Death Penalty - for/against?

My2Cents

Brown Belt
@Brown
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
3,322
Reaction score
533
Personally I dont understand how you can support it. Wrongfull convinctions happen all the time and death can't be overturned. Even for that reason alone I don't understand how you can support it.

Furthermore, it's proven that doesn't stop peopee from doing crime, so basically the detterent effect is non-existent.

What are the pro aguments? How can you explain it to yourself supporting something that you know has such flaws?
 
I support it as part of justice being served. That said, justice and morality are different things and ought not to be treated like they were the same thing. It's also highly risky to put administering justice in the hands of government and therefore some limitations to what a government can legitimately do are in order.
 
Last edited:
I support it in theory, but in practice we have too many issues. The two biggest being wrongly convicted and botched executions.
 
Some people just need to die for the shit they do.

Justice for the victim/victims and their family.

I don't care if it does or doesn't stop others form killing. Maybe in some cases it does in in other cases it doesn't but that's not the point anyway.

I'm all for making sure the person is guilty before killing them.

I don't care about "botched" executions and think we need to bring back the gas chamber and old sparky. I'm not looking to torture the person but if it's not as "clean" as people would like I don't care.

If they required a lottery of citizens to pick a person to pull the switch and I was picked I would do it. I would not look forward to it but like I said some people just need to die for what they did.
 
Last edited:
I support it when there's absolute proof of the guilt. It's got to be a certainty, without doubt or 'reasonable doubt.'
 
Last edited:
I'm all for making sure the person is guilty before killing them.

This is a key issue. Many, like myself, do not believe the state should be given power to kill people and especially citizens. But even if you do believe that killing people is per se okay if they deserve it, there is the issue of wrongful convictions that will never disappear due to the human element (false confessions, false witness statements, tampered-with evidence, corrupt or prejudiced judges, naive juries, bad defense attorneys, withholding of evidence by DAs wanting to 'win' the case).

@panamaican is of the opinion that while all that is true, killing innocents is not as bad as not having the death penalty because the death penalty serves a useful purpose and from a strictly utilitarian perspective, those who are innocent simply have had bad luck (I am paraphrasing and spinning this, obviously, so feel free to reiterate your position @panamaican). Personally, I disagree because I simply do not know of any evidence how the death penalty has lead to better situations as opposed to those in countries without it. If someone could hook me up with a large-n study of family traumatization and happiness that shows relatives are significantly happier with than without the death penalty, I might reconsider that aspect.
 
@JDragon
There are plenty of cases that there is no doubt the person did it and I have no problem with killing them.

Just look at the head lines and you will see plenty.
 
I'm against it in both theory and practise! I do however on an emotional level feel that the "brazen" bull should be in reinstated for some criminals.
 
I wonder if there were a state assisted suicide option how long it would take for a lifer to take it?

Is the suicide rate high in prison?
 
@JDragon
There are plenty of cases that there is no doubt the person did it and I have no problem with killing them.

Just look at the head lines and you will see plenty.

No question about that. My point is that there will always be mistakes made, even if courts may get it right in 98 percent of the cases.
 
Just the threat of the death penalty is often really useful in getting people to plead guilty and avoiding unnecessary trials. It gives more tools to prosecutors.
 
No question about that. My point is that there will always be mistakes made, even if courts may get it right in 98 percent of the cases.

I don't see a truly innocent person being put to death now days. The process is too long and the cases looked at to hard.

Could it have happened in the past, yes but I'm not willing to stop it just willing to make sure now we have the ability to do so.

I'm only for it when there is no question of the persons guilt.
 
I absolutely support it. there is no reason why people getting multiple life sentences without possibilities of parole shouldnt get one.
yeah, I know there are wrongful convictions, but those cases are from the last century.
 
Death Penalty should be enforced of any asshole caught in the act and on those mofokers posting facebook videos of their crimes (escalated death penalty for being too retarded).
 
Against.
It's expensive and innocent people have been (and will be) put to death.
 
Against. Anyone who doesn't believe we've executed innocent people has their head up their ass. That alone is a good enough reason never to do it.
 
Against. Anyone who doesn't believe we've executed innocent people has their head up their ass. That alone is a good enough reason never to do it.
It's expensive too. For example, an inmate on death row in CA costs the state twice as much annually as someone in gen pop.
 
It's expensive too. For example, an inmate on death row in CA costs the state twice as much annually as someone in gen pop.

Yeah, AND it's not a deterrent AND it disproportionately gets applied to the poor and socially marginalized AND there's no consistency to its application, there are all kinds of reasons to be against it. But the fact that we know damn well wrongful executions can and have happened is enough reason to slam the breaks on the whole conversation right there.
 
Back
Top