It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Death Penalty

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 10 2004 @ 09:28 PM
Well, strangely enough, I couldn't find a death penalty thread in existance when I, here it is.

I, personally, am against the death penalty. I think that murder is murder however you put it (unless in self defense), and that our government shouldn't be given the right to say who lives and who dies. Put them in jail, whatever, but we don't need to be killing people..

The other main reason, is fairness. There are many people executed all the time, and while we can prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the person is guilty, I don't think death is a decision to be made on a whim, concerning certain cases where all the facts weren't available...and if information is found to prove the person innocent later, well, too late, he/she was already killed. And let's not forget the racial issue...down south there are so many black people executed compared to whites, and the same trend basically anywhere. Black people are executed for crimes when whites would most likely just get life in prison...biased and biggoted judges and juries have no place when it comes to deciding to kill someone.

This brings me to my final point...I don't believe we can ever pick a group of people who should decide if another man should die. People are never "fair", death is permanent, and the final decision should not be left up to any people at all. Most people are religious, and murderers can have the conscience that they will have to deal with their God(s) in the afterlife. And this is the way it should be.

Personally, I don't think anyone in the world has the right to determine if another should die or be killed. This is still murder...the only reason it can be justified is in immediate defense in order to save someone else's life from the person whom you killed...hell, if someone's family prosecutes seeking the death penalty, they might as well pick up a gun and shoot that person themself if they really need revenge. I know certain crimes are so horrendous that it seems killing the criminal will make them feel better, but it won't...some might argue this, and I know I myself would be very enraged if my family were victimized, but I still don't think I could bring myself to kill the person. This is mainly a personal/moral issue though, the political issues are whether or not the system is working fairly...blacks sent off to death, while whites live.

Please post your thoughts...

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:11 AM
I am with you.

I am pro-life, all the way around. Except in those certain circumstances, what ever those may be.

It's like hitting your child to punish them for hitting
- what exactly is that teaching???

Plus, it's cheaper to lock someone up for life than execute, actually.

With DNA and stuff like that, I think we're able to now, more than ever, make sure we're putting the right people to death - if that matters to anyone listening.

Let me ask though: You're a parent and someone murders your child? would you be support the death penalty in that situation?

[Edited on 11-3-2004 by Bob88]

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:17 AM
I am for capital punishment. death penalty, castration, etc.

however I do believe in allowing the defendant the right to fair trial, appeals and let them sit in jail for a while before actually imposing the penalty.

btw, don't know what religions you are but many religions including Catholicism, Judaism and Islam all supported capital punishment and the eye for eye, limb for a limb policy.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:19 AM
I am all for the death penalty, only if the crime committed is deserving of such a punishment. I have to admit that we kind of through around the death penalty a lot, sometimes to people who are innocent/framed. However, I don't believe it is a wrong thing. After all, do we really want to waste all of this money keeping these bastards locked up in prison for the rest of their natural lives? Do you have any idea how much money that costs?

Take into consideration the food, facilities, maintainance, guards, lawyers, etc. After a while, the numbers get pretty big. I estimate that if we lock someone up for close to 30 years, we will spend somewhere around $1 million, just to keep them alive and happy (because of all of the regulations concerning the treatment of prisoners).

Mr. M

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:22 AM
I am for the death penalty, if only to weed out the truly horrible people in society. Justice doesn't bring redemption, but it is a natural human urge.

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.

Also, the threat of death has been proven to keep crime rates low. Less crime means a better society for everyone.


posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:30 AM

Originally posted by StarChild
After all, do we really want to waste all of this money keeping these bastards locked up in prison for the rest of their natural lives? Do you have any idea how much money that costs?

Money shouldn't come into the equation. Until there is a fair and safe way of proving without doubt that a person is guilty, then the death penalty should not be used. I have heard of too many mistakes and miscarriages of justice to believe that the judiciary are infallible. And yes, some of these people, wrongly found guilty, would have been executed had the death penalty been in force in the UK.

Yes, some were in prison for years before the miscarriage came to light, but at least they were still alive and it was possible to release them. If they had been executed, then what ?

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:34 AM
Thats a hard call, as much as we may feel that someone who commits a heinous crime may be deserving of losing there life for the deed, who are we to judge, are we without blemish? I think not, and as much as we might want to play God, its not our place to bring that down on someone, just my feelings on the topic.

Also I may be wrong but I thought I remember reading somewhere that its never been proven that the death penalty deters someone from taking another ones life.

[Edited on 11-3-2004 by tracer]

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:35 AM
It's like hitting your child to punish them for hitting
- what exactly is that teaching???

Umm i think people have a misconception that prison is about rehabilitation. Its not and never was. Its about Punishment firstly and secondarily prevention of offender being able to commit another crime whilst in prison.

As for the death penalty.. I don't know whether i want to get into an indepth debate considering my right wing views and relatively blase attitude to mortality. LOL.

So an unqualified yes, the death penalty is effective in its role as punishment but in America is way too expensive (more than non capital states), and is thus a further burden on the victim (society).

As for blacks being more likely to get capital punishment, well the problem here is not that blacks are treated more harshly but that whites are treated too lenient. I remember when that english nanny was in court for murder of a baby in Boston. Some strange people here were going crazy (IMNSHO) rasing money for her because presumably they thought "nasty foreigners must be making a mistake shes a nice white english girl", if that case happened in the UK no-one would care, no legal fundraiser nothing just a straight court case. Theres the problem, preconceptions, possibly sub-concious. Maybe ethnically neutral/balanced jurys would help even things up? Just my 2 cents.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 12:48 AM
no - it's cheaper to lock someone up forever, rather than all the automatic appeals, courts fees, juror fees, and lawyer fees. I'll venture to say that's fact. If someone could enlighten me otherwise....

I've heard about some pretty barbaric stonings among Islamic sects, like that Taliban, but I've never heard a priest from my church condone capital punishment.

I just don't know where we, as a society, can claim the authority to take a life? Though, I'd like to see those that we might put to death send to some island, for good, never to return.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 04:32 AM
Edwards was the last Dem standing *for* the death penalty in the 2004 race. Bush of course is from Texas so he's got the pro death penalty gene.

Most people may not like it, but if you're against the death penalty...Kerry is your man.

He's 100% against it. Keep that in mind when Bush starts his "Massachusetts Liberal soft on crime" ads... he means Kerry won't kill people.

Not that it matters as President. It's up to the states.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 05:06 AM

I've heard about some pretty barbaric stonings among Islamic sects, like that Taliban, but I've never heard a priest from my church condone capital punishment.

Though the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill', it also says 'an eye for an eye'.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 05:12 AM
Yes, some were in prison for years before the miscarriage came to light, but at least they were still alive and it was possible to release them. If they had been executed, then what ?

Yeah I know, but if our judicial system was accurate, we would not have that problem, would we?

Mr. M

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 05:47 AM
what about a guy who has life in prison, does he not also appeal?

this is not about playing god, but stopping those who do play god and take the life of their fellow into their own hands.

the bible does say thou shall not kill, and the penalty for violating that is death. Only Invouluntary manslaughter gets away with less. Read i think either Dueteronomy 19 or 20.

Bible aside , as much as i agree with it, we have to determine wheter or not it is a acceptable practice for america based on not religion but justice and what works for us.

Personally im for it , but agree with the waiting periods and appeals (though i think the cost could go down a little bit, but that has more to do with the way we allow laywers to practice). But the 1/7 mistake rate is way to #ing high and needs to be brought down.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 05:48 AM
I am for the death penalty. God says the government was given the sword, and for cause, and tells us to obey our laws.

It cheapens life to not look upon murder as a capital offense.

However, there is a problem, though. We in America no longer have proper juries, nor are they properly charged. Jurists are no longer peers of the defendant, people who know him and his character and reputation in the community. Jurists are randomly selected, and they don't know the person and wouldn't know if, regardless of all the indirect evidence, could this person be capable of such an act.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 06:00 AM
Exactly. Our judicial system is so jacked up. I am always hearing stories about some guy who was innocent, and sentenced to life in prison. Then there are stories of cold-blooded killers who get off scot free due to "insanity". Well no sh*t!!! Of course they are insane! That's why they do the things they do. I doesn't justify letting them off the hook, and putting them in a sanitarium. Sanitariums are designed to help people, and murderers are way beyond any help a phsyciatrist can provide.

Mr. M

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 07:08 AM
We shouldn't give anyone the right to decide if someone is to be given the death penalty unless there is a 100% foolproof way to do so fairly...and that is impossible.

As for if my child were murdered, I probably would feel like killing the person, but I wouldn't actually do it, or seek the death penalty...I don't think it would make anyone feel better, and the person who did it would have to think about it the rest of their life in a federal prison--they will suffer plenty in there for the crime, but not die.

And the teachings of Jesus were that you should never kill anyone. It clearly also says in the 10 commandments thou shalt not kill, and I dont think the government is given an exemption to that rule, as God will decide that person's fate.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 07:12 AM
I disagree. The government does have the authority to determine the death of a convicted criminal. The punishment should relate to the nature of the crime. An eye for an eye.

Personally, I believe that whatever that person did should be done to them, to a T. If a guy raped some little boys, let some of those Bubbas in prison assrape his sorry ass. Wonder how he'd feel about that?

Mr. M

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 07:23 AM
Face history, you are either going forwards, or attempting to go backwards.

Those who like the death penalty, torture, and all the rest of the gruseome anti-powers, also fold to the direction of slavery and the abolition of the Constitution the Bill of Rights, and next the Magna Carta, just to retreat to the dark ages.

Sorry but if you like the dark ages, go for your sorry death penalty and its attendant barbarity. I am sticking with reasonable confinement as a suitable punishment. If there are any questions of immediate self defense through, then that is a case for lethal force. Even that is a security screw up. Otherwise the death penalty is tempting fate, even the basic physics of the universe, not to mention the next level connecting into the divine.

Review your history if you want to envision the most depraved and anti-social elements of government who quash any semblence of moral authority in themselves by reaching for draconian penalities. This is not even power! It weakens a State, and develops distrust at every turn.

Yes if you want to destroy a once good State, or even a bad State, start up these uncivilized "penalties," and watch another civilization collapse into the archaeological layers never to be heard of again.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 07:41 AM
any liberal democratic society must grant its citizens inalienable human rights in order to provide safety against the state absorbing powers to which it has no right and to provide the moral code that society must obey.

the fundamental right any human has is the right to live. this right cannot be lawfully or morally withdrawn by anyone just as nobody can deny you your right to have skin.

i also believe the central purpose of imprisonment is to educate and rehabilitate. i dont think anyone is born evil (the term evil itself is simplistic to the point of absurdity) but that people become unlawful due to outside influence - be it family, friends, religion or society as a whole. it is the role of society to guide these people into becoming lawful.

posted on Mar, 11 2004 @ 08:00 AM
I always thought it was very interesting that the aim of the corrections system seems to be deterring future criminals and rehabilitating the convicted ones.

The death penalty accomplishes niether of these objectives. Killing isnt rehabilitation, and it is wrong.

Someone who takes another life for whatever reason is no better than the jury that sends them to die. Murder is murder.
When the government decides to go to war with some country, they have a way of just generalizing the hell out of their reasons for doing it. They sterilize the concept to make it palatable to people. Capital punishment is no different. They don't focus so much on the end result (death) as they do these little 'issues' here and there.

They guide your thinking around the block and back without really aknowledging their own law. Murder is wrong. Of course, they dont call it 'murder'. That doesnt sound nice, does it?

The bottom line is that killing someone is wrong, and the government never wants to paint a picture likening them to a crazy knife-wielding psycho. They just want to pull the sheets over your eyes and make you believe that its wrong........unless its them doing it.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in