• 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!

Is the Death Penalty Murder?

Is the Death Penalty Murder?


  • Total voters
    70
Whats confusing is how easily people excuse justify and stand for the slaughter of an unborn child yet get their silkies twisted over the execution of a murderer. I mean...come on...how twisted do you have to be?

Yes...this IS a fun game...isnt it.

Perhaps you didn't mean this post to be repulsive, but it is. Neither abortion nor capital punishment is fun... nor is it a game. Inflammatory rhetoric is not meant to impart reason; it is meant to impart anger. It is also extremely unhelpful in the discussion of serious topics and controversial issues.
 
Since murder is a legal thing of course it isnt, neither is abortion. Not logic to support otherwise.
 
When the state is permitted to kill its citizens, then no-one is safe.
 
Murder is a legal term for unlawful homicide.

Capital punishment and abortion are both lawful forms of homicide.

Ergo, neither capital punishment nor abortion are murder.
 
I think it's a murderer. To me, the government doesn't have the right to kill anybody, unless the person is proven to be a war criminal. I absolutely reject the idea of capital punishment, if someone did something illegal, imprison him. In many cases imprisoning a person can actually be worse than simply killing him.
 
The fact that this issue is even up for debate proves that as a people, Americans are not mature enough to realize actions have consequences. While many believe the issue to be emotional, and write as such, what they don't realize is that it is not an emotional issue we're dealing with. The death penalty is a judicial issue. The courts have a duty imposed upon them to prosecute an offender for crimes. Whether or not the public agrees is irrelevant, because the courts are in fact a public institution. Until the Death Penalty's legality is revoked, it is not murder.
 
Recent high profile executions have resulted in a resurgence of debate about the death penalty. One thing I'm noticing is that, several times now, I have seen a post by someone who has told me in the past that it's wrong to call abortion murder (because abortion is legal) yet calling an execution murder. I do concede that abortion is not legally defined as murder, but then, wouldn't the same be true of the death penalty?

So, what do you think? Is carrying out the death penalty murder? Explain why or why not.

Elective at-will abortion, when no other life is in danger, is ethicaly 'murder' because the unborn has not committed and was not convicted of any capitol offense

The prisoner on death row, was.
 
Murder is a legal term for unlawful homicide.

Capital punishment and abortion are both lawful forms of homicide.

Ergo, neither capital punishment nor abortion are murder.

Neither was beating your slave to death at one time.
 
I think it's a murderer. To me, the government doesn't have the right to kill anybody, unless the person is proven to be a war criminal.
The Constitution specifically allows the state to depreive someone of their life, so long as they are given due process.
 
The Constitution specifically allows the state to depreive someone of their life, so long as they are given due process.

That's true....


5th Amendment, which says:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Strange...I just posted this Amendment in another thread...related to another topic.
 
That's true....


5th Amendment, which says:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Strange...I just posted this Amendment in another thread...related to another topic.

Gotta love the 222 year old document dictating our morals and laws.
 
Legally no.

But I consider premeditated, intentional killing of another person, outside of warfare, to be murder. Not that I necessarily think its always wrong, just that its only the "law" that creates the distinction.
 
Yes it's murder, but most likely only if you're one of the bleeding heart wackos who thinks executing a cold blooded murderer is some how wrong but it's perfectly okay to kill the unborn, who are only guilty of having one or two worthless irresponsible parents who can't figure out what a condom is for, or maybe they are too complicated for stupid people to figure out how to use them.
 
Gotta love the 222 year old document dictating our morals and laws.
The law is the law. You dont have to like it but you cannot simply pretend it isn't there.
 
Yes it's murder, but most likely only if you're one of the bleeding heart wackos who thinks executing a cold blooded murderer is some how wrong but it's perfectly okay to kill the unborn, who are only guilty of having one or two worthless irresponsible parents who can't figure out what a condom is for, or maybe they are too complicated for stupid people to figure out how to use them.
Isn't it technically homicide? That covers a multitude of situations, including the death penalty.
 
"Thou shalt not murder". Item 6 Decalogue. Published Moses.
'

He sees you when you're sleeping, he knows if you're awake, he knows if you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake. LMFAO
 
Isn't it technically homicide? That covers a multitude of situations, including the death penalty.
It is.
Homicide isn't always illegal.
 
Criminologists' Views on Deterrence and the Death Penalty

"Eighty-eight percent of the country’s top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to a new study published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and authored by Professor Michael Radelet, Chair of the Department of Sociology at the University of Colorado-Boulder, and Traci Lacock, also at Boulder.

Similarly, 87% of the expert criminologists believe that abolition of the death penalty would not have any significant effect on murder rates. In addition, 75% of the respondents agree that “debates about the death penalty distract Congress and state legislatures from focusing on real solutions to crime problems.”

The survey relied on questionnaires completed by the most pre-eminent criminologists in the country, including Fellows in the American Society of Criminology; winners of the American Society of Criminology’s prestigious Southerland Award; and recent presidents of the American Society of Criminology. Respondents were not asked for their personal opinion about the death penalty, but instead to answer on the basis of their understandings of the empirical research.
Facts about Deterrence and the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
I mentioned this in another thread, but there are actually two types of deterrence; general and specific. General means the punishment deters others from committing the same type of crimes and "specific" meaning it deters the same individual from committing more crime. When used, the DP is a 100% effective specific deterrent.
 
I mentioned this in another thread, but there are actually two types of deterrence; general and specific. General means the punishment deters others from committing the same type of crimes and "specific" meaning it deters the same individual from committing more crime. When used, the DP is a 100% effective specific deterrent.

Well you would be right if the person had murdered and gotten out of jail again. Most of these people are life time criminals and I"m not talking about the one time solo person. Most of these guys are in involved in gangs, live in poverty, and can't afford a proper attorney. Your 100% is guaranteed wrong, look up how jail is a revolving door. 80% of people who are released from prison will return, EIGHTY PERCENT. Then again you can't increase punishments because there is the 20% who are not returning, they did their time and are sorry for what they have done. I have to say though honestly, I'm surprised it isn't a 100% prison return rate.
 
Back
Top Bottom