View Poll Results: Should Capital Punishment be supported?

Voters
90. You may not vote on this poll
  • It should be supported in both principle and practice.

    43 47.78%
  • Yes in principle, but not in practice due to the ambiguity of social bias.

    14 15.56%
  • It should be opposed both in principle and practice.

    33 36.67%
Page 40 of 42 FirstFirst ... 303839404142 LastLast
Results 391 to 400 of 416

Thread: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

  1. #391
    Educator Invayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Present
    Last Seen
    07-22-16 @ 08:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    817

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueKC View Post
    Time for a history lesson.

    "The Lacedamonians, when they had conquered the Athenians, appointed 30 men to govern their state. These 30 began their administration by putting to death, even without trial, all who were notoriously wicked, or publicly detestable; acts at which the public rejoiced, and extolled their justice. But afterward, when their lawless power gradually increased, they proceeded, at their pleasure, to kill the good and the bad indiscriminately, and to strike terror into all; and thus the state, overpowered and enslaved, paid a heavy toll for its imprudent exultation."

    -Julius Caesar "On the Treatment of the Conspirators"
    Oh please. OJ had a trial. They should have shot the jurors too.

  2. #392
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,628

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    You are not just hurting them but also everyone they know. You claim it's an idle consequence but it's revenge. Revenge is defined as a harmful action enacted upon someone in response to wrongdoing. That is precisely what the death penalty is. You killed someone, now you die. Eye for an eye.
    You are leaving out the most important part of "Revenge" and that is that it is done in a resentful or mean way...


    revenge   /rɪˈvɛndʒ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ri-venj] Show IPA Pronunciation
    verb, -venged, -veng⋅ing, noun
    –verb (used with object) 1. to exact punishment or expiation for a wrong on behalf of, esp. in a resentful or vindictive spirit: He revenged his murdered brother.
    2. to take vengeance for; inflict punishment for; avenge: He revenged his brother's murder.


    revenge definition | Dictionary.com


    Revenge is done out of an emotive response. The DP is not about revenge for me. It is about CONSEQUENCE.

    consequence   /ˈkɒnsɪˌkwɛns, -kwəns/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kon-si-kwens, -kwuhns] Show IPA Pronunciation

    –noun 1. the effect, result, or outcome of something occurring earlier: The accident was the consequence of reckless driving.
    2. an act or instance of following something as an effect, result, or outcome.
    3. the conclusion reached by a line of reasoning; inference.
    4. importance or significance: a matter of no consequence.
    5. importance
    in rank or position; distinction: a man of great consequence in art

    CONSEQUENCE definition | Dictionary.com


    If my kid eats a cookie before dinner without asking, then they get a time out.
    Is that "Revenge"? No... it is a CONSEQUENCE for the action that she undertook.

    Perhaps I am just more logical than you? No rip or anything, but I can disassociate myself from an emotive response with regards to this subject. If a man hits my daughter, then I might get angry and go and smash him, that is revenge... sure. It is also a CONSEQUENCE. The two can be independent, and they can be linked... for me, the DP is not linked... it is independent of emotion and revenge. It is about CONSEQUENCE and nothing more.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  3. #393
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    12-19-08 @ 12:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    101

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Invayne View Post
    Oh please. OJ had a trial. They should have shot the jurors too.
    He certainly did, and he was acquitted. Out of curiosity, who is this "they" that should have extra-judicial power to murder United States citizens?

  4. #394
    Advisor Unrein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Seen
    09-01-13 @ 12:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    448

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueKC View Post
    Time for a history lesson.

    "The Lacedamonians, when they had conquered the Athenians, appointed 30 men to govern their state. These 30 began their administration by putting to death, even without trial, all who were notoriously wicked, or publicly detestable; acts at which the public rejoiced, and extolled their justice. But afterward, when their lawless power gradually increased, they proceeded, at their pleasure, to kill the good and the bad indiscriminately, and to strike terror into all; and thus the state, overpowered and enslaved, paid a heavy toll for its imprudent exultation."

    -Julius Caesar "On the Treatment of the Conspirators"
    I hope you aren't trying draw a parrallel between ancient Athens and modern US democracy.

  5. #395
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    Punishment by the law. Yes it is the same issue and according to your logic if the state cannot kill a killer than neither should be allowed imprison an imprisoner, steal from a thief, etc. You need to make the distinction as to why that standard applies to THIS crime only and any crime.
    The necessity of the death penalty law is what we are debating in of itself. Imprisoning someone or killing them are two entirely different things. I never argued against punishing criminals for the crimes they committed... please cite where I said that, otherwise it's time to move on.

    I am emphasizing my disagreement with the death penalty as a form of punishment. If you cannot even discern that basic fact in what I'm saying, then there is no point in continuing this discussion with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    You are making a double standard.
    It's not a double standard to suggest that no one should be executed. A double standard would be the one that already exists, wherein some people get life in prison and some get executed for the exact same crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    The poor tend to be subject to MOST crimes compared to those who can afford layers. So we are taking this to something unrelated to the death penalty specificly and now crime in general.
    Except other crimes don't involve people being killed by the State. Again, please try to focus on the topic at hand. If a person's life is at stake but they cannot afford acceptable legal counsel, and the majority of people on death row come from a poor background, then there is systemic bias taking place.

    If the death penalty were uniform, a rich man and a poor man would both suffer the same fate.


    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    The lawyers generally make the difference between whether or not they are found guilty, if they ARE found guilty (of 1st degree murder) the sentence is pretty consistent regardless of how much money you spent on your defence.
    Are you seriously suggesting that someone who only has a public defender provided to them is going to stand the same chance of a lesser sentence than someone who can afford a good lawyer? Wow...

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    the law isn't punishing them the person who committed the crime is responsible for their families woes. I'am not prepared to lighten ANY laws LET ALONE murder convictions just to make thier family feel slightly better. It's a consequence that they have to live with.
    The person isn't committing suicide last time I checked, the State is killing him. Therefore the State is responsible for the family's woes. Your argument would seem to imply that the criminal knew they would get the death penalty when they committed their crime and therefore knew the suffering it would cause their families.

    This is a bogus argument since the system applies capital punishment inconsistently, so there is no way to know for sure if you will be killed or not. This is why the death penalty does not serve as an effective deterrent in the U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    It does no such thing. Capital punishment deals with the one who committed the crime and no one else. Any consequences are purely subsequent and not the responsibility of the government.
    Maybe in your ideal world it does, but in reality the death of anyone causes suffering to all those who know them and love them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    And that said, I would give more favor to the family of the victim who wants to see justice served then the apperently selfish family of the murderer.
    Why is the criminal's family selfish for not wanting their loved one to die? The criminal is still a human being with human ties.

    Careful, your bias is showing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REVENGE.
    Prove it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    HOw many people are sentenced to death each year? relatively not that many. Of those put to death how many have loving caring families? Probably not most of them. Is the effect of a few dozen families grieving over thier childs death going to severly (or even remotely) effect society? No.
    Provide evidence for the bolded assertion.

    I agree that the number of executions a year is small compared to how many criminals are actually in jail in the U.S., but the cost of the legal proceedings and the executions themselves far outweighs simple incarceration. (Please see my previous post for evidence.)

    Murdering people ruins the lives of others. I'm not interested in whether or not you think the effect is small. You haven't been in the position to know your loved one is going to be killed in a pre-meditated fashion. That is torturous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    A. That's besides the point completely.
    B. The main reason people watch is for oversight purposes.
    Sorry, but it's not beside the point just because you say it is. Also, prove B with evidence. Public executions make it a spectator sport. More than just the family and friends are allowed to go. That is an excellent commentary on how some people in society, such as yourself, feel satisfied with the deaths of others, as it suits your brand of morality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    That is besides the point, again. I'am sure most people who support the death penalty wouldn't disagree that more effort should be put into prevention. Just like people who support abortion also support measures to prevent unwanted pregnancy.
    It's not that it's beside the point, it's that you aren't understanding the point. Take suicide as an example. It's a person killing oneself. If a person ends up taking their own life then it's because they lacked support, were perhaps isolated in their thoughts, and they ended up carrying out an act in response to an impulse. Not enough people know the warning signs of depression. The same could be said of murderers... how often do people ignore others who are clearly displaying disturbing behaviour? How many people walk on and decide to not get involved?

    That's what I mean when I say execution is a way of throwing away a collective mistake. It's a righteous way to try and make the rest of society feel just in the way they live.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    It a punishment equal to the crime so yes. If someone steals 500 dollars does it make any sense to order them to pay back 400 of it?
    So then why doesn't every murder deserve an execution?

    How do you decide if the punishment is "equal to the crime"?

    Subjective non-sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    You described it quite fine yourself. It's the notion that peoples' actions are based on the collection of pycho-social interations, and that behavior is determined completely by the system as a whole and not individual free-will.
    Hmmm... I never really said that the person lacks free will, I was talking about contributing factors. Again, you misunderstood. For some murderers, perhaps the only intervention they've had in their whole life is when they end up in court and are found guilty. Why does it take so long for the system to catch up with some of these people? Some murderers are even repeat offenders. Why do we only discover some of them when it's too late?

    And how is killing them without even a chance at rehabilitation going to do any damage control? You claim that most murderers can't be rehabilitated. I agree, because they are given a death sentence instead! Some people on death row sit there for 15-20 years doing nothing whatsoever, while the State wastes time and money to satisfy the revenge impulse of people like you.

    In that time, the person could have been taught to live a better life and understand the gravity of what they did. Instead, people like me pay to have them sit there because people like you want to continue to shovel money into a financial black hole in order to do away with them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    They are burdening everyone else with thier existence and their family is being selfish if they want justice waivered to protect their feelings.
    You aren't understanding. It's not about the family wanting the verdict wavered, but the system causing a family suffering in order to try and provide "justice" to another family that is suffering. It tries to transfer the suffering, but instead you have two groups of people who suffer. How does that make any sense?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    So we shouldn't have a legal system at all then because that's how the whole thing works? Anarchy then? Please distinguish "eye for an eye" and "law". What is the difference between the two?
    When did I ever say that there should be no justice system or that criminals don't deserve punishment? Please provide a quote as evidence in your next post.

    In this case, an eye for an eye and the law are the same thing, which is unfortunate.

  6. #396
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Invayne View Post
    I do believe you just made the best argument FOR capital punishment. You are starting to see the logic in it. Good for you!
    I am still stolidly against the death penalty, but if it is going to exist then it should be uniform. So the latter is the second best option in my mind.

    For instance, in 1999 two 18 year-old girls were executed in Singapore on drug related charges. The U.S. was among some of the Western nations that condemned the actions, mostly on emotional appeals. So why is it not okay to execute two 18 year-olds, but it's okay to execute a 45 year-old?

    The cries coming from the U.S. were reflective of its own double standard.

  7. #397
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    If my kid eats a cookie before dinner without asking, then they get a time out.
    Is that "Revenge"? No... it is a CONSEQUENCE for the action that she undertook.
    When your child steals a cookie, do you execute him and then just go have another child? No, you give him a consequence he can learn from. Your analogy is flawed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    Perhaps I am just more logical than you? No rip or anything, but I can disassociate myself from an emotive response with regards to this subject. If a man hits my daughter, then I might get angry and go and smash him, that is revenge... sure. It is also a CONSEQUENCE. The two can be independent, and they can be linked... for me, the DP is not linked... it is independent of emotion and revenge. It is about CONSEQUENCE and nothing more.
    I've provided enough logical evidence to debunk your claim that I'm only making emotional appeals. I come from a country that, long ago, realized the impracticality and illogical nature of the death penalty. A society that wishes to harbour humanitarian ideals cannot kill its own people, no matter what. A person who has done something horrible deserves to be put away, and society doesn't have the right to decide who deserves to live and who deserves to die. Those are my values.

    The death penalty is a consequence that serves no purpose in the United States. It's been debunked as a deterrent. It's been debunked as a financially efficient method to deal with criminals. It's been debunked as a form of justice that brings relief to the people left behind (especially the criminal's family). It's not even applied uniformly, since two people committing the same crime could get two difference sentences based on a number of factors.

    The only thing left to look at is its use as a revenge tactic... i.e. if a court feels that a person's actions were "evil" enough, then they should die. That's not justice, it's attempting to repay one deed with something of equal value. That can never be decided objectively since it's a subjective issue, and no person in society is wise enough to know who deserves to die and who doesn't. At least, that is what I believe and what my country believes.
    Last edited by Orion; 12-12-08 at 12:18 AM.

  8. #398
    Educator Invayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Present
    Last Seen
    07-22-16 @ 08:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    817

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I am still stolidly against the death penalty, but if it is going to exist then it should be uniform. So the latter is the second best option in my mind.

    For instance, in 1999 two 18 year-old girls were executed in Singapore on drug related charges. The U.S. was among some of the Western nations that condemned the actions, mostly on emotional appeals. So why is it not okay to execute two 18 year-olds, but it's okay to execute a 45 year-old?

    The cries coming from the U.S. were reflective of its own double standard.
    What 45 year old was executed for drug charges? Have a link?

  9. #399
    Educator Invayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Present
    Last Seen
    07-22-16 @ 08:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    817

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    When your child steals a cookie, do you execute him and then just go have another child? No, you give him a consequence he can learn from. Your analogy is flawed.
    THIS analogy is WHACK! No one gets executed for stealing.



    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I've provided enough logical evidence to debunk your claim that I'm only making emotional appeals. I come from a country that, long ago, realized the impracticality and illogical nature of the death penalty. A society that wishes to harbour humanitarian ideals cannot kill its own people, no matter what. A person who has done something horrible deserves to be put away, and society doesn't have the right to decide who deserves to live and who deserves to die. Those are my values.

    The death penalty is a consequence that serves no purpose in the United States. It's been debunked as a deterrent. It's been debunked as a financially efficient method to deal with criminals. It's been debunked as a form of justice that brings relief to the people left behind (especially the criminal's family). It's not even applied uniformly, since two people committing the same crime could get two difference sentences based on a number of factors.

    The only thing left to look at is its use as a revenge tactic... i.e. if a court feels that a person's actions were "evil" enough, then they should die. That's not justice, it's attempting to repay one deed with something of equal value. That can never be decided objectively since it's a subjective issue, and no person in society is wise enough to know who deserves to die and who doesn't. At least, that is what I believe and what my country believes.
    Don't worry, when we're forced to join the "Global Community", we'll be forced by folks such as yourself to give up our wonderful death penalty so the monsters have a chance of getting out of prison to kill again. Until then, we're alot safer with it.

  10. #400
    User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    12-19-08 @ 12:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    101

    Re: Is Capital Punishment Justified?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unrein View Post
    I hope you aren't trying draw a parrallel between ancient Athens and modern US democracy.
    Certainly not since Julius Caesar was from Rome.

Page 40 of 42 FirstFirst ... 303839404142 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •