Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Death Penalty

jzonda415
Posts: 151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 12:12:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
For a long time now I have been going back and forth on capital punishment and whether or not it should be legal. I used to be all for it, but I soon had a formal debate with my Dad where I had to argue against it. While learning about it, I found many facts and points against it which made me think differently about it, and from there on I was undecided on the issue. I could really use some opinions to help me decide. So, I ask:
Should the Death Penalty be Abolished?
DeFool
Posts: 626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:04:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
We will abolish the death penalty, but not soon.

My view: it is unsafe for the society that maintains it. I see an equilibrium between societal rage directed towards murderers, and societal fear of false conviction.

Currently, in the US, this imbalance favors rage. We use the death penalty as a useful safety valve, that allows us the fiction that murderers will be punished with capital punishment. This prevents vigilantism.

However, eventually it will become evident that the death penalty is itself a type of serial killer, which also kills the innocent according to a demonic lottery of chance. Managed by fallible humans, state sanctioned killings will sooner or later be seen as an unacceptable risk to anyone who is innocent of any crime - revenge will no longer justify it.
Nidhogg
Posts: 503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:10:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/5/2013 2:04:15 PM, DeFool wrote:
We will abolish the death penalty, but not soon.

My view: it is unsafe for the society that maintains it. I see an equilibrium between societal rage directed towards murderers, and societal fear of false conviction.

Currently, in the US, this imbalance favors rage. We use the death penalty as a useful safety valve, that allows us the fiction that murderers will be punished with capital punishment. This prevents vigilantism.

However, eventually it will become evident that the death penalty is itself a type of serial killer, which also kills the innocent according to a demonic lottery of chance. Managed by fallible humans, state sanctioned killings will sooner or later be seen as an unacceptable risk to anyone who is innocent of any crime - revenge will no longer justify it.

I believe the death penalty is justified only in extreme cases like mass murder. If they are allowed to live it is an insult to everyone that they killed.
Ridiculously Photogenic Debater

DDO's most mediocre member since at least a year ago
DeFool
Posts: 626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:29:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/5/2013 2:10:16 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 2/5/2013 2:04:15 PM, DeFool wrote:
We will abolish the death penalty, but not soon.

My view: it is unsafe for the society that maintains it. I see an equilibrium between societal rage directed towards murderers, and societal fear of false conviction.

Currently, in the US, this imbalance favors rage. We use the death penalty as a useful safety valve, that allows us the fiction that murderers will be punished with capital punishment. This prevents vigilantism.

However, eventually it will become evident that the death penalty is itself a type of serial killer, which also kills the innocent according to a demonic lottery of chance. Managed by fallible humans, state sanctioned killings will sooner or later be seen as an unacceptable risk to anyone who is innocent of any crime - revenge will no longer justify it.

I believe the death penalty is justified only in extreme cases like mass murder. If they are allowed to live it is an insult to everyone that they killed.

I think we agree here.

I would add as a caveat, that the death penalty is itself a mass-murderer. This complicates the discussion, but should be noted.
Nidhogg
Posts: 503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:33:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/5/2013 2:29:21 PM, DeFool wrote:
At 2/5/2013 2:10:16 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 2/5/2013 2:04:15 PM, DeFool wrote:
We will abolish the death penalty, but not soon.

My view: it is unsafe for the society that maintains it. I see an equilibrium between societal rage directed towards murderers, and societal fear of false conviction.

Currently, in the US, this imbalance favors rage. We use the death penalty as a useful safety valve, that allows us the fiction that murderers will be punished with capital punishment. This prevents vigilantism.

However, eventually it will become evident that the death penalty is itself a type of serial killer, which also kills the innocent according to a demonic lottery of chance. Managed by fallible humans, state sanctioned killings will sooner or later be seen as an unacceptable risk to anyone who is innocent of any crime - revenge will no longer justify it.

I believe the death penalty is justified only in extreme cases like mass murder. If they are allowed to live it is an insult to everyone that they killed.

I think we agree here.

The victims' families should ask for the Death Penalty as well, to ensure public opinion can't sway it too much.
Ridiculously Photogenic Debater

DDO's most mediocre member since at least a year ago
DeFool
Posts: 626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:45:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I want to be clear: my opposition to the death penalty comes from the innocent persons that it kills - not the punishment of the rightfully convicted. Although the practice kills fewer innocents than might be expected, I feel that this number is still far too large. I doubt that we would allow a meat-packing plant, or Walmart, to kill as many.

I am fairly certain that we would not allow a negro-criminal to kill as many innocent persons as the death penalty does... no matter how many people the evil negro bandit welfare drug addict Obama supporter tries (but fails) to kill.

I saw a man from Mexico (and his uncle) beheaded by a drug cartel online. A chainsaw was used. I would very much like the chainsawing murderer to meet a similarly gruesome fate. However, I am also aware that the death penalty in America has killed more men from Mexico (and their uncles) than this chainsaw killer. Which is worse?

I say the one with the higher body count.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:46:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
and what will we replace the Death Penalty with? The role of correctional facilities is to rehabilitate convicts, not to punish them. The Death Penalty is in place, for when a convict cannot be rehabilitated. It's not a punishment. Alternatives to the Death Penalty is exile, but that is not as applicable as it use to be.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DeFool
Posts: 626
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:51:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"and what will we replace the Death Penalty with?"

This depends on when we replace it. I would suggest that we replace it with a First-World education system. We could replace it with world-class schools, staffed with teachers who earn prestige and six figures.

I point out that it costs less to send a child to Harvard than to the death chamber.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:56:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/5/2013 2:10:16 PM, Nidhogg wrote:
At 2/5/2013 2:04:15 PM, DeFool wrote:
We will abolish the death penalty, but not soon.

My view: it is unsafe for the society that maintains it. I see an equilibrium between societal rage directed towards murderers, and societal fear of false conviction.

Currently, in the US, this imbalance favors rage. We use the death penalty as a useful safety valve, that allows us the fiction that murderers will be punished with capital punishment. This prevents vigilantism.

However, eventually it will become evident that the death penalty is itself a type of serial killer, which also kills the innocent according to a demonic lottery of chance. Managed by fallible humans, state sanctioned killings will sooner or later be seen as an unacceptable risk to anyone who is innocent of any crime - revenge will no longer justify it.

I believe the death penalty is justified only in extreme cases like mass murder. If they are allowed to live it is an insult to everyone that they killed.

Should that be something our criminal justice system should be concerned about? Shouldn't the practice and enforcement of law be dispassionate?
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 2:58:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/5/2013 2:46:45 PM, DanT wrote:
and what will we replace the Death Penalty with? The role of correctional facilities is to rehabilitate convicts, not to punish them. The Death Penalty is in place, for when a convict cannot be rehabilitated. It's not a punishment. Alternatives to the Death Penalty is exile, but that is not as applicable as it use to be.

The role of the penal system is highly debatable and ultimately multifaceted. While it certainly went through a rehabilitative bent in the 60's it is currently punitive.

We don't need to replace it with anything. We would rely on other sentences (Life without parole, for example).
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/5/2013 3:22:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I see an equilibrium between societal rage directed towards murderers, and societal fear of false conviction.
False conviction is a higher risk for life sentencing to prison, where people's consciences get less tweaked, legal safeguards are lower, and you're STILL TAKING SOMEONE'S LIFE AWAY by condemning them to spend the rest of it in a cage. ("They can appeal," ha. Life imprisonment appeals aren't taken nearly as seriously as death row.)
You're much more likely to die in prison an innocent man if the death penalty was not pursued for your case.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Avamys
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2013 9:28:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
With the death penalty, you could easily execute someone who is innocent. By the time their innocence is proved, it would be too late. But if they were just put in prison, you could let them out, clear their name and let them live a new life. Death penalty can also be used as a tool for revenge or getting rid of people. Consider this. If the Secret Service though someone knew too mush, they'd just frame him for murder and he'd get executed. Secrets safe. We should prevent these scenarios, as again, those people did not really murder and were innocent.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2013 10:28:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/15/2013 9:28:34 PM, Avamys wrote:
With the death penalty, you could easily execute someone who is innocent. By the time their innocence is proved, it would be too late. But if they were just put in prison, you could let them out, clear their name and let them live a new life. Death penalty can also be used as a tool for revenge or getting rid of people. Consider this. If the Secret Service though someone knew too mush, they'd just frame him for murder and he'd get executed. Secrets safe. We should prevent these scenarios, as again, those people did not really murder and were innocent.

Innocents being executed is extremely rare.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross