The Death penalty.

I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand there are some monsters out there that I feel simply deserve execution. An execution I might add, that doesn't even come close to the brutality they have inflicted on others.

On the other hand, innocent people are tried and convicted of guilt and suffer greatly for it. Even more if it's life in prison, or death, as a punishment.

At the end of the day I'm reminded of something a very wise and very old man once said,

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”

I don't think I could ever be the one to "pull the trigger" so to speak.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
In 2014 22 countries partook in the death penalty.

Afghanistan (6), Belarus (3+), China (+), Egypt (15+), Equatorial Guinea (9), Iran (289+), Iraq (61+),
Japan (3), Jordan (11), Malaysia (2+), North Korea (+), Pakistan (7), Palestine (State of) (2+, Hamas
authorities, Gaza), Saudi Arabia (90+), Singapore (2), Somalia (14+), Sudan (23+), Taiwan (5), UAE (1),
USA (35), Viet Nam (3+) and Yemen (22+

So Is it right? does someone have no hope? should a life taken mean a state taking a life?.
Must admit If it was someone close to me who was the victim I would probably choose death for them but justice is supposed to be blind and deep down I would want them to spend time with no freedom even If it meant life inside for them.
So yes or no?.

Oh some good facts here.

www.amnesty.org...

I'm actually against the death penalty & believe in rehabilitation. But I think you explained it well when you said "Must admit If it was someone close to me who was the victim I would probably choose death for them". You can't expect others to take a higher moral ground than you would.

Also, many cultures have different versions of the "death penalty" which doesn't fit these stats. Drone strikes, shoot to kill orders against suspects, use of live rounds against demonstrations, and military incursions are all "death penalties", if we're to be literal about it. So any country that believes in wars of aggression or "preemptive strikes" is carrying out the death penalty on its targets. And I think these are even worse because there's no trial and no conviction; not even a chance to defend yourself against the accusations made against you.

I'm wholeheartedly against it.
I think its hypocrisy of the highest order to say its wrong to kill someone so because 'you've' killed someone 'we' are going to kill you.

But I passionately believe the sentence should fit the crime.

Life means life.
Lifers should have a bare cell with just the basic essentials, subsistence level food and hard labour.

We seem to have forgotten that the primary reason for someone's imprisonment should be punishment and not rehabilitation.

However, I know I too am a hypocrite.
If anyone committed a serious crime against any of my loved one's I know for a fact that I would do everything in my power to seek personal revenge against them.....and I suspect it would be pretty brutal to say the least.

As with most things of a serious nature there is no straight forward answer.

originally posted by: Freeborn
I'm wholeheartedly against it.
I think its hypocrisy of the highest order to say its wrong to kill someone so because 'you've' killed someone 'we' are going to kill you.

But I passionately believe the sentence should fit the crime.

Life means life.
Lifers should have a bare cell with just the basic essentials, subsistence level food and hard labour.

We seem to have forgotten that the primary reason for someone's imprisonment should be punishment and not rehabilitation.

However, I know I too am a hypocrite.
If anyone committed a serious crime against any of my loved one's I know for a fact that I would do everything in my power to seek personal revenge against them.....and I suspect it would be pretty brutal to say the least.

As with most things of a serious nature there is no straight forward answer.

Umm... so basically you're only against the death penalty in certain cases? I'm not trying to judge you either way, but it's much better to just be honest with yourself about it. If someone crosses a certain line with you, you believe they deserve a "pretty brutal" revenge.

I'm only pointing this out because this is exactly why the death penalty exists in the first place. Because most people actually are in favor of it; it just depends on the circumstances. It's no different than the people whose red line is someone hurting their family members, someone being in a terrorist group, or someone who is accused of crimes against a child. Many cultures generally accept those as red lines that warrant death.

Every culture has different ideas of "unforgivable crimes" and some use the death penalty as a result (be it legally or through vigilante lynchings). So it's wrong for us to say we want to abolish the death penalty, when we actually want special exceptions just for us.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

No, the point I was trying to make was that I morally believe capital punishment is hypocritical.

But, I recognise that I am but human and as such have my failings.
And being hypocritical on this is one of those many failings; I know the sort of person I am and I know without a shadow of a doubt the lengths I would go to under certain circumstances and I know exactly what I am capable of doing.

I am not proud of that.....but its a fact nonetheless.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: enlightenedservant

No, the point I was trying to make was that I morally believe capital punishment is hypocritical.

But, I recognise that I am but human and as such have my failings.
And being hypocritical on this is one of those many failings; I know the sort of person I am and I know without a shadow of a doubt the lengths I would go to under certain circumstances and I know exactly what I am capable of doing.

I am not proud of that.....but its a fact nonetheless.

Like I said, I'm not judging you. I just feel the only way to really solve social issues is to confront them head on. The only way we'll ever deal with the death penalty is to come to terms with how we really feel about it, then try to form a solution that can give everyone a clear conscience. It's definitely morally hypocritical for us though, just as many cultures claim to believe in animal welfare while killing countless millions of moles, rats & snakes as "pests".

It took me a very very long time to get past the same point you made. I thought the death penalty was wrong but necessary at times. It literally took what I believe to be a direct message from God ("All Life is Precious") to get me to stop feeling like that.

I also understand how hard it is to stay true to the concept of punishment, forgiveness, then rehabilitation. In fact, many times it's much harder to unclench our fists & forgive than it is to throw a fist & punish. I won't pretend I'm perfect, but I've come to terms with that and am now trying to overcome my boundaries, such as learning to forgive as I'd want my God to forgive me.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I know you're not judging me and I respect your take on things. I think it shows that you are a compassionate and caring person.

I'm not one to psychoanalyse things too much - I came to terms with who and what I am years ago.

Being Agnostic I lack your faith but I do recognise that we need to raise above some of our more base instincts if we are to evolve and develop as a species etc

But being brutally honest I just don't think I personally would be able to do so under certain extreme circumstances.....let's hope we never find out.

a reply to: Freeborn

I can agree with that. And I didn't mean to sound preachy. Just showing that it took what I consider a literal act of God to get me to start walking this path lol

And even then, my temper would get the better of me, though I'd try not to act on it. But it took me snapping at a place of business to get me to finally look into anger management and coping techniques, which is one of the best things I've ever done. So maybe that can help some.

My opinions on the death penalty are complex. I support and oppose it, and I will explain why.

In theory, I support the death penalty in the case of certain crimes and criminals. I support it purely for murder, and then, only special cases when the nature of the murder was extremely brutal, sadistic, cruel, callous, cold blooded, and beyond heinous in nature. I also believe it should be an option in cases of mass murder or anything that results in wide scale death. When it comes to the nature of the criminal themselves, those deserving the death penalty would fit just about anyone's definition of pure evil. No empathy, no remorse. Sadistic and cruel in nature, or simply callous and uncaring. Premeditation is a must. Examples: Guys like Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy. Scott Peterson. Terrorists. This list is not limiting, just giving some examples of the nature of crimes I consider death penalty worthy.

There are many cases where someone is murdered, and while tragic, I do not believe it warrants death. Such crimes are the more common crimes. Like murders committed during the heat of a robbery, a jealous lover's rage, ect. Murders fueled by normal, human emotions that have gotten out of control. Often, the majority of those who commit these crimes are not soul less sociopaths, just people who made poor choices or allowed their emotions or passions to cloud their judgement. I believe decades to life in prison sentences, depending on the nature of the murders, is appropriate. More often than not, these people, while messed up and guilty, often end up regretting their choices, and in some cases, can actually end up making some sort of positive change, even from behind bars.

All that said, currently, I oppose the death penalty in our current system because I believe our justice system is too corrupt to be trusted to decide between life and death. The death penalty is overused, especially on people of color, and often, for crimes that really warrant 20 to life sentences. On top of that, too many innocent people have been executed, and even one innocent person being executed for a crime they did not commit is unacceptable. Before I would ever support the death penalty in actual practice again, the "justice system" must be completely overhauled, and the death penalty should limited by law to a limited set of circumstances, and perhaps only handed out by a vote of judges.

Until then, I have withdrawn my support for the death penalty as it is currently held in the current state of the U.S. justice system.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Your post mirrored my views on it perfectly.

A death sentence should not be handed out like halloween candy. But with care, if that doesn't sound too strange...

I too support it for certain crimes and only if certain evidentiary criteria are met. Kill someone for gain and you're done. Kill someone for sport/enjoyment and you're done. Kill someone during the heat of the moment and sentencing would vary. If I have rock solid evidence against them and its a crime eligible for death, I'm good with it.

For example: I would not give the death penalty to the woman who killed her friend with a crock pot during an argument, but I'd flip the switch personally on the garbage that tortured and killed Baby P.

The only way I've personally observed it being a deterrent is when someone deliberately does something in a non-death penalty state. I think results would be different if all states had it. And though people get snarky about it, its true that once someone is dead they won't repeat their offense. I dont care if other garbage gets scared straight. THAT person is permanently removed. Good enough.

I do support the Death Penalty.

There was a case in my state back in the late 70's where a man kidnapped a four year old girl, was drowning her in a deep puddle of muddy water while sodomizing her at the same time. I will never, as long as I live, be able to get that case out of my mind.

He admitted to doing the crime, said he deserved the chair. People were carrying signs outside the jail, saying to not execute him. Where were they when this girl was sentenced to die in the brutal way she did ? HMMM !!! People truly astound me with their nonsense.

He was executed by electric chair ! At least that one won't be able to do this horrid act to someone else's child. Monsters exist and in cases like this one, no mercy should be shown them.

a reply to: DaphneApollo

What about the people who have been wrongly convicted? How many have gone to the chair?.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: DaphneApollo

What about the people who have been wrongly convicted? How many have gone to the chair?.

I do understand your point, however, do you agree that those who are found guilty of taking someone's life, like my case above, Deserve the death penalty? No one in America is convicted to either prison or execution without Due Process and many times appeal after appeal.

Of course All are given a fair trial, my example above was also given a trial. Hopefully, those cases with any doubt, ARE NOT executed without being certain of their guilt. That, would be wrong. But, in my case above, he admitted it.

He shed innocent blood. If the state were to execute him, NO "innocent" blood is being shed. Some of you need to learn the difference.

originally posted by: Greathouse
I'm against the death penalty. I believe no one should be sentenced to death unless there is 100% certainty of their guilt .


It takes a very high standard to reach 100% certainty and no court in the world is capable of that standard .

Yes, I second that.. I must not think of it cooking dinner for every innocent person who got excecuted by a government.