One related to the joke thread controversy

[ChrisL]

This is where I disagree: To me the death penalty has its greatest value as a means of closure for the survivers effected by the crime. They and all of society actually should experience the closure of the event, they deserve the means to move on. There is also the deterence aspect which is very real because death is a primal fear in all of us, and having that as a punishment possiblity plays upon that. Since the benefits of the death penelty are for the survivers to feel tht closure with the innocent society benefits simply by carrying out the act, guilt or innocence are not really a part of it, it more like a human sacrifice in this manner. Whatever person is sacrificed has been deemed worthy of that happening by society that it may relieve its pain, no matter where the crime they supposedly commited is something they are guilty of society has accepted the burden of their death and is therefore served by it. For the "innocent" man individually, it sucks, but society is not guilty of a moral wrong.

I've actually given this assertion some thought through the years in regard to how I would feel if I was personally affected in such a horrific way of suffering the loss of one dear to me at the hands of another in murder. I can honestly say sentencing and carrying out a death sentence to the perpetrator would not provide me closure. It wouldn't. No amount of torture, no one method of killing and no amount of post death desecration of the perp's corpse would bring back my loved one. It would be pointless to me. Moreover, in my opinion, if I were to call for the death of the perp to avenge the death of my loved one, I would feel that I reduced myself in some way by dealing with them on their murderous terms. They'd win twice. Just my own personal feeling on the subject.

Chris L

[Wildtim]

"Indeed, the decision that capital punishment may be the appropriate sanction in extreme cases is an expression of the community's belief that certain crimes are themselves so grievous an affront to humanity that the only adequate response may be the penalty of death."

~ Supreme Court of the United States of America

*

" A society that sentences killers to nothing worse than prison -- no matter how depraved the killing or how innocent the victim -- is a society that doesn't *really* think murder is so terrible."
JEFF JACOBY, September 28, 2003

"There is barely a country in Europe where the death penalty was abolished in response to public opinion rather than in spite of it. In other words, if these countries' political cultures are morally superior to America's, it's because they're less democratic."
-- Joshua Marshall, writing in The New Republic

[xman]

Noone deserves to die simply by virtue of who they are or what they've done regardless of how monstrous that may have been. Thinking so makes YOU the one with the homicidal fixation. "...lest you become one". We should, however, be prepared and able to (regrettably) use deadly force to protect our lives, the lives of our family or other innocents.

X

[Wildtim]

X I don't see how you can say that.

You really don't believe that there are people in the world who will always desire to hurt people and continue to act on those desires until they day they die?

You don't think people deserve to know that they are beyond a shadow of a doubt safe from above monsters?

You would really put the right to live of the monster above the right to live of the rest of society?

[goshawk]

The number of people murdered by killers who have been released from prison far exceeds the number of people wrongly executed for murder.

I don't know that that is true, and even if it is, I didn't propose that any killers be released. What I do know is that we are collectively responsible for what we do, in spite of our fear of what might happen, and to avoid that truth is moral cowardice.

goshawk

[Wildtim]

I don't know that that is true, and even if it is, I didn't propose that any killers be released.

Yes, you do you propose that we don't kill them ergo they go to jail ergo they will be released.

What I do know is that we are collectively responsible for what we do, before we are responsible for trying to prevent what might happen, and to avoid that truth is moral cowardice.

goshawk

I'm glad you concede that we are responsible for what we do ergo you kill you put your own life in the balance, for you should not do that which you are not willing to have done to you.

[JimR]

I personally believe that in cases of pure, 100% surety, then the death penalty is justified. Jeffrey Dahmer? Kill him. Ted Bundy? Gone.

Sure.

But.

But there is a simple problem here that I don't see how you can solve.

Killing an innocent person = murder. Murderers deserve execution. Execution, being an endeavor of men, is imperfect. Imperfect execution will inevitably lead to the killing of an innocent person. See where that leads?

It is virtually guaranteed that innocent people have been executed--the numbers are simply too big, and the people who have had last minute acquittals based on real evidence are just too numerous. If you truly believe that all society takes on the burden of execution, a belief that I personally support, then it is virtually guaranteed that American society is guilty of murder.

When someone is dead, they are GONE. You can't release them, you can't compensate, it's over. Yes, that's what makes murder as heinous as it is, which is why societies should not engage in it. When a society condones the possible murder of innocent people in the name of "playing it safe", then society has gone bats**t insane, and does not deserve to be safe.

[AFDavis11]

I've always been a little wary of the death penalty. I support it, but I am always worried about whether it'll be enough . . . enough of a deterent,

If we take your average murderer I would surmise that his value of human life wouldn't be very high . . . and so to kill him, or threaten to do so, might not have the full meaning that we want it to.

We on the other hand, value life. So our first thought is "We'll kill 'em".

Could something be worse? How about life long family restitution? You work for the rest of your life for the other families benefit . . .

Cutting off his hands and feet? Arms and legs . . . ???

Just my luck we'd cut off a guys arms and legs and he would still kill again . . .

[JMS]

But there is a simple problem here that I don't see how you can solve.

Killing an innocent person = murder. Murderers deserve execution. Execution, being an endeavor of men, is imperfect. Imperfect execution will inevitably lead to the killing of an innocent person. See where that leads?

It is virtually guaranteed that innocent people have been executed--the numbers are simply too big, and the people who have had last minute acquittals based on real evidence are just too numerous. If you truly believe that all society takes on the burden of execution, a belief that I personally support, then it is virtually guaranteed that American society is guilty of murder.

When someone is dead, they are GONE. You can't release them, you can't compensate, it's over. Yes, that's what makes murder as heinous as it is, which is why societies should not engage in it. When a society condones the possible murder of innocent people in the name of "playing it safe", then society has gone bats**t insane, and does not deserve to be safe.

You pay your money and take your chances!

[xman]

X I don't see how you can say that.

You really don't believe that there are people in the world who will always desire to hurt people and continue to act on those desires until they day they die?

I certainly do and we keep those people incarcerated for life for the protection of the community.

You don't think people deserve to know that they are beyond a shadow of a doubt safe from above monsters?

same answer

You would really put the right to live of the monster above the right to live of the rest of society?

Not at all, but above your right to act as part of a collective murderer yourself. By simply saying "kill 'em", we become the very monsters we abhor and, worse still, we support and engender the murderous actions so that others may feel justified in killing too.

We have serial killers here in Canada too, but they don't get 'the chair'. Instead they get studied and counseled to the great financial relief of the taxpayer, because we all know that the appeal process for death penalty inmates is extremely prohibitive. We've gotten so good at it now that such individuals have actually said that they hope they are never again released into society because they know they will kill again. Science is the answer, not vengeance.