• 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 in Theory

Do you support the Death Penalty


  • Total voters
    78
Provide more information. I'll give you an answer. Knowing where the families went could mean many things.

Where did your support come from while growing up? Was it the government or your family? We're off topic, but what the hell...
 
Where did your support come from while growing up? Was it the government or your family? We're off topic, but what the hell...

Mine came from my family. Not everyone has a family to support them (or at least one that can/is willing), hence government assistance.
 
Exactly...

And while I may not disagree with your assessment on the overall health and activity of society; I don't think that translates into a higher death penalty rate.

As I said, more money, more innocents dead, no added benefit to society; no one in favor of the DP has yet been able to address that. Maybe the money, but you can't (or perhaps rather it has yet to be) address that without exacerbating the others.
 
Mine came from my family. Not everyone has a family to support them (or at least one that can/is willing), hence government assistance.

Don't you think it would be wise to address this issue rather than continuing to support it?
 
The goal of the justice system is to protect society ... Not to Punish sins. No one has the right to take a life, and no one has the right to judge whether or not someone has a right to live, the point is to make sure society is protected.
Well said my friend. Now I don't have to explain my point of view.
 
And while I may not disagree with your assessment on the overall health and activity of society; I don't think that translates into a higher death penalty rate.

As I said, more money, more innocents dead, no added benefit to society; no one in favor of the DP has yet been able to address that. Maybe the money, but you can't (or perhaps rather it has yet to be) address that without exacerbating the others.

Society has decided the penalty is appropriate for certain crimes and is a benefit. A sentence isn't intended to benefit society; it's intended to punish the criminal...
 
In my opinion the difference in punishment between death and life in prison is not worth the chance of wrongful execution, which seems to be significant.

Yeah. We have heard this all before.

One more time: Far more innocent people have died due to the State to NOT executing the death penalty when the convict was genuinely guilty of a capital offense than have died due to the State executing the death penalty when the convict was genuinely innocent of a capital offense.

The sooner you burn this statistical fact into your brain, the sooner you will stop wasting your time, my time, and everybody's time with this hackneyed bad argument.
 
Don't you think it would be wise to address this issue rather than continuing to support it?

I never said we shouldn't try to solve the issue. Do you propose we let the child and their parent die, or resort to crime?
 
I never said we shouldn't try to solve the issue. Do you propose we let the child and their parent die, or resort to crime?

I would suggest a policy where the family, be it direct or extended, is held responsible for a child's rearing, not you, not me, not anyone else...
 
Society has decided the penalty is appropriate for certain crimes and is a benefit. A sentence isn't intended to benefit society; it's intended to punish the criminal...

Society says a lot of things, not all of it appropriate. And while punishment is intended to punish, the use of the death penalty is illogical. LWOP is essentially the same punishment as DP without the cost, with the added bonus of giving ample time for innocent people to prove their innocence, and provides just as much security and protection as could be obtained through the DP.

If society wishes the illogical, is it still necessary to engage such? Remember, this is a Republic, not a pure democracy.
 
I would suggest a policy where the family, be it direct or extended, is held responsible for a child's rearing, not you, not me, not anyone else...

Does that mean no tax credits for kids too?
 
I'm talking about social issues, primarily. You're OK with going back to segregation?

Segregation is self-imposed, in many cases, because people like to be around people like themselves. Upward mobility hasn't been a problem for a long time for those that strive for a better life, no matter what color they are. We have laws that guarantee fair housing, as an example. Would you believe that any professional athlete or movie star would be told where they could live? If they have the money, they live where they feel comfortable... around people like themselves, IMO. .
 
Society says a lot of things, not all of it appropriate. And while punishment is intended to punish, the use of the death penalty is illogical. LWOP is essentially the same punishment as DP without the cost, with the added bonus of giving ample time for innocent people to prove their innocence, and provides just as much security and protection as could be obtained through the DP.

If society wishes the illogical, is it still necessary to engage such? Remember, this is a Republic, not a pure democracy.

Oh boy, this opens a whole new discussion...

We now more resemble a country ruled by unelected jurists rather than any form of republic...
 
I would suggest a policy where the family, be it direct or extended, is held responsible for a child's rearing, not you, not me, not anyone else...

OK, and again, what about those that don't have family that are willing? It'd be ridiculous to require parents to support their kids in to their 30s+.
 
I know it! So stop reacting emotionally. Wanting to kill people is the pinnacle of being over emotional! :mrgreen:

Deontological Ethics... it has nothing to do with emotion. ;)
 
Segregation is self-imposed, in many cases, because people like to be around people like themselves. Upward mobility hasn't been a problem for a long time for those that strive for a better life, no matter what color they are. We have laws that guarantee fair housing, as an example. Would you believe that any professional athlete or movie star would be told where they could live? If they have the money, they live where they feel comfortable... around people like themselves, IMO. .

Yeah, we didn't have things like the Civil Rights Act in the 50s.
 
Oh boy, this opens a whole new discussion...

We now more resemble a country ruled by unelected jurists rather than any form of republic...

I'm not going to disagree on that; yet does it address the fundamental question? I think not.
 
Indeed it is. Most arguments I see in favor of the DP are rather emotional. It doesn't consider the pitfalls of the system, the cost not only in dollars but in human life, the proper constraints of government, and the necessity for the DP in our modern society.

Deontological Ethics... it has nothing to do with emotion. ;)
 
OK, and again, what about those that don't have family that are willing? It'd be ridiculous to require parents to support their kids in to their 30s+.

You're right, they should support themselves as they are no longer "kids"...
 
Back
Top Bottom