Capital Punishment

[Stroupes]

Is it ever justifiable to execute criminals?


Close to 90 countries have the death penalty, but nowhere is it debated so often as in the United States where each state can formulate its own policy according to the Constitution. Many states allow the death penalty as a sentence although some, such as Illinois, have recently imposed a moratorium while they study the arguments for and against.

Some forms of Capital Punishment are more dangerous/harmful than others.
Lethal Injection, for example, contains 3 chemicals: sodium thiopental, which induces unconciousness, Pancuronium bromide, which basically relaxes the muscles, and potassium chloride, which affects electrical conduction of the heart, leading to contraction.

Given that all 3 chemicals worked 100% of the time, it wouldn't be so much of a bad thing, if you're pro-execution, but this sometimes isn't the case.

In my criminal justice class, I studied various cases of capital punishment, one being a failed lethal injection.

The problem here, is that when not all the chemicals work, say, the pancuronium bromide, the victim is left unconcious, but can still feel all the unimaginable pain of the potassium chloride, but he or she cannot move, because of the sodium thiopental, and can't tell anyone that they are in pain because they are unconcious.

Situationally, all other forms of capital punishment seem to be jusitfiable.

 

[Vro]

I'm not for capital punishment in any way.

But for those who are, why do you care so much about the humanity of it? I read the same thing, what if one of the chemicals doesn't work? They're going to be dead anyways, why do you care? There's no such thing as a dignified death if it's sentenced. A bullet is just as effective, and cheaper, than the chemicals above.

As far as justifiable? There should never be a punishment that ends your life. The point of a punishment is, hopefully, repentance. I do not believe in God; I am Buddhist. So do not take repentance in a religious way. There should be no limit to forgiving someone's crimes if they are truly regretful. It may take time for you or others to accept their apology, but it will take even longer should the criminal truly repent and ask for forgiveness.

Ending their life solves nothing, unless you look at it in a utilitarian point of view, in which you're getting rid of them to better society. If that's the case, why not life sentence? The only argument against that I can see is price. Can someone's life be translated into monetary amounts? I personally don't think so, and hope that others see that as well.

 

[victra♥]

I am, on the other hand, for Capital Punishment but only for situational cases. Personally, if someone is willing to commit murder knowing full well that they are taking a person's life, Capital Punishment seems very justifiable. Imagine how the family of the victim must feel, or the potential that victim could have had. It doesn't seem fair that you lost someone dear to you, and the murderer is allowed to live their life, in jail or not. As for the lethal injection, i must say that i disagree with this method of capital punishment. However, i do not have any empathy for those unlucky few who have a failed lethal injection. Assuming all of the criminals in death row are sick murderers, I honestly don't care.

Christians feel that it's justifiable that God sends someone into ****ation in fire for all of eternity because Adam ate an apple 6000 years ago. With that, it should be hard justifying Capital Punishment. I could use the same argument most Christians use when they're asked about the fairness of Hell as a punishment:


You're given a choice and you chose the wrong one.

 

[SkylerOcon]

In most cases, the Death Penalty is given because of a murder. I find that ironic. It's a lot like saying that as punishment for Joe stealing my book, I'll steal his. It solves nothing. I'm still missing what I lost, and now Joe is missing something of his.

Killing somebody as punishment for killing is a contradiction in itself. Not only that, but we can never truly be 100% sure that somebody committed a crime unless they admit to it. It would not be good to kill somebody for a crime they didn't commit only to discover that somebody else did the deed later.

 

[Vro]

Imagine how the family of the victim must feel, or the potential that victim could have had. It doesn't seem fair that you lost someone dear to you, and the murderer is allowed to live their life, in jail or not.

It's not fair. But like Skyler said, it really doesn't solve anything. It might make things "even," however you just killed another person, which you seem to agree with, is wrong.

Not only that, but we can never truly be 100% sure that somebody committed a crime unless they admit to it.

Admitting to a crime doesn't mean truth in any way. It just means the person says he or she willingly confesses to a crime. And I'm sure there are very reliable ways to tell if someone did something. I'm not saying all crimes are 100% verifiable, but I know that when many crimes are solved beyond a doubt, they mean it.

 

[BFDD]

The only time I am for the death penalty is for people that can not function in society. Serial killers for instance that can not function in society and continue to harm others even in prison. They present a danger to there fellow inmates and the guards. The only way to prevent them from causing more harm would be to kill them or lock them in solitary for the rest of their life, death seems much less cruel. But these are special cases, when it is the only option to prevent harm to others.

 

[Amide]

First off, people that receive the death penalty deserve it. But does that make it ethical? It's so unethical to have murder in the process that it's unbelievable that it's still an issue. This is like ****** criminals that have *****. Just because the government is in the process, and the person has done it too, it isn't justified.

This saying says it all: Why should we kill people that kill people to show that killing people is wrong?

 

[Vro]

Wait, you say they deserve it but it's unethical?

 

[Amide]

@Vro

The killer deserves to die, but still shoudn't get killed.

Because a killer killed someone, the killer in an unethical world would get killed, and while the killer deserved it since the killer killed someone, it still isn't right.

It's kind of hard to explain, like if you punched a kid at school. The kid would think that you deserve what you did to him, but it still wouldn't be right.

 

[Vro]

Interesting. You're putting morals over your own feelings. It's interesting because I don't feel he deserves to die, morals or not. But, it's easy for me to say that, without me being in that situation.

 

[Amide]

Well, I know that a lot of people hate the death penalty, but in the situation in which a family member was killed, they would want the criminal executed. I simply couldn't take it. I'd feel responsible for the criminal's death.

 

[lonejedi]

I support Capitol Punishment, but I don't think it should be used in extreme cases, but it also needs to be redone. Too many times, prisoners are on death row for years and years. Sitting there going through the motions of a death sentence. The process is ridiculous. I'm also for capital punishment because of how much money the government pumps out to these people. Someone who is homeless and doesn't have any food, but is a decent citizen, gets less than a proven killer. They sit in their warm cells, get a 2-3 meals every day, and even get free time to hang out with other cell mates.

 

[Amide]

I guess your right, capital punishment is more efficient, but I think that all criminals should have to work in prison. It fixes the problem of the fact that criminals get so much money from tax. However this would require closer supervision. In the end though, I think that ethics is more important than the cost of the process.

 

[lonejedi]

I guess your right, capital punishment is more efficient, but I think that all criminals should have to work in prison. It fixes the problem of the fact that criminals get so much money from tax. However this would require closer supervision. In the end though, I think that ethics is more important than the cost of the process.

But the cost of the process directly relates to ethics. We could be using all that wasted money on things that do matter! Instead of pumping it out to criminals, we could reform Welfare, and help those who actually need the money. We could cut costs for tax payers, which would benefit the whole country.

 

[Amide]

But the cost of the process directly relates to ethics. We could be using all that wasted money on things that do matter! Instead of pumping it out to criminals, we could reform Welfare, and help those who actually need the money. We could cut costs for tax payers, which would benefit the whole country.

You're right. But it would feel wrong. Choosing between ethics and ethics can actually be hard, but I think as a transition, something similar to 'assisted suicide' sounds like a good idea. Assisted suicide is when the person that wants to commit suicide has a reason to want to die and could get positive support because dieing would be less painful than the alternative, living. For example, would you rather die, or go to prison for life? Many would say the former, some people go insane (not that they weren't insane in the first place) in prison.

If no one takes that offer, maybe capital punishment could be a last resort. It's just awful that we have to use lethal injection when another method is much less painful.

 

[MojoMan]

I am totally against capital punishment. The only reason for capital punishment is for murders, right? So basically, you're killing people because they killed people just to show that killing people is wrong. It's a Hippocratic statement. When we were small children, didn't adults used to say that if you get into a fight, just walk away, because fighting only creates more fighting? That's exactly what is happening. I suggest just locking all the serial killers up in one big cell, and let them kill each other if they're so desperate for bloodshed.

 

[OffTheChain]

Never been a fan of capital punishment, its not so much of how they are executed but the fact it seems like its an easy way out for the criminal. He/She should have to live with what they dd and if possible get help, there are plenty of alternatives to death.

Also I'd like to add on how while someone may take another persons life no authority group should have the right to take the criminals life.

 

[McCloud]

Lonejedi:

The process of putting a criminal to death is more costly than letting them rot in jail.

The death penalty is iffy for me, but in general I frown upon it. There is no evidence that capital punishment deters crimes, lowers costs/saves money, etc etc. Other arguments include mishandled cases (wrongful death), etc. Capital punishment is, at its best, vengeful bloodshed spurred on by pathos. All the arguments presented here ask one to "think of the family." The family isn't the justice system. The justice system should (though it doesn't necessarily do it all the time, but that's another matter entirely) remain above the emotional arguments of people.

What we are looking for is true and proper justice, both legally and ethically. Killing a killer isn't really the way to go about that.

 

[lonejedi]

Did a little research, and I stand corrected. There are no financial savings with the death penalty. I was wrong about that. But I also think that if done right, the death penalty could be done cheaper, the process as of now is horrible.

I just don't agree with getting rid of it all together. I think when someone murders someone by first-degree murder, they're not going to think about what they did in jail, and be sorry for it. They're not going to care.

 

[Crimson King]

Louisiana has a pretty good law - if you **** a child under a certain age, I believe it's 4, you are automatically given the death penalty. Rapists and Pedophiles are the lowest of the low in the human totem pole, and they are also the ones least like to be rehabilitated and the ones more likely to get out on a technicality and commit their crime again. Also, if you are for ethical treatment of humans, putting a rapist and ESPECIALLY a pedophile in the General Prison population is about the cruelest thing you can do.

 

[Amide]

@CK

Do you really think that a rapist would continue that behavior in prison? I guess it makes sense, because they wouldn't get out of prison. But under that control, why would they do it? If there really was a possibility that they would continue the immoral behavior, well then yes, I'm absolutely for the death penalty.

 

[Crimson King]

No, what I mean is in prison, Rapists and pedophiles are usually treated the same way they treated their victims. Most die pretty fast.

 

[Stroupes]

For anyone wondering about criminals continuing their behavior after prison, research Florence Holway.
She was ***** and sodomized, and her rapist got out of prison early with a plea bargin, and continued to **** women.

 

[Vro]

Altho prison does not deter crime after a criminal is released, they cannot be released if they have a life sentence. And usually that is the substitute for the death penalty.

 

[Stroupes]

I think criminals should just get the life sentence, period.
I've been to a prison, I was only there for like, 2 hours, and I already got sick of it.
I think life in prison would certainly be sufficient.
Death would be the easy way out.

 

[snex]

for those who are against capital punishment... what do you propose we do with unrepentant and untreatable sociopathic killers? give them life in prison without parole? well how exactly is that different than a death sentence, other than the cost of keeping them alive? (yes im aware of the insane costs of death too - but those costs are *unnecessary* whereas the cost of life sentences *are* necessary)

the fact of the matter is, until neuroscience comes up with a way to effectively cure these people, there is simply nothing we can do other than protect the rest of society by getting rid of them.

 

[Vro]

there is simply nothing we can do other than protect the rest of society by getting rid of them.

This can be either life or death sentence, which changes nothing from the debate. Sociopaths make up a very small portion of death row, to my knowledge, so it shouldn't be the main focus.

 

[snex]

This can be either life or death sentence, which changes nothing from the debate. Sociopaths make up a very small portion of death row, to my knowledge, so it shouldn't be the main focus.

for such people, a life sentence would require keeping them away from other potential victims as much as possible. basically solitary confinement. i would argue that solitary confinement is both more cruel and more costly to society than putting the person to death.

 

[BFDD]

This can be either life or death sentence, which changes nothing from the debate. Sociopaths make up a very small portion of death row, to my knowledge, so it shouldn't be the main focus.

It should be talked about, I agree that in many cases the death penalty is a bad idea, but sociopaths are still a danger to the prison population and are not curable.
You are against the justice system killing people who are arrested but you are ok with other people killing them?

As far as it being more expensive to kill someone than a life imprisonment. As snex said it doesn't have to be that way. Arguing that the current system is flawed is not valid. If you want to argue how to fix the current system start a new topic.

Is it ever justifiable to execute criminals?

This is the original question and I am saying yes in some specific cases it is justifiable. If the person continues to present a danger to others even while imprisoned, it is justifiable to kill them for the safety of other people.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

There are plenty of things worthy of death, I am going to go for the obvious, Hitler, he deserved it, thus the death penalty is justifiable, yet it seems those who deserve it most do not recieve it, as they take their own life, not out of shame, but cowardice to face the consequences of their own actions.

I am sure some of you would only support the death penalty if it was you who was killed.

 

[Amide]

There are plenty of things worthy of death, I am going to go for the obvious, Hitler, he deserved it, thus the death penalty is justifiable, yet it seems those who deserve it most do not recieve it, as they take their own life, not out of shame, but cowardice to face the consequences of their own actions.

I am sure some of you would only support the death penalty if it was you who was killed.

Like I have said before, Hitler deserved to die, but it still isn't ethical to kill him. Life in prison would do the same justice. Actually, it costs the same too.

 

[snex]

Like I have said before, Hitler deserved to die, but it still isn't ethical to kill him. Life in prison would do the same justice. Actually, it costs the same too.

one bullet costs the same as several thousand meals?

 

[Crimson King]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/scotus.child.****/index.html - Louisiana sucks again.

 

[SkylerOcon]

for such people, a life sentence would require keeping them away from other potential victims as much as possible. basically solitary confinement. i would argue that solitary confinement is both more cruel and more costly to society than putting the person to death.

If there was a sociopathic, unrepentant killer who admitted to commiting the crimes and there was proof against him, then he should be given death row. It would be to dangerous to keep him in a prison. This is one of the few cases in which it is plausible to kill somebody, because even when he's surrounded by guards he would still be dangerous.

 

[Stroupes]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/scotus.child.****/index.html - Louisiana sucks again.

I could almost understand why they're doing that, but it's still ridiculous.
I would think crimes like ****, given certain circumstances, would certainly jusitfy execution.

 

[Amide]

one bullet costs the same as several thousand meals?

Actually, the system that goes through people on death row costs lots of money. The chemicals that they use, because they don't use guns, cost a lot to be made. I'll admit I am not that sure why the costs are so close, but they really are. People that are a threat to society can be killed. (I know, everyone in jail's a threat to society, but when things could go wrong even there)

 

[snex]

Actually, the system that goes through people on death row costs lots of money. The chemicals that they use, because they don't use guns, cost a lot to be made. I'll admit I am not that sure why the costs are so close, but they really are. People that are a threat to society can be killed. (I know, everyone in jail's a threat to society, but when things could go wrong even there)

pointing out that we carry out the death penalty inefficiently does not mean that killing a criminal costs more than putting them in prison for life.

i could build a geo metro with my bare hands and it would probably cost me over $100,000, but that does not mean that geo metros cost more than a mercedes.

 

[Amide]

pointing out that we carry out the death penalty inefficiently does not mean that killing a criminal costs more than putting them in prison for life.

i could build a geo metro with my bare hands and it would probably cost me over $100,000, but that does not mean that geo metros cost more than a mercedes.

It is cheaper to kill someone. But the way we do it now, it really isn't much cheaper. Death penalty reform could fix that, but I'd still be against it for the most part for violating the eighth amendment.

 

[Vro]

How is a bullet cruel and unusual, may I ask? If properly executed, it is swift, cheap, and painless.

 

[snex]

How is a bullet cruel and unusual, may I ask? If properly executed, it is swift, cheap, and painless.

especially since the SCOTUS has not outlawed the death penalty on these grounds... i dont see how you can claim cruel and unusual when test cases are aplenty.

what we should do to people sentenced to death is tell them theyre free to go, and when they start to happily leave, BAM, shot to the head. theyll die happy. whats the downside?