Death penalty is morally necessary

Discussion in 'Politics' started by madanthonywayne, Dec 8, 2005.

  1. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I've always believed the death penalty was morally necesary as the only just punishment for taking a life. Now a couple economists have shown that each time a convicted murderer is executed, 18 innocent lives are saved.
    So there we are. Refuse to impose the just sentence upon convicted murderers, and condemn 18 innocents to death. Now who's uncivilized?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. kazakhan Registered Abuser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    915
    Did you read the whole article or just the first page?
    Bullshit...
    Yeah, I wonder...
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Satyr Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,896
    I think killing, in general, is morally necessary.

    Try convincing a moron that you are right.
    You can’t.
    All you can do is shoot him before he reproduces.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Of course I read the whole article. I figured you wouldn't. Nevertheless, the point of the article was that the tide is turning. Your quote is basically a "dissenting opinion" by one guy. It seems intuitively obvious that the death penalty should have some deterent effect, and the majority opinion was that it does.
     
  8. kazakhan Registered Abuser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    915
    I'm not suprised. I had read the article before you even posted your link, the SMH is my first stop for news.
    What tide? You still only have one report claiming that 18 lives are saved it remains just as much an opinion as the one I quoted.
    Seems, being the operative word and what majority are you talking about?
     
  9. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Well, I agree with the death penalty. But also I keep wondering and pondering why any society would want to keep vicious murderers and violent criminals within their midst? ...even if in prisons? Why does any society need those kinds of proven criminals?

    Baron Max
     
  10. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    Must murders are 1 time affairs. I fail to see how the 18 extra people will die?

    Moreover the murder rate is much lower in countries without death penalty. I would like to see some explanation of that.
     
  11. from www.deathpenaltyinfo.org

    "Since 1973, 122 people in 25 states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence"

    As of April 2005
    these are the states and how many people have been exonerated in each one.

    Florida
    21

    Massachusetts
    3

    Illinois
    18

    Missouri
    3

    Louisiana
    8

    Indiana
    2

    Texas
    8

    So. Carolina 2

    Arizona
    8

    Idaho
    1

    Oklahoma
    7

    Kentucky
    1

    Alabama
    5

    Maryland
    1

    Georgia
    5

    Mississippi
    2

    No. Carolina
    5

    Nebraska
    1

    Pennsylvania
    6

    Nevada
    1

    Ohio
    5

    Virginia
    1

    New Mexico 4

    Washington
    1

    California
    3


    thats 122 people who were innocent that would have been killed by the death penalty. so what exactly is your definition of a proven criminal, and how long should they be held before they are killed in pursuance of a death penalty statute? maybe 1 or 2 days? none of these innocent people would be alive without the appeals process. sometimes it takes years for crucial evidence to come to light. now that dna evidence is being used regularly they are finding that a lot of people have been executed who probably werent actual criminals. what about that? thesystem is set up the way it is because human error is certain. people who are convicted may very well be innocent, and society has an interest in at least keeping them around for long enough to find out whether there has been a mistake or not. other than that, i think people who are serving life sentences in prison should be forced to work in a way that is productive to society instead of sitting around throwing buckets of urine and AIDS blood at guards, watching cable tv, and getting free college educations. what happened to labor camps?
     
  12. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Hmmm? Is that true? Is that true in the USA? I believe I've read/heard that most convicted and/or suspected murderers are repeat offenders. Do you have any evidence of either of those assertions? And, no, I don't know!

    Number of people pressed into smaller areas? Vast population differences? Ethnic mixes being different? Class separations? Wealth distribution differences? Median age of the population? .... The type of car they drive? The favorite color of car? .... ;=)

    Hey, shouldn't we also ask why, for example, there is less violent crime in Mayberry, RFD than in, say, Detroit or New York City?

    In the USA, if a town has only, say, 2,500 people, will the violent crime rates be the same as those of a city of, say, 2,500,000? If not, why not?

    Baron Max
     
  13. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    In accordance with out justice system, a person is guilty when proven guilty by a jury of his peers in a valid court of law.

    If that doesn't fit your ideas of justice, then why do we even bother with courts? Why not just let everyone go free and do anything that they want to do ...including murder and rape and violent assualt?

    Sure the system is not perfect, but neither is anything else in life. Accidents happen every single day, people die of accidents daily, all the time, and you accept those without much question. Yet an "accident" happens in the justice system and you go all bonkers! Why? Is the accidental auto death so different to the accidental death in state-sanctioned execution? Aren't they both dead?

    Why? If our justice system finds them guilty, then they're guilty! That's how it works in our system ...and until we can find a "perfect" system, then we have to live with what we have.

    But, wait ....what if they, too, are all innocent??? You'd make them suffer while the state/activists/etc. attempt to prove them innocent?

    Labor camps are for the guilty. But you've already expressed the doubt of guilt of any of those people ...so why are you now suggesting that they be made to suffer? You aren't being consistent in your argument.

    Baron Max
     
  14. kazakhan Registered Abuser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    915
    Would you still have that attitude if the State accidently executed your closest relative, an accident is an accident is it not?

    If the justice system says the sky is purple does that make it so?

    Charles never implied any such thing, you truly are a world class troll

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Putting the personal spin on something like this is asinine! Even if my closest relative were the world's worst serial rapist and killer, I'd probably be against his incarceration, much less his execution. But that's not how one views such issues ...or if they do, they're idiots!!

    If rationality can't be used to discuss these issues, and personal bullshit keep coming into play, then nothing will ever be solved ...including the issue of the death penalty.

    ?????

    So ...is that all you have to say with regard to my last posts? That's it? Only personal attacks? Of course, when one can think of nothing else with which to debate, personal attacks seem to be the thing on sciforums.

    Baron Max
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Majority of who?

    There are more Americans incarcerated for murder today than ever before. This suggests to me that the death penalty is no deterrent.
     
  17. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    It could also suggest that there is today a greater motivation to kill. Who do you want to kill, Toady?

    I think the deterrent argument begs these two questions first: Is killing ever justified? Under what specific circumstances? Because remember, we are in the case of legally-sanctioned executions applying a government killing in response to a civilian one. If applying the most extreme of responses possible, then in a society under the law the very same standards should apply equally then to each party.

    There's the rub.
     
  18. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    James, you may not be aware of it, but there have been several changes in the death penalty in the USA and many states refused to execute anyone. The death penalty is a state issue, for the most part, unless the Supreme Court makes another blunder! But there are numerous studies that show that the death penalty, when actually APPLIED, is a deterrent to violent crime. The biggest problem is that the death penalty is not actually APPLIED, even when that't the sentence of the court. The lawyers and judges hold up the executions for years and years ...sometimes commuting sentences and sometimes for so damnd long that the convict dies of old age before he can be executed!

    So ...with all that in mind, finding any truly conclusive documentation on the effects of the death penalty is pretty damned difficult. But if it were used properly, then, if nothing else, there would be less repeat offenders ....don't you agree? So if nothing else, it would help that one issue ...and many violent criminals do, in fact, repeat their violent crimes.

    But I still wonder .....why does any society want to keep such violent criminals in their midst ...even if their "midst" is, in fact, in cages? Why does any society need them? Why does any society want them?

    Baron Max
     
  19. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    Why would there be so much less murders in for instance Amsterdam, where some drugs are legal, where there is a cultural diversity that easily matches any american city? And owning a gun is rare and frowned upon

    Makes you think doesn't it?
     
  20. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Well, sure it makes one think a bit, but it's not comparing the same things in the same/similar environments/conditions, so the comparison is sorta' like comparing apples and oranges ....you can do it, but does it tell you anything?

    I would love to see precise and accurate stats comparing two very similar cities ...one with the right to have/carry guns, and the other without. And with enough time to provide some meaningful stats. As it is now, if I happen to want to "prove" that guns are great, I can go to a "great gun" site for all the "facts" I need. And vice versa for the opposing view. And it's really not meaningful ...not in any good, scientific way.

    One thing that I find highly interesting is the gun issue that's going on in England (London?) these days. There are more and more people applying for a permit to carry concealed handguns.

    But as it stands right now, only the ....ahh, elite, wealthy, high-class, influential, ..., people have been given that right. But more and more cops are asking for the right to carry guns for their own personal and family protection ...they deal with "bad guys" who might wish to do them or they're family harm.

    There was an article in the Dallas Morning News about it just this morning. One cop is becoming pissed off that the authorities won't let him carry a gun ...even while his own supervisor carries one and is in little or no danger!

    Baron Max
     
  21. anytime Registered Member

    Messages:
    18
    Why is it the government's place to exercise moral authority?
     
  22. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    It is the government's place to exercise all authority formally and legally granted by the public. Nothing more, and nothing less.

    It is the public's place to establish and safeguard deliberate limits on the authority of government.

    The absence of either of these components of the relationship results in avoidable but unjustifiable killings.
     
  23. kazakhan Registered Abuser Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    915
    Bullshit.
    If my brother, for arguments sake does the crime I'll have no sympathy for him when he does the time. Even though I'm generally against the death penalty and particulary so for drugs I'd still have no sympathy for him if he was in this guys shoes. So you'd support your serial rapist and murdering relative being free to keep it up.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Now thats funny...

    If I had something else to add to my post above in regards to the post in question it would've been there. Personal attack, if you say so. You've just implied that I am an unintelligent idiot, so if you're going complain, refrain from doing it yourself.
    You accuse me of being asinine then make a comment like this. Without the question tagged on the end the statement stands on it's own, of course a dead person isn't going to re-offend yet you go on to ask if james agrees with your redundant statement. This is another of my reasons for believing you to be a troll. Were you a car salesman at some point?
     

Share This Page