The Death Penalty Is Unacceptable

[Greenday]

"Revenge". Because really, there's absolutely no other reason whatsoever and certainly not a single good reason.

Pretty much this. Who cares if we got the right person or if it's justice? As long as we the revenge makes us feel good.

[mikoyan29]

There are some people I would advocate the death penalty for but those are the really special people. For the most part, I think life in prison would be alot worse on them than killing them. Especially if you gave them the treatment that was given to one of the Nazis where basically his only contact was with his guards and that wasn't for long.

[PepperElf]

I'll be honest ... I'm not against the death penalty.

I won't provide the link to this because I feel it exceeds even what Fratching allows, but if you want to search for it yourself ... go right ahead.

Kyle Dinkheller, Georgia police officer. His death was semi-captured by his dashcam. He stopped a vietnam vet for a traffic issue. The wiki just says that the vet was shot in the stomach and survived but that he killed the officer.

I couldn't watch the video of his death. I heard the yelling and went over to look and read the description below and realized what was going to be semi-displayed ... I left the room and covered my ears.

The description read this:

Using `suppressive fire’, Brannan systematically, methodically shot Dinkheller in the arms, legs, exposed areas that would not be covered had Dinkheller been wearing a bulletproof vest, slowly executing him. Reloading his weapon Brannan continued firing with the final death shot to Dinkheller’s right eye.

I won't lie. I was horrified and felt it was right that the vet was sentenced to death.

Those of you who feel he shouldn't be sentenced should watch the video of the execution of the police officer.

[AdminAssistant]

I don't think there's anything wrong with taking even the worst of the worst criminals, putting them in a little concrete room, and letting them rot there for the rest of their lives. Perhaps with pictures of their crimes plastered on the walls to give them something to think about. In fact, I'd say that's a worse punishment than sending them off into the great beyond.

As I said when it happened, I would have loved for Osama bin Laden to go on trial for crimes against humanity at the Hague. Many Holocaust survivors said they felt some sense of closure after the Nuremberg trials and Eichmann's trial. They got to see their former tormentors in a weak, powerless state. How wonderful it would have been to see bin Laden, helpless in a courtroom, listening to all that he was responsible for, before being put away.

[PepperElf]

Blame that one on Obama.

When Saddam was captured with Bush in office there was a public trial.

He was still executed but we all knew it was him without a shadow of a doubt.

[bara]

The reason why the death penalty is a good thing (keeping in mind it should ony be used for concrete proof such as video),

It is the only way to be certain, beyond a doubt, that a monster will never commit another crime. Lock them up: They can still kill other prisoners who may not have commited such a bad crime, they might kill a guard, they might escape and kill somone else.

Take for instance the guy who did that arizona shooting. We know beyond a doubt that he did it. He knew what he was doing. he planned it. posted a goodbye online somewhere. That may be sociopathic, but he wasnt in some sort of uncontrolled rage when it happened.

So... what if he can be medicated? What happens if he refuses to take his meds? (I read some where thats one of the issues they are having)

Do we spend how much money, for his entire life to keep him contained? Forever exposing others to the risk that he might find a way to kill again?

Or do we dig a deep dark hole, and just drop them in there and toss some grool down every now and then and hope they get it?

I understand some people feel its wrong to kill no matter what, and I respect that. But I think about the possibilities. These monsters can never be anything but a burden on society, we either have to pay moeny to keep them contained and risk the chance of them killing again, lock them up in an inhumane way, or we dispose of them like the rest of the garbage.

I saw a wonderful Heilen quote.. here another "We shoot mad dogs don't we?"

[linguist]

I saw a wonderful Heilen quote.. here another "We shoot mad dogs don't we?"

we shoot mad dogs as a mercy to the animal (particularly in the case of rabies, which is what this sort of quote is usually implying) as much as out of any danger they may pose. symptomatic rabies has no cure and always leads to a slow, lingering death.

in any case, it doesn't apply as we aren't talking about animals here. responding to barbarism with barbarism serves no purpose toward doing justice; it only serves to fulfill some sense of vengeance and to dehumanize both the executioners and those who are cheering them on.

[Gravekeeper]

Blame that one on Obama.

When Saddam was captured with Bush in office there was a public trial.

Ugh, seriously? Saddam was found hiding in a dirt hole under a farm. Osama was in an armed compound in a city inside the borders of a supposed ally. Two completely different situations and in both cases the life or death of the target in question was up to the forces on the ground and the reaction of the target.

Not the respective presidents.

[Nyoibo]

Part of the idea of the death penalty is based on the assumption that there is something after death and that the person being executed will be punished in the afterlife.

[Andara Bledin]

Ugh, seriously? Saddam was found hiding in a dirt hole under a farm. Osama was in an armed compound in a city inside the borders of a supposed ally. Two completely different situations and in both cases the life or death of the target in question was up to the forces on the ground and the reaction of the target.

Oh, come now. We can't let little things like facts get in the way of a good rant, now, can we?

^-.-^

[Evandril]

To me, the death 'penatly' isn't about punishment, as removing someone from society in the most efficient manner possible. The main problem is insuring guilt...which is something NOT done at present.

Sticking the person in a box for life is, IMO, a far crueler punishment, and does no more 'good' than simply killing them. If they are allowed to interact with others, you've got the chance of more harm being committed, with the main 'benifit' of making the punishment worse for the others stuck in with them...Again, something I do not see as benificial.

[HYHYBT]

He was still executed but we all knew it was him without a shadow of a doubt.

Seriously?

[PepperElf]

Ugh, seriously? Saddam was found hiding in a dirt hole under a farm. Osama was in an armed compound in a city inside the borders of a supposed ally. Two completely different situations and in both cases the life or death of the target in question was up to the forces on the ground and the reaction of the target.

Not the respective presidents.

don't get me wrong, i'm on the side of Devgru who took him.


i'm just against obama for trying to fuck it up.

1) Don'tcha know? Obama tried tossing the 'seals' under the bus for the event

2) the government PUBLISHED photos of the teams FACES. WTF. Do you realize how much fucking danger that puts the team in? Might as well have tattooed targets and prices on their faces.

3) Yet... it's a no-no for us to see the results. Thankfully if you know who to talk to you can get leaked copies of the images.

4) I feel the fact the government even said who did it is directly responsible for the destruction of the aircraft that had Seals in it. if obama's people had done a better job at keeping OPSEC then no one would have known who did it.... and those other seals may still be alive.

way to go zero

[bara]

we shoot mad dogs as a mercy to the animal (particularly in the case of rabies, which is what this sort of quote is usually implying) as much as out of any danger they may pose. symptomatic rabies has no cure and always leads to a slow, lingering death.

in any case, it doesn't apply as we aren't talking about animals here. responding to barbarism with barbarism serves no purpose toward doing justice; it only serves to fulfill some sense of vengeance and to dehumanize both the executioners and those who are cheering them on.

Some mad dogs were raised to be aggressive.

Vengence plays no part in it, at least for me. Its about prevention and its about keeping costs down. (Please note, I want absolute proof that a crime has been commited before the death penalty is used)

I also feel its more barbaric to lock someone up in a little cell 'to think about what theyve done', for 50 years than to just put them out of our misery. Especially when they dont think they did anything wrong. Our system is messed up, of that there is no doubt and currently I am against our system using the death penalty because its being used to get votes rather than justice.

When people use it as vengence yes, its dehumanizing, when used to get votes its monstrous. I do not cheer the necessity of killing other humans. I accept the fact that sometmes (and rarely in the grand scheme of things) is necessary to remove harmful elements to prevent them from harming others ever again.

The people I think it needs to be used on are not sick or insane. They just have a different set of morals than the rest of us.

[Hyena Dandy]

Philosophically, I suppose, I am for the death penalty. I think it is crueler to lock someone up for life than it is to kill them. In practice, though, I am against it, because we can never have a 100% proof of guilt.

The idea of a world where the death penalty can be used seems fantastic to me, in the literal sense. In that it it is a fantasy. I am as likely to support the death penalty during my lifetime as I am to travel in the TARDIS.

I would like a world where it could be used. Maybe there is one. But it isn't ours, and as such, I am against it.