Without the Death Penalty....?

First, I think they would question this notion of the victim getting justice. The murderer dying obviously does not help their primary victim get justice. And then does it give the family justice if the murderer is killed? It depends on what one thinks is just. Nothing is bringing back the dead person, which would really be the only true justice. I think giving people the impression that someone else's death is giving them something they need is misleading and harmful. They are still going to feel like shit. There is a difference also between a hot killing and a cold killing. If I come home and find someone has killed a family member and they are standing there with the weapon, I may kill them, if I manage. Good chance I think. But once you have someone in custody and have control of the situation, it is a whole other thing to coldly go about setting up their death. And this process damages society, many anti-capital punishment people will argue. You may not agree, but notice that their concern is not simply for the murderer.

I think the process of relating to a person for months or years, then escorting them to a cold death is damaging. For all the various people who engage in that escorting, and even to we who are at a distance. It affects what we are. You may not agree, but that is part of my position. I can't be sure it is part of Enmos'.

Then there are a range of practical issues. It is a horrible, horrible thing for a country if they put an innocent person to death. Of course it is horrible for that person, but it damages the spirit of a country and all the people who put that person to death when that happens. And it does happen. And sometimes we do find out.

Another problem, in the US, is that if you are black you have a greater chance of being killed by the state than if you are white. Guilty or innocent. Until that is fixed, the spirit of the country is damaged by the death penalty.

There are other issues, but those are a start.

And remember these guys are in prison. It is not as if people are advocating no punishment.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's a pretty deluded thing to say.. If you really think they are comparably you may have a problem.

Look, until they can be a 100% certain that the 'criminal' in question is guilty capital punishment is not ethical. And even when that is achieved it may still be an ethical dilemma.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What's the big deal, Enmos? I don't understand it ...please try to explain it to me.
Let's review things a little bit:

You don't believe in god or in religious views, but you do believe in evolution - that man is just another animal in the world - so ....what's so special about that criminal (man) that makes killing him any different to killing that steer for the steak you had last night for dinner?

If an animal, a dog, was vicious, mean, and attacked and killed a little kid, I'm sure that you'd want/expect that it be "put down" (executed). So what's the difference between the vicious man and the vicious dog?

What's so "sacred" about humans ...especially in light of your lack of religious believes AND your beliefs in normal evolution of animals?

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, I wouldn't. The owner(s) are to blame.

There is absolutely nothing sacred about humans.

I don't see what evolution has to do with capital punishment.

 

There we go, Enmos. There's nothing sacred about humans, so if there are scumbag rapists and murderers, society shouldn't tolerate them and should give them their due.

 

Yeah. And see, that's what I don't get with some people here at Sciforums - On one hand, they fervently believe in evolution, which basically means that humans are just one of a long line of animals continually evolving. In fact, if they believe in evolution, then they must necessarily believe that the human will be replaced soon by some other animal. Yet on the other hand, with the death penalty (as well as some other things), they seem to hold humans high on some idealistic pedestal in some almost-sacred view. Duh?

If Enmos, and others like him, don't have any "sacred ideal" attached to humans, then why should they care so freakin' much about them? It seems to make no sense ....other than from a purely idealistic perspective.

And idealism is fine, I guess, but it just doesn't work with reality ...so how can one argue about some real life situation while still holding to some fairy tale ideal? Nope, I just don't get it.

Baron Max

 

Not to mention the stupidity even beyond that; they support life in prison, but not the death penalty? If the death penalty is murder, then life in prison is kidnapping and holding hostage.

Either way, you're taking away someone's life; if the state has the right to imprison people in a Supermax, then it has the right to execute people.

 

And society does, those criminals are imprisoned.

 

Irrelevant.

No.

Capice?

 

Assuming that the news details on the thread are correct:

Why would a prisoner who is not a death row inmate slash a guard's throat? Wasn't this act most likely to put him in death row if the guard died, or make his life in prison hell in any case?

Doesn't this example say more about the prison life than the inmate? Turning a person who did not commit a "capital punishment crime" into a throat slashing man.

What does make you think executing the throat slashing inmate would solve the problems "if the prison has been on lockdown several times over the past few months"?

Apparently he is not the only one turning violent in this particular prison. Could it be a problem about the prison rather than the inmates?

In a similar sense, could violent "capital punishment crimes" point out the problems in the society rather than the individuals who commit them?

Why would anybody relate a violent act of a non-death row inmate to a discussion about the necessity of death penalty?

What are the basic requirements for being called bloodthirsty?

 

I guess some of you people have never really run across a really evil human being. Someone who thinks of his fellow man as cattle for slaughter regardless of age or circumstance. Who thinks he is entitled to your loved one, money, belongings to do with as he pleases. When you do I think you will see that there are individuals who should be put to death or kept away from society for the remainder of their life span. I propose put them to death after the first year...i wouldnt mind being the one throwing the switch or injection the solution....would feel just about right for me....

 

Why? And as to life in prison, is it also wrong to lower yourself to the same level as a kidnapper holding a hostage for the rest of their lives? Just saying that it's "wrong" is simply stating your opinion, nothing more.

The people of a state or nation determine "moral or not moral", and according to numerous polls (you believe in polls even as I do not) the American people believe its okay to execute vicious murderers and rapists. In the USA, the people haven't been permitted to vote on the issue (except in a few states?) ...our activist judges in the states that don't have capital punishment have taken the law into their own hands to make that determination - which is against everything that the law stands for! Judges shouldn't make the law, they should uphold it!!

So what are you saying? ...that human life is, somehow, sacred and/or valuable above and beyond that of simply being another animal on Earth? See? Why is that man's life so valuable to you, James? You believe in evolution, so you must believe that humans are simply a small step above the apes. So....?

If the state executes the wrong man, well, okay, it was a mistake, they could apologize to the family and perhaps give them a couple of dollars in restitution.

And, James, if the state puts someone in prison for the crime, instead of executing them, the state can't "correct" that mistake either. The man has spent however-many-years as a kidnap victim. Ain't no correcting that either. So what now? ...just don't do anything to the criminals?

Baron Max

 

Capitol punishment is merely a form of revenge, not justice. Having revenge on a criminal may satisfy base instincts, but it is not justice. Justice is, or should be, something that is both fair and humane. If a man takes a life, let him spend the rest of his life in prison. But to be completely without mercy lowers us to the level of the murderer. Maybe it is no less than he deserves, but if we support capitol punishment, it is no less than we deserve either. As someone who is against capitol punishment, I can tell you that one of my main reasons for being against it is because I don't want to support killing, anymore than I want to support rape. If the criminal needs to be removed from society, this can be done by life imprisonment. I don't believe human life is sacred, but it is no more our right to take life away than it was his. Execution is not justice.

 

Why? Where did you get that idea about "justice"? "Justice" is set by the state or the nation in its laws and rules, nothing philosophical about it. You, personally, might not like it, but that's just tough shit ...or do you somehow think that you should get to approve everything the state does?

You don't support killing or rape, yet you seem perfectly willing to support kidnapping and holding hostages for their entire life? Hmm?

If the state says it's justice, then it's justice. Your opinion doesn't count for much where the law is concerned.

Baron Max

 

Just because something is law doesn't mean is it moral, or should not be changed. Do you really put so much trust in the state, that you would not question or challenge the laws they make? Just the fact that there is some debate about capitol punishment should be enough to make people want to err on the side of mercy. Obviously, some people feel it is completely immoral, so why should they have to support it as law?

And justice is an ideal that exists outside of the dictates of the state. What the state decrees is not necessarily justice just because the state decreed it. If the state decided to have you and your whole family murdered for no good reason, would it be justice? No. The right path exists in trying to match the state's actions to a code of ethics that most closely resembles justice. Capitol punishment is not it.

 

In the USA, in public vote and numerous polls all across the country, the people, the citizens of the USA, are overwhelmingly in favor of the death penalty. Every time it's put to a vote, the people want the death penalty.

So, okay ....where does the ideal of "justice" come from? If it's from "the people", then they've deemed the DP as justice for some vicious crimes. If it's dropped down from heaven, it seems that even heaven beleives in the death penalty. If it's ONLY something that YOU believe, then.....?

Baron Max

 

That's because the majority of the people in the States are poorly educated and uncivilized. Most decent countries abolished the death penalty years ago.

lol I didn't just make up the concept of justice. It's been around for a year or two at least.

 

And how is that workin' out for them?

Then you must know where it comes from, right? If so, then please explain it to me so that my feeble mind can understand it.

Baron Max