• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Death Penalty: Right or Wrong?

Death Penalty: Yea or Nay?

  • Total voters
    34
Objective-J said:
No I responded with proven facts and you chose to deny them. Your argument was what you said was true, it is not, this is MORE dishonesty. You know the thread is still here right? LOL

Like I said the solution is a very simple one. instead you choose not to partake in such a simply civil solution so the issue is yours :shrug:
Click to expand...
Okay. :shrug:
 
Moderator's Warning:
This has gone on for more than a full page. You're both thread-banned.
 
Last edited:
Confucius said:
Quite frankly I've always found the idea behind the death penalty to be somewhat appalling. The basic idea is punishing murder through murder. That doesn't make much sense does it?
Click to expand...

It has literally nothing to do with "punishment" and everything to do with upholding the value of life and facing a consequence.

I am not sure that any violation to a law is about a punishment, for that matter. They are all consequences to violating the law.
 
Objective-J said:
not if its true

admit that your original statement as written was factually wrong and their will be no misunderstanding or dishonesty. If you continue to deny that fact you ARE being dishonest. :shrug:

Its really the only issue I have, you misspoke, big deal, happens to everyone, Ive done it plenty, if you would just admit it then there would be no misunderstandings or dishonesty, the solution is pretty simple.
Click to expand...

Jesus... would you both just get over it and move on?
 
theplaydrive said:
You either really don't understand what I'm saying or you're being incredibly dishonest. So I'll repeat it one last time in a clearer way.

The safety of the public (including those in prison) is NOT improved by the death penalty if those on death row commit more crimes before they are executed than those with life sentences commit for the entire time that they are in prison.
Click to expand...

Death row inmates typically do NOT commit more crimes than lifers due to the fact that they are under tighter security and are kept separate from general pop.

Lifers, on the other hand, are notorious for committing all sorts of heinous offenses, including murder, maiming, rape, extortion---even organized hits on civilians outside of prison. Why? Because they have nothing to lose. They cannot get more time than "life without parole."
 
Confucius said:
Quite frankly I've always found the idea behind the death penalty to be somewhat appalling. The basic idea is punishing murder through murder. That doesn't make much sense does it?
Click to expand...

I agree. The term "capital punishment" is a confusing misnomer.

We should replace it with the term "existential ejection". It is so much more to the point.
 
Sig said:
Death row inmates typically do NOT commit more crimes than lifers due to the fact that they are under tighter security and are kept separate from general pop.

Lifers, on the other hand, are notorious for committing all sorts of heinous offenses, including murder, maiming, rape, extortion---even organized hits on civilians outside of prison. Why? Because they have nothing to lose. They cannot get more time than "life without parole."
Click to expand...

But these "hits" are generally against other criminals... so who cares?
 
Bodhisattva said:
But these "hits" are generally against other criminals... so who cares?
Click to expand...

Actually, these hits are quite often against innocent civilians whose only connection to the perpetrator is in being related to someone with whom the perp has an issue.
 
Sig said:
Actually, these hits are quite often against innocent civilians whose only connection to the perpetrator is in being related to someone with whom the perp has an issue.
Click to expand...

Stats? I know that my friends on the force don't mention this. They talk about another scum bucket that got tagged due to a hit and that's about it. I know that I have never looked it up, and I am sure that an innocent person is hurt or killed from time to time, but I would doubt that it is "quite often".
 
Bodhisattva said:
Stats? I know that my friends on the force don't mention this. They talk about another scum bucket that got tagged due to a hit and that's about it. I know that I have never looked it up, and I am sure that an innocent person is hurt or killed from time to time, but I would doubt that it is "quite often".
Click to expand...

What would satisfy your definition of "quite often"?

To be honest, I'm not certain of the exact stats, nor am I interested in researching it. It is doubtful that such stats could even be accurate since the perpetrators of such crime are not likely to leave a note next to the body stating "Just so you know, this murder was orchestrated by a convict serving a life sentence. Be sure to record it as such in your crime stats."

I do know that it happens. It is often related to prison gang activity, and it is likely being schemed in one or more maximum security prisons in the U.S., right now as you are reading this post. I also know that it would happen less if such lifers were put to death before they had a chance to even consider such a scheme.
 
Supposedly, there are about 3,250 on death row. Supposely, there are about 7.5 million adults (3% of the population) were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, prison) - about 1.5 million or so of those are in prison (plus another million or so juveniles). I don't think that tracking the ongoing crime from 3,000 on death row would be statistically possible within 7,000,000 criminals commiting crimes from places other than death row (not including those criminals who have never been or are no longer under correctional supervision). Something like 140,000 inmates are serving life in prison.

A study done several years ago by the Bureau of Justice Statistics said 56% of the violent felons convicted had a prior conviction, and that when the felons committed the new crime, 18 percent were on probation, 12 percent on release pending disposition of a prior case and 7 percent were on parole.

Clearly recidivism is a big problem. Commit a pre-meditated murder? Actual death penalty should be on the table. Want to plea bargin down from something to save court costs and time? Start there.

On death row already? Seems like there's an obvious way to fix that...
 
Zyphlin said:
This is not an attempt to honestly debate but rather you just going out of your way to be intentionally obtuse so as to argue against a misrepresentation of what the person is saying instead of what they're ACTUALLY saying.

The poster is stating that the death of someone who murdered their family member is not an "equal" trade in regards to the loss of their loved one. As such, there's not some magical 1:1 ratio where their death is equal to your family members death and therefore you're somehow, in some twisted way, being "pro-life" by killing the person and winding up with 2 people dead instead of 1.

Because its not equal in such a bizarre and ****ed up way, killing the person would not qualify as being "pro-life" to that person.

Killing the perpetrator doesn't return the person that died to life...it just kills another person. To them, since there's no some kind of equal trade between the two, then attempting to say that one death justifies the other death and thus its actually PRO-Life is ridiculous.

And I agree. I support the death penatly but its ****ing ridiculous to suggest that it is a "pro-life" stance. It kills someone. Doesn't matter the reason. Aren't we always told the reason doesn't matter with abortions, it just matters that you're killing. Suddenly somehow the reason DOES matter here though, and one can be PRO-life by ending a life? Yeah, that doesn't work. You're Pro-Life in specific circumstance. There's nothing wrong with that, but its absolutely laughable that you're trying to suggest instead you're actually consistantly pro-life.

I get that you think that by having the deterrent of the death penalty it saves lives. That said, it doesn't change the fact that it also actively, by choice not simply by circumstance, KILLS people which is unequestionably not a "pro-life" stance.
Click to expand...

Hey, Zyphlin, show me where I even claimed I was pro-life anywhere in this thread. I've even said in other threads that I cannot be considered pro life because of my stance on the death penalty. Sorry if that's just too inconsistent for you, but it is honest. If you all can't figure out why I see a difference between a baby and a convicted killer, I'll never be able to explain it. Details matter to me. So ****ing sue me.
 
I honestly think harsh punishments should be set in place for real criminals. Criminals actually enjoy being in jail. They get 3 meals a day! And they usually end up back in jail so we need to start teaching them a lesson. Im sick of paying money for criminals to be happy.
 
Conservative420 said:
I honestly think harsh punishments should be set in place for real criminals. Criminals actually enjoy being in jail. They get 3 meals a day! And they usually end up back in jail so we need to start teaching them a lesson. Im sick of paying money for criminals to be happy.
Click to expand...
It's not just the 3 meals... it's the television, it's the guaranteed porn (in some places), it's their socializations, and gang relationships they make on the inside. I just saw ... show called bait car. Cops set up this car in various places and make it tempting - invariably some shmoe comes out checks it out and drives away with it. This last one had two absolute winners...

1. A guy and his 18 month old and some other dude look over the car - initially decide against it then see the speakers in the back and change their minds. The guy puts his 18 month old daughter in the back seat, straps her in with the fold up stroller and obviously gets nabbed.

2. This guy looks just like a regular shmoe, gets in the car gets nabbed and the cops have him cuffed on the front of the car and asks if he has any priors - been to jail (meanwhile the camera shows gang tats all over the guy), he says yeah but never for grand theft. They pull his record - 18 priors, assault, 4 different grand theft counts, robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, firearms charges, etcetc... When confronted with this he gets mad and just says, "take me to jail".

The first guy was young - maybe early 19-22 years old. The second guy in his 40's been around and in jail apparently most of his life. Neither one looked worried, weren't necessarily shocked they were caught, didn't really have a problem getting caught and knew they'd be spending time in the pokey - just had no care about it whatsoever. They're reaction was about the same as if they said they were going to change their shirt and be right back. The point here is, yes, it's way to easy. I know how these other television programs show how tough it is on the inside... I disagree... if it were tough they'd never want to go back again.

My solution: Put them to work - hard labor for the "greater good". They get to work their sentence off 12 hours a day, 6 days a week for years of course, in a humane way, with meals, health care, rest days, etc. When they leave prison they have a skill they may be able to use outside... it's a win win.
 
Most of these idiots do better in jail than they do on the outside. I want prison to be horrible, somewhere no one in their right mind would ever want to go for any reason. I want hard physical labor, absolutely no perks, etc. Make it so terrible that people would rather go straight than have any chance at all going to prison. Bet you'd see the prison population drop real quick.
 
Cephus said:
Most of these idiots do better in jail than they do on the outside. I want prison to be horrible, somewhere no one in their right mind would ever want to go for any reason. I want hard physical labor, absolutely no perks, etc. Make it so terrible that people would rather go straight than have any chance at all going to prison. Bet you'd see the prison population drop real quick.
Click to expand...

Prison should NOT be horrible. The primary goal of a correctional facility should be to reform, not to punish. Convicts can pay for their crime literally through deductions out of their paychecks, after they are released and placed in a job with a living wage.

What most undermines rehabilitation, and turns otherwise salvageable convicts into hardened criminals, is the presence of incorrigibles who interfere with those inmates who are making a sincere effort to reform. This is precisely why the incorrigible inmates have to go, and I don't mean to some supermax money pit. We should not waste our time and tax revenue on the irredeemable.
 
Cephus said:
Most of these idiots do better in jail than they do on the outside. I want prison to be horrible, somewhere no one in their right mind would ever want to go for any reason. I want hard physical labor, absolutely no perks, etc. Make it so terrible that people would rather go straight than have any chance at all going to prison. Bet you'd see the prison population drop real quick.
Click to expand...

you know why this wont happen?
because it makes to much damn common sense.
 
Sig said:
Are you for or against capital punishment?

State your reasons.
Click to expand...

I'm against it for the simple reason that it seems not to be worth the legal trouble/cost to taxpayers. I know that here in Washington State, executing some one generally costs taxpayers more than putting them away for life. Not sure about other states....
 
Sig said:
Prison should NOT be horrible. The primary goal of a correctional facility should be to reform, not to punish. Convicts can pay for their crime literally through deductions out of their paychecks, after they are released and placed in a job with a living wage.

What most undermines rehabilitation, and turns otherwise salvageable convicts into hardened criminals, is the presence of incorrigibles who interfere with those inmates who are making a sincere effort to reform. This is precisely why the incorrigible inmates have to go, and I don't mean to some supermax money pit. We should not waste our time and tax revenue on the irredeemable.
Click to expand...

Prison must, to be valid, perform three functions. It must protect society from the criminal, it must punish the guilty and it must make the criminal ready to rejoin society. If prison doesn't do all three of those, then prison is not the proper place for the criminal to be.

White collar criminals who are not harming society don't belong in prison, they can be punished another way.
Life-without-possibility-of-parole criminals will never get out, thus there's no reason to keep them breathing. Execute them.
Most criminals, however, do re-offend, thus prison isn't sufficiently punishing them if they're trying to return there. Prison should be a hell-hole, it should make anyone who goes through the prison system do anything they can to keep from ever going back.

Currently it doesn't.
 
Cephus said:
it must punish the guilty
Click to expand...

I disagree. Punishment is counterproductive to rehabilitation. Convicts should literally pay for their crimes by making restitution to their victims after they have been rehabilitated and placed in gainful employment.

Most criminals, however, do re-offend, thus prison isn't sufficiently punishing them if they're trying to return there. Prison should be a hell-hole, it should make anyone who goes through the prison system do anything they can to keep from ever going back.
Click to expand...

Convicts reoffend because they have either not been properly rehabilitated (which is the case most of the time) or are incorrigible. The incorrigible convicts should be euthanized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom