Why not just execute people who receive life without parole?

More expensive in terms of legal costs. I could say that the death penalty is less expensive in terms of resources. Dead prisoners don't need food and water.

Prison is not an effective deterrent

How does the death penalty involve society descending to the level of the criminal? It's punishment. Does that mean prison involves society descending to the level of the criminal?

Again, I already proved that prison is also barbaric. Death is death, I don't understand how there is anything barbaric about the inevitable. It is a punishment for the ultimate crime.

The offender's family? They are innocent and not hurt in any way. They should not care what happens to scum. I wouldn't.

Innocent and mentally ill people can also be imprisoned. Sympathy for the offender? I'm arguing against sympathy for the offender, you're arguing for it.

Prison cannot undo the crime

The death penalty is about ensuring the criminal pay for his crimes.

And prisons are one more barbarity. It's imprisonment.

Except, unlike them, I am not a murderer or child rapist, and I'm not evil.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

James R:
overall cost to society i would asume you speak of moral cost in which case i atleast do not sugest executions are griim and gory seens of sloughter.

Prison v Death is unresolvable but death i belive has a stigma which is more of a deterant

Note the name of the thread "Why not just execute people who receive life without parole?" rehabilitation is imposible becasues they will never get out.

for offenders family i belive it is worse having to visit in prison and to have the realtive their.

the prisoners have forfited their rights when they comited their high level crimes, there not exactly the same as us

lastly by inprisoning we are commiting large scale kidnap just like by execution we are commiting murder.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Then why does the US have such a high crime rate compared to countries that don't have capital punishment ?

 

you're trolling right? needles hurt more than firing squad? *edit* let the person choose

that aside, someone with life and no parole should have access to assisted suicide. its that or perhaps force them to do it in a much more primitive fashion. you can make counselling a prerequisite of the assistance to see whether they can be helped.

 

Yes, in money. Not in resources. Dead criminals don't use food, water, or supplies.
Not to mention prisons are overcrowded, and if we increase use of the death penalty, we might be able to shut down some prisons and maybe turn them into more useful buildings, such as schools, hospitals, churches, homes, etc

I think both are good deterrants, or have the potential to be, but it's about how sentences are given; for instance, here's my idea for, say, the average crime (non murder)

First offense- no punishment, but they warn the guy and register him
Second offense- (for second offenses for something like rape, then it's the dp); for something like drugs or robbery, we can give them college courses and community service, and tell him if he does it again he will be executed
Third offense- death penalty

That way criminals should be well aware that their actions will not be tolerated.

They won't be rejoining anything if they have life in prison without parole.

You're ignoring the fundamental point: they'd be imprisoned. If I were 30 and given life in prison, I'd prefer the dp. If I'm an innocent man enjoying life, then what's the point of dying now?

I care about them, but they aren't criminals. If one of my family members became a child pedophile rapist murderer, to hell with him. I'll cheer on his hanging.

Criminals who commit heinous acts are scum. I won't be biased by them being family.

Revenge is fair.

Both are barbaric, both are punishments. I don't think it should matter how we punish criminals as long as we do it, and without it being ridiculously out of proportion with the crime.

Do you consider Hitler evil? What about BTK?

What moral cost? The death penalty is not immoral, because it is applied as punishment, not as cold blooded murder. Not all killing is the same, it depends on the situation and circumstance.

I agree. If you are going to destroy the rights of others, you will not get rights. That's how society operates. That's why we punish criminals. Murderers, rapists, and the sort forfeit their rates, as well as their humanity.

Which is exactly why I believe prison is no less barbaric than the death penalty. If anything, it's more barbaric.

That has to do with various factors, including immigration, poverty, population, etc

South Africa has a ridiculously high crime rate, but does not have the death penalty; I believe the statistics show that the crime rate increased after they abolished the death penalty. That's why so many South Africans want it re instated.

The question is, do they deserve rehabilitation? Their victims don't get such a chance.

I wouldn't call BTK human. It seems to me you are trying to defend criminals' rights above victims' rights.

There should also not be surgery, construction, and so many other things according to this argument.

Besides, correction is beyond the point. Either you believe any innocent suffering cannot be tolerated, or you agree that sacrifices have to be made.