The vast majority of developed countries do not have the death penalty it is wrong and is simply a knee-jerk reaction to how horrible a crime is but its ridiculous. For example if i rape 1000 9 year old kids I wont get the death penalty but if I'm simply an accomplice to 1st degree murder of even just one person I could be sentenced too death in america, I wont even begin too list the amount of innocent people who were sentenced too death row who were later found innocent


thank science for DNA testing

^ The bigger problem that the USA has is the fact they actually extend sentences. For instance, if you're a rapist and you get sentenced to 8-12 years gaol, after 6 or 7 years the victim or the victim's family can lobby to have the sentence extended, and it does happen all the time. And it can happen over-and-over again, without the inmate ever being able to set foot outside the prison, except under escort to go the court. So people who were in their late teens or early 20's can end up serving 35 years to life simply by having their sentences continually extended at the request of the victims/families! In my view that's a serious human rights abuse.

I'm very much against capital punishment under any circumstances.

Now, let me explain that a little bit, since I think it warrants some detail. I perfectly understand victim's families, who want someone put to death for what they have done to their loved ones. If someone did something terrible to one of my relatives and friends, I probably would have no problem killing them personally and I would wish the worst on them.

But that's not how a legal system should work. A legal system has the obligation to protect society from perpetrators. It isn't obligated to carry out revenge killings. And that's what capital punishment ultimately is about. Studies have shown that it serves no other purposes. Deterrent is off the table of discussion as crime stats are showing.

Also, there's the margin of human error. There have been quite a number of death row inmates walking free years or decades after being convicted because new evidence came up. Or even because some prosecutor wanted to make a name for himself and surpressed evidence during trial.

I live inside the EU and compared to the USA our member states have a pretty liberal law. Even life sentences have limits. Sometimes 15 years, sometimes 20, sometimes 25. If you only read the letter of the law, that doesn't seem to be much of a punishment, especially in cases like Brejvik in Norway. American media, in their reporting, tends to stick to that letter, without mentioning or knowing that there is more to these laws. I've seen this mistake being made by liberal as well as conservative media. But in most countries, there are clauses, keeping violent offenders off the streets for good. It's called preventive custody. For us, living in Europe, it's a done deal that Brejvik never walks the streets again. He will be kept in custody after his sentence is up.

(November 6, 2014 at 6:53 pm)Alex K Wrote:

(November 6, 2014 at 6:15 pm)lifesagift Wrote: .. is harsh, I admit, but in this circumstance.. is the right thing to do:

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/5...3210835968

No it's not. It's never ok, period. Fortunately, I live in an actually civilized country in which it has long been abolished, so the question does not really present itself.

I agree the death penalty should be abolished. However I can envision circumstances where it can be warranted. Such circumstances have little to do with the nature of the crime and more to do with the resources of society.

Suppose on Gilligan's Island, the professor goes apeshit because Gilligan knocked over his coconut shelled powered radio transmitter. In his rage the professor stabs Gilligan in the eye and kills him right in front of all the other castaways.

The remaining castaways have to do something about the professor....next time he rages is he going to stab Mrs Howell in the eye? It is just impractical for them to lock him up in the cave with the bamboo bars. To much of their resources would be dedicated to guarding the mad professor. The only way the rest of the group could protect themselves from the professor is to execute him.

In a circumstance like that, I would tolerate the death penalty.

The irony of many Christian 'pro lifers' is that many if not most of them, are pro death penalty. Hmmm...

Guess humans only have value in the womb?

(November 7, 2014 at 9:17 am)Deidre32 Wrote: The irony of many Christian 'pro lifers' is that many if not most of them, are pro death penalty. Hmmm...

Guess humans only have value in the womb?

They should just call themselves what they are, "Pro-birthers". After the baby is alive they don't seem to give a shit about ensuring that kid any sort of reasonable quality of life.

(November 7, 2014 at 9:17 am)Deidre32 Wrote: The irony of many Christian 'pro lifers' is that many if not most of them, are pro death penalty. Hmmm...

Guess humans only have value in the womb?

Killing someone just for existing, and killing someone because they hanged a child upside down and beat him to death are worlds apart from each other.

(November 7, 2014 at 9:23 am)Chad32 Wrote:

(November 7, 2014 at 9:17 am)Deidre32 Wrote: The irony of many Christian 'pro lifers' is that many if not most of them, are pro death penalty. Hmmm...

Guess humans only have value in the womb?

Killing someone just for existing, and killing someone because they hanged a child upside down and beat him to death are worlds apart from each other.

True.
But, has the DP deterred heinous crimes? Not in the U.S.

For some reason it hasn't, though I'm not of the opinion that crime prevention is the main goal of the death penalty. It's to remove the worst people from society in a more complete way than putting them in a cage somewhere.

(November 7, 2014 at 10:43 am)Chad32 Wrote: For some reason it hasn't, though I'm not of the opinion that crime prevention is the main goal of the death penalty. It's to remove the worst people from society in a more complete way than putting them in a cage somewhere.

There are a lot of people in prison who have done some pretty heinous things, yet only a select few get the DP in the U.S. So, it never seemed to make sense to me. Violence (no matter how insidious it looks) will always beget more violence, so in theory, it may seem like the best option in dealing with some criminals, but in practicality, it doesn't really 'work.'