The Death Penalty - are you for or against it and why?

[OnlyNatural]

Well, I support it, but only in a drastically revised form: Namely, it would be voluntary, and only people who will be spending the rest of their lives in prison or third (or more) time offenders. And, of course, there'd be counseling to make sure that the prisoner really wants to die, and of course, the actual methods would be as painless as possible.

That's an interesting idea. I wonder how many prisoners would choose to do that. Somehow, though, I don't think many would. The desire for self-preservation is pretty strong, even in the worst situations, and particularly among sociopaths and psychopaths. It would probably just offer those who are truly suicidal with an easier way out.

[Ashendant]

Well, I support it, but only in a drastically revised form: Namely, it would be voluntary, and only people who will be spending the rest of their lives in prison or third (or more) time offenders. And, of course, there'd be counseling to make sure that the prisoner really wants to die, and of course, the actual methods would be as painless as possible.

That's an interesting idea. I wonder how many prisoners would choose to do that. Somehow, though, I don't think many would. The desire for self-preservation is pretty strong, even in the worst situations, and particularly among sociopaths and psychopaths. It would probably just offer those who are truly suicidal with an easier way out.

That's actually worse it may cause people to kill other so they can kill themselves

[Nitsuj]

I oppose it. I feel that if a person has done something bad enough to warrant the death penalty, people want them to be miserable. What could cause more misery than life in a prison? If somebody's committed a murder, it's borderline hypocritical to kill them yourself.

[Autumnlicious]

I oppose the state's right to kill you in principle.

[OnlyNatural]

That's actually worse it may cause people to kill other so they can kill themselves

Would someone who's suicidal really go through the trouble of murdering someone, enduring the trial process, and spending time in jail, just so they could let the state kill them? I guarantee you there are a lot more easier ways, like jumping off a building or inhaling carbon monoxide in your garage.

[Ashendant]

That's actually worse it may cause people to kill other so they can kill themselves

Would someone who's suicidal really go through the trouble of murdering someone, enduring the trial process, and spending time in jail, just so they could let the state kill them? I guarantee you there are a lot more easier ways, like jumping off a building or inhaling carbon monoxide in your garage.

They don't have the courage to do it...

[Rev. Rye]

Well, I support it, but only in a drastically revised form: Namely, it would be voluntary, and only people who will be spending the rest of their lives in prison or third (or more) time offenders. And, of course, there'd be counseling to make sure that the prisoner really wants to die, and of course, the actual methods would be as painless as possible.

That's an interesting idea. I wonder how many prisoners would choose to do that. Somehow, though, I don't think many would. The desire for self-preservation is pretty strong, even in the worst situations, and particularly among sociopaths and psychopaths. It would probably just offer those who are truly suicidal with an easier way out.

Well, I came up with the idea when I had heard about how Ian Brady (basically the UK's equivalent to Charlie Manson) has actually been fighting for his right to die for years (He is not terminally ill, BTW), being on hunger strike for about eight years, only surviving because of force-feeding twice a day. Looking at it, it really gave me the above idea. On the one hand, the death penalty is intrinsically flawed because we cannot be sure we're not executing the wrong guy. On the other, is there any real reason we should force somebody like Ian Brady to live longer than he wants to?

[Justtristo]

I am against the death penalty, mainly because there is always the risk of innocent people being executed.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

I'm for it. I don't like the idea of spending money to keep the worst of the worst human beings alive. It's more than they deserve.

[Tiberius]

Of course not, you would need a more compelling reason than "person x killed person y", such as "person x will kill person y unless I kill person x first", in that case I would be justified in taking someone's right to life to prevent another loss of life.

So assuming that you are person Z, I can say "person Z will kill person X unless I kill person Z first", and I would be justified in taking person Z's life right?