Death Penalty ok?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I did a minute of research on capital punishment in Indonesia, and they only seem to execute foreign nationals involved in drug smuggling. Almost all executions in the past decade fit that standard. Jakarta wants to be seen as tough on drugs, I guess.
 
Since rehabilitation, as it is, is not working nearly effectively (if at all) enough, I'm pro death penalty in certain cases. This would not merely require a specific type of crime, but specific circumstances as well.. It would, however, require not just substantial proof, but inadmissible proof. A single innocent person sentenced to death is enough for me to be against it, in the form the sentences are carried out.

That being said, I'd prefer a sentence to permanent solitary for the worst (in my opinion, obviously) criminals. If they wanna act like animals, treat them like animals. However, if the practices in the rehabilitation process is improved to the extent that rehabilitation is actually a viable option, I'd prefer that.
 
I think this need, like Lady Bern put it, a discussion label or a debate label on it.
 
Okay, let's see if I can put all my thoughts into a well made post and with good points.... Probably not, this will probably be an incredible mess, but I'll try my best to make my thoughts as non-contradicting and make as much sense as possible. HERE WE GO:

1. It's irreversible. Once you've killed them, you can never take it back. People are seldom PROVEN innocent after they've been executed, because no one cares to take up the case after that, but there are cases where they have noticed that all the evidence doesn't support that they were the actual bad guy/girl, or that the situation was completely different than they first thought. It gets harder and harder to get wrongly accused because of DNA and such things, but there's still times when people are wrongly accused. Luckily they're often pulled out of death row before the execution, which leads me to point two.

2. Wrongly accused people whom has been freed from death row usually have horrible mental scars. They've been tormented by the thought that they might get killed any day, and many people are there for YEARS before they're finally proven innocent. There has been people pulled out just as they've been about to go to their own execution. At least in America. If we go to China, you either are proven innocent and leave the court room, or you're proven guilty and you're executed a few days later. No time for being proven innocent later on.

3. The families to death row inmates. Yeah. Death row inmates are humans, no matter what action they might or might not have taken. They have families, and that family can be completely innocent and love their child, spouse, sibling or parent no matter what they did. If the death row inmate dies, will they suffer for their crime? Depends on your beliefs about the afterlife, but I don't believe so. No matter what happens to the death row inmate in the afterlife, or lack thereof, what we can be absolutely certain about is that their family will suffer. (If they haven't cut all ties with that person, or if that person doesn't have a family)

4. What will their death achieve? They will suffer up until the point they are killed (if they don't want to be killed, cause there has been those inmates too.) but once they're dead, it won't matter anymore. No matter what you believe about the after life, it's what we do in this life that matters. No afterlife means that we need to live this life as happily as possible. An afterlife means that our actions will decide what happens to us. Wouldn't it be better to try and rehabilitate them so that they can give to society one day, and if an afterlife exists, that they can go to a good place?

5. Clear cut rules or at least some sort of guidelines are IMPORTANT!! At the moment in USA some people gets sent to lifetime for worse murder acts than other people that has been sent to death row. If the death penalty should be allowed to exist, you need to be consistent with what crimes should lead to death row, but it's not. Sometimes serial killers are sent to death row, sometimes they're not. Sometimes a ONE TIME murderer is sent to death row, but often times they're not (I hope). Sometimes mentally insane people are sent to death row, even though there's laws FORBIDDING it, or at least some rules saying they should be rehabilitated or something like that. While America seems to have NO guideline for who can be sent to death row, and just cherry picks the people they don't like, and China just executes people left and right (though apparently they have gotten better), Japan has at least done the sane thing and made a criteria list:

The nine criteria are as follows:
Degree of viciousness
Motive
How the crime was committed; especially the manner in which the victim was killed.
Outcome of the crime; especially the number of victims.
Sentiments of the bereaved family members.
Impact of the crime on Japanese society.
Defendant's age (in Japan, someone is a minor until the age of 20).
Defendant's previous criminal record.
Degree of remorse shown by the defendant.
Click to expand...
IF any country is going to have death row, isn't it best to have some kind of guideline like that? Now I don't know how well it is followed, but considering how low their execution numbers usually are, I would say it's followed pretty well. Or maybe they just have so small amounts of murder they send everyone to death row o.O Either way, that's a somewhat good list to go after, as long as you follow it and actually look at the evidence. By the way, I would add mental stability to that list if I got to mod it.

6. Cases like this EXISTS:
A 15 year old girl (black American) whom had sold sex to men since she was 13 and had mental problems from her mothers side, eventually ended up shooting one guy she had slept with because of paranoia. She believed he was about to kill her, even though no such evidence was found, and most likely it was her mental instabilities acting up.

They actually thought that she, a fifteen year old girl, should be put on death row. She sat in prison until she was 18, and then got her trial in which she escaped death row, but got a lifetime in prison instead. Fifteen years old, mental instabilities, felt regret, was under aged, had no ill intent, in her mind she was only protecting herself, one shot, and she got a lifetime in prison (though they spoke about giving her death row). If we look at the list Japan has made, I doubt she would even be on the radar for death row, and usually kid's aren't.

I even think there has been a ten or eleven year old kid who they talked about giving the death penalty. Kids are still developing, they're still learning! If you make sure to rehabilitate them immediately they can actually become good adults. Thinking that the death penalty would be a solution for a child that has murdered once is flawed thinking. It shows a flawed system.


While I don't like the death penalty and never would want even the most horrible person to be put to death, I can accept that it exists if people uses it responsibly. Though I can't support a flawed system, nor accept it, and in most countries, if not all (haven't really checked up Japan properly to say if their criterias has worked in practice.), the death penalty is horribly flawed. There's no clear rules and it's just a giant mess. People are sentenced without 100% evidence supporting them guilty, and families on both sides are left without their loved ones. Death won't make the criminal a better person, and they will never get the chance to better themselves. Sure, if they have clearly showed that they can't become better, serial killer ala blood countess style, then do whatever you want, but a one time murderer or someone who has a mental disorder that they can overcome with the right professional help, or a child having committed the crime, might be worthy of a second chance. Criminals should be punished, yes, but they should also be helped and rehabilitated so that they can become good people and actually help society one day. We need to rehabilitate them and teach them how to get back into society once they're out of prison. (And of course make sure they're not a threat when we release them).

DONE!

And since I've seen this having been taken up at least once, I just want to point out that pedophilia isn't an act. Pedophilia is the sexual attraction towards children. Saying they deserve the death penalty is kind of mean. :/

I know what you mean, you mean child molesters (hopefully). A child molester/rapist, can be a child molester/rapist without being a pedophile. Some adults have sex with children simply because they want to feel that they have power and control over their victim, and the easiest victim is often a child. Of course, pedophiles can also be child molesters/rapists, but it is not guaranteed. So please, please, please. Stop saying pedophiles deserves death. It makes it harder for pedophiles who doesn't do anything to search for help. They live in constant fear that people will find out and hate them even though they might never have done anything wrong.

Okay, now I'm officially done. o.O This was very fast put together (2 hours is apparently fast for me), and I don't think I did a very good job with it, but it is a rough explanation of why I feel that it is wrong and slightly about what could make it a bit more right (only briefly touched on), though I wouldn't like it still, and a small section explaining pedophilia... Cause apparently that's needed. Even though it shouldn't be.. People should know this.. But they don't.. And it makes me sad.

I've probably missed points that I will come to think about in a few days when this thread has been closed because of... reasons... But this is long enough as it is, and if I wanna make a better point I'll just use my very neglected blog where I usually put this kind of stuff. (It's not an iwaku blog btw, so no need to look there.)

REMEMBER FOLKS, IF THERE'S NO DEBATE PREFIX YOU SHALL NOT DEBATE!!! ... Just thought I put this out there before people try to debate me (or anyone else) o.O And if this thread happens to get a debate prefix.... Well, then I'll chicken out. I'm not good with debates. Friendly discussions sure, but debates gives me cold feet...And racing heartbeat, and makes me anxious... So no. Just no. I'm just here to leave my (at the moment messy) thoughts, and read other peoples thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Windsong, LogicfromLogic and The Ghost Note
This had always been a very grey issue for me.

1.) Yes innocent people can be found guilty.
1a.) If you're found guilty, you probably have something to do with the crime. You're someway related to it and have at least an iota of guilt associated with it.

2.) People do fucked up shit and can't be productive members of society no matter what is done.
2a.) Are we as humans one to judge degrees of fucked-up-ness to justify killing someone else?

Finally, I'll say this. I have a family member sentenced to several life sentences for murder and rape.
Do I think someone who does those things to someone else deserves to be allowed to keep on living and have a chance (however remote it might be) to do it all again? No.
Would I be sad if he was killed? Only because I know him. That's all that skews my views on this, but if he was executed I honestly would get over it. So am I any better than him if someone else dying, someone who I know personally, would only cause me a moment's grief simply because I didn't kill him myself?

If that's all to ambivalent, I am for the death penalty, but understand how fucked up it is to condone the death of someone vs someone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashi
"Do you know, though," cried the prince warmly, "you made that remark now, and everyone says the same thing, and the machine is designed with the purpose of avoiding pain, this guillotine I mean; but a thought came into my head then: what if it be a bad plan after all? You may laugh at my idea, perhaps—but I could not help its occurring to me all the same. Now with the rack and tortures and so on—you suffer terrible pain of course; but then your torture is bodily pain only (although no doubt you have plenty of that) until you die. But here I should imagine the most terrible part of the whole punishment is, not the bodily pain at all—but the certain knowledge that in an hour,—then in ten minutes, then in half a minute, then now—this very instant—your soul must quit your body and that you will no longer be a man—and that this is certain, certain! That's the point—the certainty of it. Just that instant when you place your head on the block and hear the iron grate over your head—then—that quarter of a second is the most awful of all.

"This is not my own fantastical opinion—many people have thought the same; but I feel it so deeply that I'll tell you what I think. I believe that to execute a man for murder is to punish him immeasurably more dreadfully than is equivalent to his crime. A murder by sentence is far more dreadful than a murder committed by a criminal. The man who is attacked by robbers at night, in a dark wood, or anywhere, undoubtedly hopes and hopes that he may yet escape until the very moment of his death. There are plenty of instances of a man running away, or imploring for mercy—at all events hoping on in some degree—even after his throat was cut. But in the case of an execution, that last hope—having which it is so immeasurably less dreadful to die,—is taken away from the wretch and certainty substituted in its place! There is his sentence, and with it that terrible certainty that he cannot possibly escape death—which, I consider, must be the most dreadful anguish in the world. You may place a soldier before a cannon's mouth in battle, and fire upon him—and he will still hope. But read to that same soldier his death-sentence, and he will either go mad or burst into tears. Who dares to say that any man can suffer this without going mad? No, no! it is an abuse, a shame, it is unnecessary—why should such a thing exist? Doubtless there may be men who have been sentenced, who have suffered this mental anguish for a while and then have been reprieved; perhaps such men may have been able to relate their feelings afterwards. Our Lord Christ spoke of this anguish and dread. No! no! no! No man should be treated so, no man, no man!"
 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: govangogh and Hecatoncheires
unanun said:
"Do you know, though," cried the prince warmly, "you made that remark now, and everyone says the same thing, and the machine is designed with the purpose of avoiding pain, this guillotine I mean; but a thought came into my head then: what if it be a bad plan after all? You may laugh at my idea, perhaps—but I could not help its occurring to me all the same. Now with the rack and tortures and so on—you suffer terrible pain of course; but then your torture is bodily pain only (although no doubt you have plenty of that) until you die. But here I should imagine the most terrible part of the whole punishment is, not the bodily pain at all—but the certain knowledge that in an hour,—then in ten minutes, then in half a minute, then now—this very instant—your soul must quit your body and that you will no longer be a man—and that this is certain, certain! That's the point—the certainty of it. Just that instant when you place your head on the block and hear the iron grate over your head—then—that quarter of a second is the most awful of all.

"This is not my own fantastical opinion—many people have thought the same; but I feel it so deeply that I'll tell you what I think. I believe that to execute a man for murder is to punish him immeasurably more dreadfully than is equivalent to his crime. A murder by sentence is far more dreadful than a murder committed by a criminal. The man who is attacked by robbers at night, in a dark wood, or anywhere, undoubtedly hopes and hopes that he may yet escape until the very moment of his death. There are plenty of instances of a man running away, or imploring for mercy—at all events hoping on in some degree—even after his throat was cut. But in the case of an execution, that last hope—having which it is so immeasurably less dreadful to die,—is taken away from the wretch and certainty substituted in its place! There is his sentence, and with it that terrible certainty that he cannot possibly escape death—which, I consider, must be the most dreadful anguish in the world. You may place a soldier before a cannon's mouth in battle, and fire upon him—and he will still hope. But read to that same soldier his death-sentence, and he will either go mad or burst into tears. Who dares to say that any man can suffer this without going mad? No, no! it is an abuse, a shame, it is unnecessary—why should such a thing exist? Doubtless there may be men who have been sentenced, who have suffered this mental anguish for a while and then have been reprieved; perhaps such men may have been able to relate their feelings afterwards. Our Lord Christ spoke of this anguish and dread. No! no! no! No man should be treated so, no man, no man!"
Click to expand...

How Kafkaesque.
 
I believe that the death penalty should only be given when a life is taken, or permanently ruined (I.e Rape and pedophilia). Look at the US criminal system. How many assholes get put away for murder or manslaughter, get released, and do the same shit the minute their out? How many child molesters get locked up for molesting a child, get out, do it again and then murder their next victim? People might claim that prison is about rehabilitation, but that's a joke. Sure, there are some who do learn their lesson and go out of their way to avoid going back to jail, but those are the minority.

The problem with the United States is prisoners are pampered. They have the life! If you ever watch the show Locked Up (Which is one of my husband's favorites) they have no worries. They're not worried about paying for their medical care, or the food that is provided for them. They don't have a single care in the world. Sure, they can't see their family, and their told what to do, and when to do it, but what do they have to worry about? Their housed, clothed, fed, and treated for their medical problems. I know people who work two and three jobs that don't even get that benefit!

People who kill, should be killed. End of story. If there is proof, and it cannot be denied that they are guilty, they should get the death penalty. No appeals. No sitting in prison for years. A simple 50 cent bullet to the head and millions saved in tax payers' money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ashi
Yes and no.

Yes, they're a danger to other human life. Being locked up doesn't stop them from trying to murder someone. Add to their life sentence? What do they care?

My take?

Work them.
For free.
They forfeit the right to be a part of society as a citizen so they will be a back to help build it.

Make them do farm work, deconstruction, manual jobs that are repetitive.

I guess that's slavery in a way which some will dislike and whatnot. But at least make them work for the country they forsook. Pump the water they have to drink, grow and raise the food they have to eat.

Edit: Murder is bad. Rape is pretty bad, but not deserving of death. Child rapists are terrible too, but not sure about death for them either, that let their attraction to children go too far, not every pedophile is a creepy slavering monster in the shadows. Just the same way a BDSM lover keeps their fetish in check. Usually.
 
Well, for a crime such as drug trafficking, the death penalty wouldn't be an option in the US. Here, that might get you relatively 15 years in prison. Crimes that are eligible are those under the category of first degree or capital murder, a pre-meditated act. Rape does not mean the death penalty, unless accompanied by a form of homicide. Why should someone who Ills be allowed to just sit in prison, living off of tax payer dollars? Murder is a heinous crime. There is nothing in the world so valuable as a human life but another human life. Why should someone with such disregard for the life of a not her not pay for his crime (murder) with his own?

cider said:
Since rehabilitation, as it is, is not working nearly effectively (if at all) enough, I'm pro death penalty in certain cases. This would not merely require a specific type of crime, but specific circumstances as well.. It would, however, require not just substantial proof, but inadmissible proof. A single innocent person sentenced to death is enough for me to be against it, in the form the sentences are carried out.
That being said, I'd prefer a sentence to permanent solitary for the worst (in my opinion, obviously) criminals. If they wanna act like animals, treat them like animals. However, if the practices in the rehabilitation process is improved to the extent that rehabilitation is actually a viable option, I'd prefer that.
Click to expand...
When something is inadmissible, that means it won't hold up or be accepted as proof in a court of law.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back