What is your opinion of capital punishment?

This subject has been debated to death on every Q+A site I can remember, while no I am not for capital punishment, you put one innocent person to death your no better than they are.
BUT for true monsters such as Olsen(Canada)Dalmar(U.S) and sorry if I didn’t spelled their names right yeah they should be put down.

As a deterrent, nope not at all people will still kill each other for whatever damn reason.

I’m pretty sure it’s been shown to not be an effective deterrent in studies. As I recall deterrents are mostly effective in property crimes. During crimes of passion, people aren’t thinking of the consequences of their actions and are “in the moment.”

I’d be in favor of renaming “life without the chance of parole” to “death by God.”

Nope, because they kill people that shouldn’t even be on death row and they will kill people because they felt like it, not because they did any crime worthy of the punishment.

And there has been 3 in Canada alone that spent a great part of their life in prison, for a horrible murder to find out years later they were truly innocent.

So in extreme cases I am for it, but 99% of all others NOPE.

The state should never been trusted with the power to execute its citizens. And no, it is not a deterrent. The threat of death is only a deterrent if it is immediate.

I don’t believe in the state taking a life.

The idea behind capital punishment is a sound one which provide a good foundation for a productive community as in the context of which we as a people exist.
It only weakness is that it does not cater for reformation, or cannot make some one better.

The system had become ineffective in that the law enforces are also the law breakers, thus the real benefits of the system is lost and will continue to deteriorate inevitably into a self destructive pattern, taking the communities as we know it, along with it.

I am with the OP, and I loud him/her for saying that; God is the giver of life and all of it is His, so only He has any right to taking it. Second thing, you can’t take a Mulligan if you got it wrong. As in the case as @SQUEEKY2 pointed out, some people lose their life (technically) in prison while the real killer got away. Also, I am against the coward way on which it is carried out. For those who want it, I think they should not object to having it televised, even if pay-per-view, to make it harder for kids to see it. If you are man enough to demand it, have the cajones to see your wish administered. To a point, it is pointless. Lanza (if that is his name) that shot up that school killing a dozen plus children, once executed, the parents are not getting 100% of him for 100% of their child; what is 1/ 22th of him, a foot and a shin, biceps and shoulders, a whole head maybe?

I’ve always been torn about this issue.

On one hand it’s spooky as hell to think the state has the legal right to kill people. Yikes! But, on the other hand there are a lot of people that truly deserve to die, so what’s the solution?

On a side note, when there’s absolutely no question of their guilt (maybe video of them doing the crime), what exactly is wrong with an eye for an eye? I see no problem stabbing someone to death that did the same thing to the 7–11 cashier during a robbery (again, if it’s on video).

It’s a tricky situation. When I was younger I was for it but as I get older I get more and more against it. Yea someone did something horrible and killed another, but killing them isn’t going to bring the victim back, it just makes you a murderer too. I’m always shocked at peoples reactions when someones been murdered or raped even. “BURN EM AT THE STAKE” “CHOP OFF THEIR GENITALS!” “MAKE THEM SUFFER!” ohhh…well there went all rational from that conversation.

On the other hand, is it my responsibility to foot the bill to keep these murderers alive and well in prison?

I have been against the Death Penalty ever since I learned as a teen that it is not a deterrent. All it does is feed the cycle of revenge; it never promotes healing and forgiveness. The State that executes somebody is no better than a mass murderer.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Just the thought of a government murdering a civillian is disgusting. But on a logical level, it doesn’t solve problems and costs money.

IMHO, the death penalty brings the State (or whatever government) down to the same level as the criminal.

Of the forty-one capital offenses in the US, all but two (espionage and treason) involve killing someone directly, or causing someone’s death by another indirect means.

I don’t want the government killing someone in my name.

No. No. No. No one has the right to decide if someone else should die. Period.

You know what?
Keep the sick fuckers on death row for life, no execution, but they’ll spend the rest of their lives expecting it to be their last day, jobs a good un.

You know @ucme you might have something there!!
At least I like it!

Like you I used to be a strong advocate of the death penalty. Not for revenge or ‘an eye for an eye’ but rather because some people are simply not worth having around. If you cold bloodedly kill more than one person, I don’t want to try rehabilitation. You’ve used up all your chances.

The problem comes in when you realize the wrong people get sentenced to death. People like the Green River killer kills 56 women and gets life. Plea deal, to find the remaining bodies. Meanwhile, some poor slob gets the death penalty because he says he didn’t do it (that always pisses off the prosecutor). Read ‘The Innocent Man’ by John Grisham, It will open your eyes to how prosecutors work. Winning at any cost, and you thought justice was the goal.

Death row cons stay there for years on end anyway, i’m talking about those proven to be beyond rehabilitation, child rapists/killers & such.

I’m against it because it is barbaric. Locking people up for life isn’t nice either but some people must be kept segregated from society while others are wrongly convicted.

It’s one of those things I can’t be for. Murder is just not justifiable outside of self defense. Removing individuals who are dangerous from the public is a necessary evil.

I too am torn. I used to be against it, not because I believe in some omnipotent all judging god but because I failed to see how it was anyones right to take the life of another. OTOH, lately, I have been re-thinking my views and am leaning more towards yes, in certain circumstances. The worst of the worst, sadistic serial killers, child molesters and killers, predatory sexual criminals etc.

I am still on the fence but lets look at this whole insane Charles Manson marriage situation. We have spent millions to keep this sociopathic cult leader mastermind incarcerated for damn near 50 years now and now he has prison appointed wedding planners? You’ve got to freaking kidding me!!! This guy should have been gassed decades ago yet he is still glorified, has a cult following and now is about to marry some lunatic 26 yr. old girl at the age of 80. Pointing finger at head and making bang sound.

The millions we spend on irredeemable violent criminals could feed the homeless population, build shelters, create programs for victims of violent crime, all manner of good deeds but we warehouse them at exorbitant cost to the taxpayers with no possibility of a return to society. I dunno, nature eliminates threats, why shouldn’t we? When the Hyenas come after the Cheetahs cubs she takes them out, she doesn’t wait for god to save her babies, she takes the necessary action. While it may be true many violent criminals were also victims of severe abuse, it is also true that there are plenty of people that have come through crappy childhoods and are not out raping and killing innocent others.
I just don’t know, but what I do know is that once one crosses these lines they have no more “rights”.

Charles Manson never killed anyone. Manson, in and of himself, he’s harmless. Little more than a petty crook. Hardly worth executing even if you support the death penalty.

Also, it cost more to execute someone than it does to house them for life.

@Darth_Algar Sooo, was Hitler innocent as well, because he was able to brainwash his minions to murder millions? C.M. is every bit as guilty and dangerous, he used his sociopathic charisma to entice others to do his killing for him. If it weren’t for the lunacy of the “justice” system that keeps death penalty convicts on death row for decades, accruing expensive legal defense and specialized facilities it would be virtually cost free. A few
bullets from a firing squad or a cyanide tablet would do the trick in a cost effective manner.

We can disagree without you putting me on your shit list forever after ya know. ;-)

Hitler had power and the control of a military to enforce his will. Manson, had a few druggie burn-outs. The comparison is ludicrous.

That expensive legal defense is a necessary part of the process, especially when you’ve got a police and prosecutorial system that is more concerned with scoring wins (to look good for taxpayers and voters) than with getting to the truth of the matter. And then you have people sentenced to death who were exonerated years, sometimes decades after the fact. And states that have ended up overturning the convictions of people wrongly convicted more times than they’ve actually carried out executions. That certainly doesn’t lend much credence to the notion of executing convicts right away. But hey if innocent people end up being executed then oh well, right? All for the greater good.

Putting you on my shit list? Lol. Don’t flatter yourself.

I am totally, unalterably and always opposed to it.

Manson, in and of himself, he’s harmless..
“Although Manson never did any of the actual killing, under the rules of accomplice liability, he was deemed as responsible for the killings as the actual perpetrators who caused the deaths of the nine people.”

I oppose the death penalty. Eliminates the margin for error, and lets the guilty off too lightly.

@Darth_Algar
Whether Manson or Hitler, anyone whose mission is to manipulate others to kill is highly dangerous, the numbers don’t matter.
5 killings, 5 million, suffering is suffering.
It is also fairly rare for a serious offender to be unjustly incarcerated as well. possibility vs. probability.

The majority of brutal killers/sex offenders have been guilty as charged, no doubt about it.
I never said I had all the answers and I’m not flattered, you have shown yourself to be a weenie, condescending and rude.

I am ideologically opposed to it. Although since I started working in a paediatric hospital, I’ve seen some things that make me hold that opinion with less conviction than before. I must also admit I have a little smile and a giggle when I see footage of ISIL fighters getting smoked.

I don’t exactly care for it either way. Sometimes I think it is too light of a punishment.

100% opposed.
A corruptible, fallible institution like the political state should not be allowed to make an irreversible decision.

@josie Playing the devil’s advocate for a moment, isn’t imprisonment also an irreversible decision? Freeing someone wrongly convicted hardly gives them their old life back.

Death means there is no possible way the sociopath will commit their crimes again.

Bonus! The offender has been removed from the gene pool.

@Coloma “It is also fairly rare for a serious offender to be unjustly incarcerated as well. possibility vs. probability.’

No kidding? A serious offender would be guilty, no? And if the person is guilty then they are not being wrongly incarcerated. I was not, however, speaking of serious offenders, but rather of innocent people being wrongly incarcerated. It happens, and happens a hell of a lot more than proponents of the death penalty want to admit.

@Coloma ”“It is also fairly rare for a serious offender to be unjustly incarcerated as well. possibility vs. probability.’

One innocent man being executed should be enough to convince you the death penalty isn’t right. From a quick google search it appears that number is closer to 40. Are they just casualties along the way for a greater world?

@El_Cadejo

To expand upon your point my own state (Illinois) has, between reinstating the death penalty in the late 1970s formally abolishing it a few years ago) executed 11 and freed 13 who were on death row but later found to be innocent of the crime they were sentenced to death for.

Again, I do not have all the answers, all I know is that some people do not deserve to live, if we have a terrorist situation threatening millions of lives we certainly would take out a few innocents to protect the greater good.
Personally I’d give my life to protect countless others. Just look at the all the infamous serial killers that have taken thousands of lives in their killing careers. Ted Bundy, Henry Lee Lucas, The Green River killer, John Wayne Gacy, on & on.

C’mon….do you really think these extremely dangerous freaks deserve to live out their days in comfort in our penal system?
I’d happily sacrifice my life to save dozens of women and children the horrors of being sexually tortured to death by a sociopath. With the advent of DNA testing and other infallible methods of determining guilt the odds have been grossly lessened in the last several decades of being wrongly convicted.

It would be fantastic if it were televised live done Python style:

Crucifixion? Take a cross, line up on the left…

My criminology professor says that the innocent-but-on-death-row-rate is as high as ten %.

@Coloma When did jail become comfortable? These horrible killers you mention, if they spend the rest of their years in jail or are put to death it makes little difference as far as the goal of protecting others goes.

I also don’t think the terrorist analogy is a good one. In one case it’s a heat of the moment thing where one is forced to make a quick gut reaction where the death penalty is talking about someone who has already been removed from the situation and held in an isolated environment.

@Coloma “With the advent of DNA testing and other infallible methods of determining guilt the odds have been grossly lessened in the last several decades of being wrongly convicted.”

It really hasn’t. For one thing DNA testing only works if you can afford it. It’s insanely expensive. Most people tried for the death penalty tend to be on the lower end of the socio-economic scale, and thus can’t afford it. It also only works if it’s been collected, handled and stored properly. A lot of cops get kinda sloppy with their collecting and handling of evidence.

@El Cadejo
Jail is climate controlled, 3 square meals a day and access to free medical care, all for misbehaving at the least, being a psychopathic killer at worst. A lot better than any homeless persons conditions whose only crime is poverty or mental illness.

@ Darth Algar Everything associated with our penal system is insanely expensive, I’d rather put the millions into those that deserve it, children, the elderly, the homeless, stray dogs and cats, anything but rewarding criminals with free living expenses and more amenities at their disposal than many upstanding citizens are privy to.

@Coloma

So, you’re against the expense involved in the legal system, but you want to make it more expensive by holding on to the death penalty? Or do you propose going back to the times when a person would be convicted, and executed the following day, on little to no substantial evidence and little to nothing more than someone else’s word?

@Darth_Algar There has to be a happy medium, I am not advocating an old west mentality but when the evidence IS substantial leaving someone on death row for years is a joke. All those boys bodies mouldering away in John Wayne Gacys basement was pretty damn substantial evidence. In cases such as that, yes, they should be eliminated swiftly.
If there is any small shred of reasonable doubt no, otherwise yes. The years and decades of appeals is a joke.

@Coloma

Those years and decades of appeals have proven to be a minimum necessity, as demonstrated by the government’s inability to avoid wrongfully convicting innocents. And presumably anyone convicted has been convicted beyond all reasonable doubt. That’s our system – if there is any shred of reasonable doubt whatsoever you’re suppose to vote to acquit.

@Darth_Algar Well of course, okay…horse dead, it’s been run to death in circles. lol

@Coloma If prison is so wonderful… And they decided to open the doors how many people do you think would run IN and how many would run OUT. The punishment for prison is loosing your humanity, loosing your freedom, being treated much like an animal without autonomy, identity, the ability to move as you please, interact with who you want. That is a STEEP price, and comes with the added benefit of being REVERSIBLE if we find out later that they were innocent.

@gorillapaws For some yes, but the worst of the worst deserve to lose their “status”.
I could do a Martha Stewart stint no problem. Cooking classes, salon treatment.
Prison is all about fame and fortune as well, the creepiest of creeps get what they deserve but for the elite it’s a cake walk. Lets not forget how many guilty get released on technicalities as well, such as OJ Simpson that was freed because of police investigative bumbles and celebrity status.

Let’s see what, if anything, goes down for Bill Cosby. The cases of violent criminals being set free, often under psychiatric recommendations only to go on and kill again is well documented.
Horrendous criminals are released and the wealthy are given salon treatment.
Remember the kid who killed a mother and daughter a couple years ago driving drunk?

A case of “affluenza.” Haha
His rich daddy finagled him being sent to a $500,000 a year country club rehab facility.
Horseback riding, gym, sports, poor baby, he might have had a 10 p.m. bedtime and no Xbox. Wah!
Bottom line, there is no justice.

@Coloma I agree that there are major issues with the US prison system, something that needs reform for sure, but I hardly think the solution to that is killing people.

@El_Cadejo Not killing “people” killing SOME people. Sheesh…I don’t know how to make myself any more clear. The most dangerous and heinous “people” that are absolutely, positively, proven guilty. The ones that will never be safe to be re-introduced to society.

It’s not that hard to compute what I’m saying. Many of them get killed in prison anyway by their peers. Rapists, child molesters, Is that any more humane than lending a hand to have inmates killing other inmates and even more violence?
I do agree that the entire penal system needs an overhaul and it is also true that our system really does nothing but make criminals even more criminal in the long run.

The whole situation is simply not working.

@Coloma “Lets not forget how many guilty get released on technicalities as well, such as OJ Simpson that was freed because of police investigative bumbles and celebrity status.”

No, OJ was acquitted because Mark Furhman admitted to planting evidence and all but admitted to lying on the stand. There is your reasonable doubt. The system worked exactly as intended.

A occasional Gacy is not enough to justify clinging on the the death penalty, especially life in prison accomplishes the game goal – removing that person from society. The state simply cannot be trusted with capital punishment.

“The state simply cannot be trusted with capital punishment.”

Interesting! Does that mean we should not let the President have his ‘Kill List’? Hell, there’s not even a trial involved with that capital punishment, just the execution part.

@FireMadeFlesh Freeing someone wrongly convicted hardly gives them their old life back.
That is why you do the next best thing, if we are a society that really want to do it right; give them 5 boatloads of money and don’t be as stupid and rude as to tax them on it.

Those worried that sociopath would get loose and do it again, put the onus on them. Make them take the choice of sitting on a chair rigged with 150lb of C-4, or get a partial lobotomy. If they have not made the choice in 15 min. they get the lobotomy; problem solved.

@FireMadeFlesh
Really?

@Jaxk Interesting! Does that mean we should not let the President have his ‘Kill List’? Hell, there’s not even a trial involved with that capital punishment, just the execution part.”

Have you ever seen me express support for such a list?

@josie You said that a fallible institution such as the state should not be able to make an irreversible decision. In the past week, there was a man to be freed after 37 years in gaol based on a 12 year old’s lies. Does freeing him reverse that decision, or has the state already done irreparable damage to his life, making the act of freeing him a mere apology for his old age?

Just pointing out that for a mere $58K (the cost of a hellfire missile) we can execute someone, along with a few of their closest friends and solve the problems of retrials, housing, retribution, and so forth. All we need is a King and luckily we have one.