Death penalty. For or against ?

[livi]

In the light of current affairs in Iraq. A simple poll regarding the death penalty. Comments and arguments are welcome.

My personal opinion is principly against it. An evolved, democratic society should not kill its own citizens.

[IROC]

I voted "no" only because I don't think it really works - not because I'm anti-corporal punishment.

As a deterrent, it fails because I don't think that criminals *really* stop and think as they are committing some heinous crime "Hey, wait a minute - if I do this I might get the death penalty!". Plus, I read once that the average criminal sentenced to death spends something like 14 years on "death row" while his multitude of appeals, etc., are processed. All at the cost of something like $49k/year to the taxpayers.

Maybe it provides some closure to victim's families, but in the end I don't think it's the right answer because aside from removing the criminal from society, I don't think it solves anything. Do some people *deserve* it? Yeah. Is it the right thing for us to do? I'm not convinced.

Mike

[VINMAN]

I'm all for it. Just have to do away with the lenghty appeal proccess.

[Christien]

I agree with you guys, Markus and Mike, generally speaking. Yes, a democratic nation shouldn't kill its own, and the deterrent argument has been proven false several times.

However in the case of extremely heinous crimes (war crimes, extreme child predators) I've noticed by anti- stance soften somewhat over the years. Am I sad Saddam will be hanged? No. Would I be disappointed if Milosovic were to be gassed? Not really.

[AFJuvat]

I believe that it it is appropriate for the worst crimes - premeditated murder, child predation, etc.

I think the appeals process should be shorter as well. I also feel that in cases where guilt is 100% certain (DNA evidence, eye witnesses etc. That the execution should be carried out in 30 days or less.

AFJ

[DaveE]

I think it's appropriate when we are sure but I don't think our justice system works well enough to be sure.

[legion]

It's best to take some people out of the gene pool as soon as possible.

[artplumber]

Originally posted by legion
It's best to take some people out of the gene pool as soon as possible.

+1

[Aerkuld]

No. But this goes against what I would have said a few years ago.
To put it in a nut shell, I am certain that not everyone convicted is actually guilty. While this might be a fairly small proportion it would still mean executing innocent people.

[nota]

for goddamm insane sure
a; it is not my country
b; sure he did it or at least most of it
c; he is a threat to do more

for the avg joe no

plea bargans are one big reason
the carreer criminal gets out by a deal
while the avg joe has nothing to trade
and the guy who didnot do it is the one caught in catch 22
willnot take a deal as he didnot do it so gets the death card

Mrs L BuSh2 killed a former boyfriend in a car crash
would you kill her??

[Zef]

An evolved, democratic society is not supposed to count some child killer\abuser too...!

[Lothar]

Originally posted by IROC
I voted "no" only because I don't think it really works - not because I'm anti-corporal punishment.

As a deterrent, it fails because I don't think that criminals *really* stop and think as they are committing some heinous crime "Hey, wait a minute - if I do this I might get the death penalty!". Plus, I read once that the average criminal sentenced to death spends something like 14 years on "death row" while his multitude of appeals, etc., are processed. All at the cost of something like $49k/year to the taxpayers.

Mike

The reason it provides little or no deterrence is because it's rarely used (as a percentage of violent criminals convicted) and ineffectively used in this country. When someone is convicted and sentenced to death, it then takes 25 to 30 years to carry out the sentence thanks to endless appeals and legal maneuvering. By that time, there is little deterrent value left. Many criminals will be saying, "I wasn't even born when that guy killed all those people.

If a reasonable appeal period were allowed and sentences carried out in less than 5 years there might be some thought given to capital punishment as a possible outcome to getting caught.

[artplumber]

More important, it stops that person from doing it again. There truly are sociapaths out there who are nonrehab-able, and not worth it for society to keep around.

I'd add that women (mostly) who "fall in love" with these things and perhaps even have babies w/them also deserve capital punishment. (ooooh mean, I know) from a purely species standpoint.

[NICKG]

I am against it in this case. We have enough bad feelings within the arab states. Saddam should have been placed in custody of Iraq and tried by them as he was, but additionally by his arab peers. We (the US) should have nothing to do with it. It is too coincidental to me that his death sentence is announced 3 days before an election here

[svandamme]

from a practical standpoint i would say , sure , if 120% prooven guilti , aka caught redhanded, yes

it's cheaper
it's more effective

but realistically , i say no

because of many reasons

- death is to easy out
- it's often used , for sentences that turn out not to be correct
- court systems are just as well flawed as are we

[Burnin' oil]

Opposed. But not for any reasons concerning the perp.

[Christien]

Originally posted by NICKG
I am against it in this case. We have enough bad feelings within the arab states. Saddam should have been placed in custody of Iraq and tried by them as he was, but additionally by his arab peers. We (the US) should have nothing to do with it. It is too coincidental to me that his death sentence is announced 3 days before an election here

Saddam was tried by an Iraqi court. Ok, it was a system set up by the US, but someone had to do it. The judge was Iraqi, the lawyers were Iraqi.

FTR, I was/am opposed to the Iraq war (leave this discussion for another thread if you want to take this up with me, even though I'm sick to death of it, but let's not hijack this thread) and am generally anti-capital punishment, but there's no argument that Saddam's not a nice guy, and now that he's caught, I say string him up, and do it publicly.

[TerryH]

Originally posted by IROC
I voted "no" only because I don't think it really works - not because I'm anti-corporal punishment.

As a deterrent, it fails because I don't think that criminals *really* stop and think as they are committing some heinous crime "Hey, wait a minute - if I do this I might get the death penalty!".
Mike

While I agree that the death penalty isn't a deterrent to murder, it most certainly is a deterrent against repeat offenders. Just last week I read of a murderer, who was released after spending 25 years behind bars for killing a 5 year old, was rearrested in the death of a 16 yr old girl. How would you feel as a parent to that girl? Why is this guy still alive much less on the street?

Is life without possibility of parole just punishemnt? Should those who take life away be allowed to watch tv and eat 3 square a day?

I have always been pro death penalty if there is irrefutable evidence against the condemned. Eye witness testimony has proven to be less than reliable since the beginning of time. Now with DNA taking over as the pointing finger, I am much more in favor of death to those that deserve it and freedom to those imprisoned wrongly.

[IROC]

Maybe I should clarify that in our current system the death penalty is not a good deterrent. I wish it was. Clearly there are people out there that need to be removed from society and I don't have a problem with doing that.

Mike

[austin552]

Bring back public execution!