm all for the death penalty, it has its place and therapy just isn't going to help some people. If you look at how its used in America, normally only people who commit'd heinous crimes are executed. Normally people who are convicted and sentenced to death will sit on death row for 15+ years. Then I suspect most get a reduced sentence, cleared of the crime, or die of natural causes. Only evil people like Tim Mcveigh end up being executed with any speed.

[Sidoh]

"In Texas we have the death penalty, and we USSSE it...if you kill someone we will kill you back."

Some states are trying to abolish the death penalty.  My state is puttin' in an express lane.

 <3 Ron White

[Armin]

Yeah, but did you listen to my point or my story? It wouldn't of been right for them to ruin my life over a mistake like this. If you've ever been in a situation like this, I'm sure you'd understand.

It is absolutely right for them to ruin your life for doing something like that. Its called deterrence so that other people who have more than 2 brain cells think twice before doing stupid shit.

I can learn in a way other than my life being ruined. I already learned, and I know it was stupid, but if you actually think instead of being a jackass, it was way blown out of proportion. Nobody was around to get hurt, and the car was already totally beaten to shit because they had this thing set up for a donation that you pay $3 and you get to take a swing at the car with a sledge hammer. Now, what exactly was wrong? The fire company would've had to put it out, which is where I went wrong, and it was also against the law. I'm not trying to justify myself, I'm just saying the punishment isn't worth it. Is that really right for them to ruin my life? I have more than 2 brain cells, it was just a stupid mistake made at that moment. Don't act like you're perfect.

[iago]

Yeah, but did you listen to my point or my story? It wouldn't of been right for them to ruin my life over a mistake like this. If you've ever been in a situation like this, I'm sure you'd understand.

It is absolutely right for them to ruin your life for doing something like that. Its called deterrence so that other people who have more than 2 brain cells think twice before doing stupid shit.

I can learn in a way other than my life being ruined. I already learned, and I know it was stupid, but if you actually think instead of being a jackass, it was way blown out of proportion. Nobody was around to get hurt, and the car was already totally beaten to shit because they had this thing set up for a donation that you pay $3 and you get to take a swing at the car with a sledge hammer. Now, what exactly was wrong? The fire company would've had to put it out, which is where I went wrong, and it was also against the law. I'm not trying to justify myself, I'm just saying the punishment isn't worth it. Is that really right for them to ruin my life? I have more than 2 brain cells, it was just a stupid mistake made at that moment. Don't act like you're perfect.

When people were trying to deal with that fire, somebody could be injured or killed.  My neighbour was a fire fighter who died (due to smoke inhalation or something) while putting out a grass fire. Or, another building could burn down while the fire department is busy. 

My teacher's house burnt down, destroying everything he owned (including pets) and nearly killing his family, because some people nearby set fire to some garbage for the fun of it. 

By the way, the point of those (true) stories is that people don't think of the consequences of their actions. 

Perhaps if you were given that kind of penalty, it would prevent others from doing the same thing.  It would serve as a deterrant to others. 

But mostly, by telling you what could happen, they scare you enough that you'll never do it again.  Although the best case is if you think before doing it, but close enough..

[Armin]

Yeah, but did you listen to my point or my story? It wouldn't of been right for them to ruin my life over a mistake like this. If you've ever been in a situation like this, I'm sure you'd understand.

It is absolutely right for them to ruin your life for doing something like that. Its called deterrence so that other people who have more than 2 brain cells think twice before doing stupid shit.

I can learn in a way other than my life being ruined. I already learned, and I know it was stupid, but if you actually think instead of being a jackass, it was way blown out of proportion. Nobody was around to get hurt, and the car was already totally beaten to shit because they had this thing set up for a donation that you pay $3 and you get to take a swing at the car with a sledge hammer. Now, what exactly was wrong? The fire company would've had to put it out, which is where I went wrong, and it was also against the law. I'm not trying to justify myself, I'm just saying the punishment isn't worth it. Is that really right for them to ruin my life? I have more than 2 brain cells, it was just a stupid mistake made at that moment. Don't act like you're perfect.

When people were trying to deal with that fire, somebody could be injured or killed.  My neighbour was a fire fighter who died (due to smoke inhalation or something) while putting out a grass fire. Or, another building could burn down while the fire department is busy. 

My teacher's house burnt down, destroying everything he owned (including pets) and nearly killing his family, because some people nearby set fire to some garbage for the fun of it. 

By the way, the point of those (true) stories is that people don't think of the consequences of their actions.

The car was in the middle of a parking lot without anyone around. I have no idea how a fireman could die putting out a fire that's in the middle of an empty parking lot. No building could've caught on fire.

Perhaps if you were given that kind of penalty, it would prevent others from doing the same thing.  It would serve as a deterrant to others.

That doesn't really seem that fair to me. They ruin my life so others won't do it?

But mostly, by telling you what could happen, they scare you enough that you'll never do it again.  Although the best case is if you think before doing it, but close enough..

It was a stupid spur-of-the-moment mistake. If I had time to think about it, I wouldn't of done it. I will think about it more next time because yes, the police were nice enough to let me off without ruining my life. What I was trying to say to zorm is that I can learn from ways other than my life getting ruined, and I'm sure everybody else can as well.

[iago]

The car was in the middle of a parking lot without anyone around. I have no idea how a fireman could die putting out a fire that's in the middle of an empty parking lot. No building could've caught on fire.

Fire can be very unpredictable and dangerous.  There are chemicals in cars that are very poisonous.  Also, what if another building burnt down while the fire department is responding?

What I was trying to say to zorm is that I can learn from ways other than my life getting ruined, and I'm sure everybody else can as well.

No, a lot of people can't learn without screwing themselves up. Why do you think people ever use Meth? :-P

[Armin]

I don't know why I said everybody, I meant a lot of people can as well.

Fire is unpredictable and dangerous, but there's probably such a low chance that something so contained can actually cause a problem like that.

[-------]

---

[zorm]

I can learn in a way other than my life being ruined. I already learned, and I know it was stupid, but if you actually think instead of being a jackass, it was way blown out of proportion. Nobody was around to get hurt, and the car was already totally beaten to shit because they had this thing set up for a donation that you pay $3 and you get to take a swing at the car with a sledge hammer. Now, what exactly was wrong? The fire company would've had to put it out, which is where I went wrong, and it was also against the law. I'm not trying to justify myself, I'm just saying the punishment isn't worth it. Is that really right for them to ruin my life? I have more than 2 brain cells, it was just a stupid mistake made at that moment. Don't act like you're perfect.

Thats exactly the point. If you got slapped across the face for setting the empty destroyed car in the middle of a parking lot on fire whats going to stop you and other people from doing it to other cars/buildings/people?

After all a slap on the face isn't all that painful and will take up 5 seconds of your life. You more or less proved my point because of the fact that you are now scared straight and won't risk doing it again for fear of messing up your life.

The point of most laws is the make an example of the people who fuck up so that others will stop and think twice before doing something stupid. If they don't think twice then oh well, they just helped society out by removing themselves from it.

[Armin]

I can learn in a way other than my life being ruined. I already learned, and I know it was stupid, but if you actually think instead of being a jackass, it was way blown out of proportion. Nobody was around to get hurt, and the car was already totally beaten to shit because they had this thing set up for a donation that you pay $3 and you get to take a swing at the car with a sledge hammer. Now, what exactly was wrong? The fire company would've had to put it out, which is where I went wrong, and it was also against the law. I'm not trying to justify myself, I'm just saying the punishment isn't worth it. Is that really right for them to ruin my life? I have more than 2 brain cells, it was just a stupid mistake made at that moment. Don't act like you're perfect.

Thats exactly the point. If you got slapped across the face for setting the empty destroyed car in the middle of a parking lot on fire whats going to stop you and other people from doing it to other cars/buildings/people?

After all a slap on the face isn't all that painful and will take up 5 seconds of your life.

That's taking it to the other extreme...

It is absolutely right for them to ruin your life for doing something like that. Its called deterrence so that other people who have more than 2 brain cells think twice before doing stupid shit.

You more or less proved my point because of the fact that you are now scared straight and won't risk doing it again for fear of messing up your life.

Is it just me, or did your point totally change? If your point is now the latter, I agree.

The point of most laws is the make an example of the people who fuck up so that others will stop and think twice before doing something stupid. If they don't think twice then oh well, they just helped society out by removing themselves from it.

What, do you make up laws yourself? Do you actually talk to law-makers and ask them what their motives are? I think not, I think you're just talking out of your ass.

[Newby]

The point of most laws is the make an example of the people who fuck up so that others will stop and think twice before doing something stupid. If they don't think twice then oh well, they just helped society out by removing themselves from it.

What, do you make up laws yourself? Do you actually talk to law-makers and ask them what their motives are? I think not, I think you're just talking out of your ass.

Can you give me a definition of what laws are for, then?

I agree with iago 100%. Laws are there to scare people.

[Armin]

You misread Newby. I also think laws are here to scare people, but from what Zorm said, laws are made only to totally fuck up somebodies life no matter how little the broken law was, and just to make an example of that person. At least that's what I got out of it.

[Newby]

You misread Newby. I also think laws are here to scare people, but from what Zorm said, laws are made only to totally fuck up somebodies life no matter how little the broken law was, and just to make an example of that person. At least that's what I got out of it.

I think you mis-read.

zorm said the point of laws is to make an example of the people who break the laws so that others will stop and think twice before doing something stupid.

When he said fuck up, he meant get caught breaking the law.

Hence, a scare tactic.

[Armin]

I don't think I misread, we just both interpreted it differently. We'll just wait to see what Zorm comes out and says what he meant, because argueing about it is pointless.