What do you think of the Death Penalty?

jupiter23 · Post by **jupiter23** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 2:29 pm

Moderators, if this already exists, then please merge it. I need as many honest responses to this as I can get, and am not looking to instigate a fight or anything, I only need answers. I have to write a paper for my Criminal Law class for the end of the semester on this subject, and since it is mostly opinion, I would like to know what you all think about it. And does your state or country have it or allow it? Thanks in advance for your responses and your help.

Jed-kun · Post by **Jed-kun** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 2:55 pm

I, personally, support rehabilitation over pure punishment. However, I support the death sentence for particularly heinous crimes and people who are way to fucked up to rehabilitate (:off-topic: then again I also support human euthanasia in extreme cases).

Akarui Kibuno · Post by **Akarui Kibuno** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 3:16 pm

I'll talk about what's in France, then my opinion.

The death penalty has been suppressed in 1981 by our former President. I don't know who decided on this exactly, this is all I can say about that.

My opinion:

"Pros" : The ones who commit crime must be punished as much as what they did.

"Cons" : It would mean going down to the same level as the killer, and it's "easy" to kill the person, when it's all better for them: once dead, they don't have anything to worry about, no time to "repent" (sorry, the word to say you want to be forgiven).

So even if I have some pros, I have lots of cons. Jail should be used properly: it's not the death penalty that is a solution, it's the change in prisons. In France, some people think of re-establishing it because "there are murders" and the like, when you wouldn't even want to enter a prison to visit someone. My math and economics teacher from last year does lessons in a very famous prison, and sometimes we'd ask him how it's like, and it was horrible (he told us of two horrible parents that were in that prison but he didn't see... I cried the whole night that day).

So in your paper, you might have some room to talk about the problem in prisons, if there are as much in the US as in France.

If you add the "this person might be innocent" problem (not THAT frequent but happens often enough to be considered, I've read) , then the "logic" conclusion would be death penalty = bad.

Though of course, it's one of those other things that can't only be dealt with with logic, but is always interesting to discuss (when discussed properly of course).

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 7:30 pm

New York State has it, but many prosecutors are so against it that they publicly state they will never seek it, no matter how heinous the crime.

Personally I'm in favor of it for all murders, and here's my reasoning: in all other types of crime, some compensation is possible to the victim. If you take someone's property, in addition to fines or prison, you have to give back the property, or if it's destroyed, pay for it. If you injure someone, you have to pay for their medical care. If you smear someone's good name, you can be made to tell the trurth in public. But a murder victim will never be able to take anything back from his or her killer. Furthermore, in all those other crimes, the victim may still find some solace--life may get better. But the murder victim never gets to enjoy a sunrise, or hear music, or experience any of the joys of life again. And it strikes me as unjust that one who denies another those joys should ever get to experience themself. Yes, imprisoning them would give them a hard life, but they would still get to breathe. They would still get to eat and drink and maybe find hope. But I don't think they deserve hope.

peachvampiress · Post by **peachvampiress** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 8:02 pm

I'm against killing any one for any reason because I believe life is a very important gift, but my reasons for apposing the death penalty are a little different from that:

-the murderer is given a painless death, and since I doubt that the governement will be bringing in texas chainsaw massacre style executions for those on death row anytime soon, the death penalty seems pretty unjust to me
-by killing the person, you're taking away all their problems.
-prison should be about rehabilitation for some people, and a punishment for those who have commited terrible acts.

The problem I see is that they need to make prisons more strict. I'm fully aware that life in prison is very hard and not nice, but I think we need to stop giving prisoners so many rights. Prisoners do not need outdoor work out equipment (yes, because the world needs stronger convicts

), prisoners do not need Cable television (I heard a story where this prison was allowing inmates to buy flat screen plasma T.V.s for their cells -_-). Prisoners do not need phone or internet access (again, I read a story about a pedophile who targeted random children over the phone and internet and no one knew anything about it).

I think we need to make prison more of a punishment for seriously dangerous convicts so that the death penatly isn't needed. I also think people need to consider if the death penalty is really punishment, or if it's a favour to the convicts.

Starscream · Post by **Starscream** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 8:03 pm

I'm completely against the death penalty, and totally in favor of life in prison for really heinous crimes in which the death penalty is suggested/demanded.

My reasons are both practical and religious. As a Catholic, I am against the taking of ALL life unless it is absolutely necessary (i.e., abortion if the woman's life is in danger), and in this case, no matter how the victim and/or his family is feeling, killing the person responsible for their tragedy won't make the pain go away completely, nor would it undo the crime that was committed. Practically...well, what if the evidence was wrong? What if we put to death someone that was, in fact, innocent of the crime, but somewhere along the line the evidence was lost, misplaced, or worse, mislabeled? For that reason, it makes more sense that the person instead be jailed for life; that way, the sentence here could be reversed if later evidence cleared the person's name.

ParaKiss_Groupie · Post by **ParaKiss_Groupie** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 9:24 pm

To be honest, I don't know what to think of the Death Penalty. On one hand, I support it, and on the other, I disagree with it. There are too many blurry lines involved for me to make a clear decision on it, I guess.

Post by **Tiff** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:05 pm

ParaKiss_Groupie wrote:To be honest, I don't know what to think of the Death Penalty. On one hand, I support it, and on the other, I disagree with it. There are too many blurry lines involved for me to make a clear decision on it, I guess.

My thoughts exactly. I actually wasn't going to post becuase of that very point...I just don't know on which side I stand more.

Cardcaptor Takato · Post by **Cardcaptor Takato** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:08 pm

I personally am against the death pentalty because I don't believe killing a person at all is right, but I don't think people who commit terrible crimes like murder should get away scott free. Instead they should be given a life in prison with stricter prison rules. If we were to take away the murder's life, would that make us any better than the murderer? After all, "You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also." Quote from the Sermon on the Mount.

Jumbled Thoughts · Post by **MarioKnight** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:19 pm

I'm in the middle too. I mean, when I heard the one segment of one of Ron White's stand up about the death penalty and Texas, about "if you shoot someone in TX and there are at least three eye-witnesses, we will kill you back" and such, which I found amusing and applauded it, but then in the recent month or so, listening to my friends talk about the death penalty and the controversy and such, it's so hard to take a side since you can understand both ends of the issue.

RoastedTwinkies · Post by **RoastedTwinkies** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:46 pm

Personally, I'm for the death penalty. A killer should not have the right to live because he took that right from someone else. If I had been murdered, I would want my killer dead for what he did to me. That's how I would want my family to avenge my death, that is if a death penalty was possible.

However, it seems that the majority of people are against it. If it went as a poll, you guys would probably win. In that case, I think prision should be a lot more strict. No more TV, no more weight rooms, no more Club Fed. Prisions should be hard labour camps. For example, we could get them to do pointless busywork. Allow me to explain:

The inmates must be up by 4:00 am and ready to go at 5:00 am.

1. Make them dig two seperate holes 100 yards apart or so. Then you give them wheelbarrows and make them fill the holes in with the dirt from the hole on the opposite end. Once they get across the field and empty their wheelbarrow, they have to fill it up again and go back across the field again and empty it at the opposite hole and so on. Give the inmates who give you a difficult time this activity.

OR the inmates have option
2. Hire a fitness freak to lead the inmates on a track two miles in diameter. Make the inmates wear 100 pound backpacks filled with sandbags. They have to keep up with the fitness freak.

EDIT: My mistake. The inmates who give you a hard time should have this activity! It's harder, whereas you can take your time with the wheelbarrow one.

The inmates who do cooperate get to choose what they want to do and they have to rotate every month. They will be doing these activities until 10:00 pm.

OR if the inmate refuses to participate, use sensitory deprivation. They use this on Charlie Manson.

3. Put the inmate in a soundproof room with no windows with the lights on 24/7. No TV, no books, no magazines, no radio, nothing. The inmate is only allowed out once a week to exercise in another room in shackles. This will inevitably damage him phychologically, but you have to look at what he did to put himself there.

Prision should be a very unplesent experience, so the criminals will be more likely never to commit another crime again.

peachvampiress · Post by **peachvampiress** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:08 am

Roasted Twinkies. I'd quote what you said, but my wrist is borderline carpel tunnel right now.

I agree with everything you said. I remember someone telling me that the reason prisoners have work out equipment is to keep them entertained so that they don't cause an uprise and hurt the guards or some bullshit like that. My reply was to give them two meals a day consiting of some sort of thin stew and bread. That way you keep them skinny, frail, and weak. Cruel? So what? Maybe people will think twice before killing someone.

A few years ago I told people that my ideal punishment for extreme cases was to cut off their arms and legs and paralyze them from the neck down. They're not going to do jack shit after that.

Actually, when you think about it, all you really need to do is cut of their hands, or even just fingers. How are they going to kill someone then?

usachan · Post by **usachan** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 12:38 am

ParaKiss_Groupie wrote:To be honest, I don't know what to think of the Death Penalty. On one hand, I support it, and on the other, I disagree with it. There are too many blurry lines involved for me to make a clear decision on it, I guess.

I agree with that as well. I think that killing is wrong under any circumstance, but on the other hand I agree with sailorasteroid that it isn't fair that someone who has commited murder to have the right to go on and have hope, but then there is always the fact someone may have been wrongly accused, like what starscream said. All these factors just sort of leave me confused and unsure of where to stand.

Rzto · Post by **Rzto** » Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:12 am

Living in Finland, I could tell something about things down here.

Death penalty has been suppressed long ago in Finland, I think it was 1918 when Finland became independent. Also here conditions in prisons are fairly good, prisoners get to work on a daily basis and they can sell their products in shops at the prison area. If I recall it right, they actually get to work outside prison area in larger groups of maybe 10-20, and there is only a few guards with them. Still prisoners doesn't escape, and if one does it is very rare. Prisoners killing guard occurs even more rarely, maybe one gets killed for every 20-30 years. Prisoners can also study in prisons and they can qualify for a new job in prison, I think carpenter is quite common.
We have also prisons that are called here "avovankila" (straight translation: open prisons, I don't know if there is anything comparable in USA). Prisoners who are put there mustn't drink or use any drugs. Also prisoners committed from serious crimes like murder or raping, doesn't have any chances getting there. But the point is that the prisoners in open prisons have more freedom, they get to vacations more often (yes, prisoners in Finland get to a few day vacations sometimes), they get to move more freely in the area, and, if I remember right, usually open prisons doesn't have anything comparable to walls, barbed wires etc...
Of course murderers, rapers and so on are kept under strict guard, but not a single prisoner is totally isolated. And it's nothing like to worst prisons in USA where prisoners get to walk for one hour a day.
But the point is that adaptation to society is easier if prisoners get some freedoms and especially get to work while they are in prison.

Back to topic... After this you can guess my opinion about death penalty. If there weren't ANY chances of killing innocent, it might be acceptable sometimes, but you can't never be that sure. So for someone who surely commits crime again, there is no alternative for life in prison.

NameGoesHere · Post by **NameGoesHere** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:15 pm

The Death Penalty is a very difficult thing to take a solid stand on. There are those who are wrongly executed, while there are others who really did commit the crime and get off scot-free. Religious, cultural and personal experiences really influence your choice, and I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough on the matter to make a sound decision. Though, I do know that if I ever witnessed someone harming someone I care about, they wouldn't have to worry about the criminal justice system.

I do believe that prisons should be tougher, for all offenders. No television, no workout rooms, and none of that "cookies from home" bull, etc. I believe that they should be forced to do hard labor every day, like Roasted Twinkies said.

Rapists should be fixed. I'm not talking about "chemical castration," I'm talking neutered.

ParaKiss_Groupie · Post by **ParaKiss_Groupie** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:18 pm

Rapists should be fixed. I'm not talking about "chemical castration," I'm talking neutered.

What about female rapists?

NameGoesHere · Post by **NameGoesHere** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:31 pm

ParaKiss_Groupie wrote:
Rapists should be fixed. I'm not talking about "chemical castration," I'm talking neutered.
What about female rapists?

They should have their ability to make children taken away as well. Tie the tubes, remove the ovaries, or just remove the whole uterus. People who are messed up enough to rape somebody shouldn't be allowed to have children. Ever.

isaisa · Post by **isaisa** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 2:50 pm

I am for the death penalty. Of course my religion goes against it, but my own opinions are for it. This is just an example: I would not feel right knowing that the man or woman responsible for the death of a family member or friend is allowed to walk on this earth. It's wrong. However, I don't like the death chosen by the government. It's too painless. I may be too brutal in thinking this, but if their victims suffered, then they should suffer as well.

Post by **Tiff** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 4:57 pm

isaisa wrote:I am for the death penalty. Of course my religion goes against it, but my own opinions are for it. This is just an example: I would not feel right knowing that the man or woman responsible for the death of a family member or friend is allowed to walk on this earth. It's wrong. However, I don't like the death chosen by the government. It's too painless. I may be too brutal in thinking this, but if their victims suffered, then they should suffer as well.

This is going to sound morbid, but..what if their victims DIDN'T suffer? What if they were killed quickly, without the chance to even think about it? Should we pick apart every murderer, ask them exactly how they killed their victim, then decide to what degree they suffered, and then base how the murderer is killed upon that?

that would be unrealistic, so to say "if their victims suffered, then they should suffer as well" generalizes that every murderer is in the same level and degree. Someone who blows someone else's head off with a gun quickly, and someone who slowly cuts their victims over and over until they bleed to death are different.

isaisa · Post by **isaisa** » Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:06 pm

I didn't mean that murderers should suffer exactly as the victims. Like....the way that murderers on death row are killed is through the injection. It's just a dinky little injection. A death like that, to me, is like dying in your sleep. So yeah...I'm not really sure how to explain myself for my earlier comment.

P.S. I don't mean to offend anyone or get anyone totally mad at me. I apologize if anyone is somewhat miffed over my comments.