Whats the point in having a death penalty?
It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes. And how can the victim's family feel better knowing that the criminal is going to be put to death by the state?
Should the state have the right to take someone's life because of a criminal act?
>>71003739
It's great on paper but in practice it's terrible and doesn't even achieve most of its goals. There's a reason virtually the only countries with the death penalty are third world fanatical shitholes.
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes.
It does, the whole idea of prison is to deter people from committing crimes, don't fall for the "rehabilitation meme", criminal scum will always be scum.
>And how can the victim's family feel better knowing that the criminal is going to be put to death by the state?
It makes society feel like justice is being made.
>>71003739
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes
it would if we'd get the fuck on with it.
>>71003739
OP has a descent point.
To me, the rediculous part of the death penality,
is that it costs 2-3 million for court proceedings.
The average cost of jail for life is about 1 million.
Clearly, Death penalty is gonna have to get cheaper, or its total waste.
>>71003739
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes.
Proofs?
>And how can the victim's family feel better knowing that the criminal is going to be put to death by the state?
depends on the family senpai
>Should the state have the right to take someone's life because of a criminal act?
Yes. But only if the evidence is clear and double-checked by unrelated parties.
Also if you have clear evidence for putting a 30 year old man into prison for atleast 40 years, why not just kill him instead? He'd be draining the society's money for the rest of his life, whether or not he died in prison
I would support it if it wasn't so damn inefficient. People are on death row for like, 10 years. Just give them their sentence and put a bullet in their skull a week later. Would save money and be much easier rather than spending to keep the inmate alive for years
>>71004281
Dismissing your terrible grammar and spelling, how about we begin to further embrace the constitution by administering fair and speedy trials that take much less time and money. That way, we have a dead criminal cadaver and our shekels.
The one legitimate argument against the death penalty is how expensive it is.
Which could be solved by having the death penalty be more humane, less expensive and faster-put a bullet in their brain. the lethal injection might be extremely painful for all we know, many papers say so, and it's slow. the chemicals are expensive. and the appeals are as well.
no appeals on the death penalty saves judicial time and TONS of money. a bullet saves the condemend possible pain and TONS of money.
because if someone killed my sister or my daughter or someone i love, they'd be dead death penalty or no death penalty
>>71003739
to set an example
>>71003739
It would deter people if the punishment was inhumane enough
like
>Boiling somebody alive
>Cutting off somebodies reproductive organs and force feeding it to them then sticking a hit curling iron up their ass
>Twisting a knife into somebodies ass until they bleed out and die
>Poking somebodies eyes out with a needle slowly
>Putting somebody in a cage with a live wild animal so they get eaten alive
If there were punishments like this it would deter crime. I would support such punishments only if the crimes were severe enough and it was without a doubt (video evidence for example) that the person committed them.
Justice isn't peacefully putting somebody to sleep with medication. Justice is inflicting the same amount of damage (and more) on that person as they did on the person(s) they killed.
>>71003739
It's not a deterrance or vengeance, it's merely a solution.
You get a guy like Charles Manson... what do you do with him as a society? Try to rehabilitate him? No, basically you can either stick him in a cage for life, execute him, or send him away. Since exile isn't a thing anymore, it's either life in prison or the death penalty. Neither are palatable, and both amount to being sentenced to prison until you die... so it's only a matter of picking your poison.
>>71005000
Unnecessary cruelty has nothing to do with justice
>>71005170
well technically, justice is balance. so if someone just executes your dad, torturing him isn't justice. but if someone rapes your wife, raping that person would be justice.
theoretically. people are very sensitive about criminals these days, very concerned about their rights
>>71004182
Yeah like 1 appeal, then you go from the courtroom to the gallows. Preempt TV with the hanging.
>Muh retribution.
And this is why USA has so many people in prisons.
>>71005000
But that's inconsistent with historical evidence. When such punishments were commonplace during the middle ages, or inquisition, the murder rate was surely higher. When we killed people by firing squads, or electricity, murder rates were higher. Capital punishment doesn't deter violent crime, whether in the ghastliest manner possible or not. Why? The people who commit capital crimes are going to do it anyway
>>71005567
wow. you're just above retribution, huh? you'd be fine if someone killed someone you love and got 10 years in prison, out in 5 with good behavir because they learned their lesson. props man, you're more evolved than
>>71004038
>>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes.
>It does, the whole idea of prison is to deter people from committing crimes, don't fall for the "rehabilitation meme", criminal scum will always be scum.
Then why do people still end up in prison? Can we even measure how many people are deterred by prison? I think not. The idea with prisons is only to remove people from society for a limited time. Rehabilitation is very subjective.
>>And how can the victim's family feel better knowing that the criminal is going to be put to death by the state?
>It makes society feel like justice is being made.
Indeed, it does, and so the highest authority in society shows it's ok to end people's lives.
That translates to the rest of society and violent crimes go up when differences are about to be settled.
Just like any parent would know, kids don't do as you say, they do like you do. State=parent.Society=child.
>>71005384
Depends on what system of justice, it isn't necessarily eye for an eye for everything.
It can be a thief losing a finger or his earlobes, a rapist would having their genitals removed etc.
My personal opinion is that allowing anyone who will be killed, even if tortured before that, is more merciful than cruel and additionally a waste of time.
>>71005606
>comparing murder rates between pre-industrial, industrial and modern times
you moron, dead babies floated in the Thames in London, hookers got cut, murder and crime rampaged in the NIGHTMARE that was London, the world's largest city at the time. but compare those stats to now, and WOW, less crime!
HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?
>>71005384
>but if someone rapes your wife, raping that person would be justice.
No, this isn't justice. Wars used to be started these ways. Raping your enemy's wife back is revenge, not justice.
Justice would be to compensate with monetary value as an apology.
>>71005870
>When we killed people by firing squads, or electricity, murder rates were higher
>When we killed people by firing squads, or electricity, murder rates were higher
>When we killed people by firing squads, or electricity, murder rates were higher
>When we killed people by firing squads, or electricity, murder rates were higher
maybe you can read it now! please, have some bread.
>>71005663
It doesn't matter what I want, it matters whats best for society.
Criminals in my country get a life sentence and end up bribing the guard or just escaping. If we made an example it would make them reconsider.
>>71005878
>revenge can't be justice
>currency or materiel is a worthy compensation
go back to your cuckshed sven
Studies show that people executed by capital punishment do not commit the same crimes again.
>>71005988
when you killed people by firing squads, murder rates were higher everywhere
even when you killed people by electricity, muderder rates were higher everywhere
this had nothing to do with the death penalty, but the society at the time.
maybe you can read it now. please, have some bread
>>71005878
I rather like the idea of a "blood-price". Each crime costs a certain amount of blood which must be paid by cutting your hand and squeezing out blood until the debt is fulfilled.
Not sure if it's a good system, but there is a certain satisfaction to it.
>>71003739
We need public executions to put fear into criminals.
>>71006150
Jesus, I know English isn't your first language, so I'll just drop it.
>>71003739
With how much red tape is involved yeah it doesn't do much
If however after being sentenced the criminal in question was put on his knees and shot in the courtroom it might have a stronger effect. Or we could bring back public hangings
>>71006056
well honestly my wife can't be worth more than 10,000 bucks
>>71006126
very true.
>>71003739
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes
How can they commit a crime if they're dead?
>>71006056
>>revenge can't be justice
>>currency or materiel is a worthy compensation
>go back to your cuckshed sven
Hope, you're trolling, Pekka Peikko, you savage.
>>71006229
>Not sure if it's a good system, but there is a certain satisfaction to it.
Revenge is always more satisfying, to the emotionally immature.
>>71006362
rather a savage than a swede
>>71006317
then why do i speak it better than you? are you an immigrant? it's okay if you are
>>71003739
We don't do simply to deter crime. Everything is relative, and when people grow accustomed to the fact that the death penalty is around, they will continue about doing their crimes regardless. You would think the prospect of spending the rest of one's life in prison would be a deterrent as well, but they still commit their crimes despite this fact.
You're right about the family's wishes, as well. Some people may relish the fact that their loved one's murderer may be sentenced to death, or they may dwell on the investigation and trial so much that it taints who they are as a person. This corrupts them even further than the initial crime may have, and these new emotions will bleed over into other aspects of their lives.
The death penalty shouldn't be a deterrent, it shouldn't be about vengeance for the victim's and their families. It should be about whether or not the criminal can contribute to society. Are they a further risk? Of what benefit would it be to rehabilitate them? Do we even have the resources to rehabilitate everyone?
Someone who rapes and murders someone simply shows us they are incapable of interacting with civilized society. What would be the use of "rehabilitating" them? So they can flip burgers, and we can pray they don't strike again? Just take them out in the middle of nowhere, pop them in the back of the head and throw them down a hole. No fanfare, no public spectacle. Just prune them from society, and slowly, but surely, we'll remove the filth and all enjoy a higher standard of living.
I don't think we use the death penalty often enough, and it should be expanded to include career criminals and other offenses like rape, robbery, and the like.
>>71003739
Yes, don't be a dumbass.
Ideally the death penalty would save us a lot of money we'd otherwise spend keeping worthless garbage in prison. In practice it doesn't, but that just means the court system is fucked.
There is a thin line between us and wild animals.
Some humans cross that line, and the only effective punishment is death.
People who murder, rape, and steal on a whim are not human to me. You can't rehabilitate these people. These people do not change. They should be put down like the rabid animals they are.
>>71006404
I bet
>>71006481
well dial it back now, i don't think theft is sufficient to warrant a death penalty. or even rape really, just a life sentence. the death penalty should be reserved for people who commit premeditated murder, and maybe second degree murder
>>71006328
Bring back public hangings and start with the politicians.
>>71003739
it deterres me
>>71006584
>i don't think theft is sufficient to warrant a death penalty. or even rape really, just a life sentence
That's because you're retarded. If you keep someone locked up for life then they are capable of change, and then what would be the point of keeping them locked up? If you think they should never be released to interact with the public, then why not kill them and be done with it? It's because you're a coward in the face of reality, and you seek refuge in your ideals.
The simple fact of the matter is that we don't live in a world of limitless resources. As this anon put it >>71006477 ideally the death sentence would save us resources compared to keeping them locked up forever.
If they can't interact with the world, and they will never amount to shit, kill them and be done with it. If we don't kill them and we release them early because we're too soft and don't want to get our hands dirty then we end up with the shit we have now, where all manners of criminal trash have lengthy criminal records and it seems like nothing ever happens to them and they continue dragging society down with their presence, making life miserable for the rest of us. They're why we need to lock all our shit up every night, why European women have to travel in groups and not walk the streets at night, why kids can't walk to school.
Imagine if a financial crisis happens and we can't afford to keep all the prisoners locked up. Would you rather we gas the prisons or let them all go? Because FUCK letting them go.
The reason for the death penalty recognized by the courts is its value as a deterrent.
>>71007107
>The reason for the death penalty recognized by the courts is its value as a deterrent.
Based on scientific data no doubt. Or not. It's pretty much just muh feels isn't it. Or do you have some study that says otherwise?
>>71003739
>What's the point in throwing rubbish in the bin
>You'll just have more rubbish in the future
If it's not a deterrent, why do convicts fight so strenuously to avoid it?
If you were honest, you'd admit that NO PUNISHMENT is a deterrent for capital crimes.
Which is partly true. A person in a first world nation who is going to commit murder, usually doesn't do so with the foresight of the consequences or with the belief that they will not be caught.
So essentially it comes down to revenge.
And most people find it satisfying.
I would also say it's good as a message to society. You will be removed. Permanently. It should also be cost effective, but from what I understand it's not anymore.
Existentially speaking no punishment really corrects the damage caused by capital crimes.
Killing the offender, putting him in jail, or letting him walk free won't bring the victim back.
>>71005000
Not really. Even when the punishment is severe, people still commit crimes, because they don't believe they will be caught.
>>71003739
I think for the most part the dealth penalty is unnecessary but every now and then you read about something so fucked up you just think: "yeah, it has a place."
There is nothing wrong with having a death penalty.
>>71007523
Do you also execute rapists and other sorts of violent criminals?
>>71007579
>falling for the rape meme
Rape is just beating someone's up with a phallic object. It's no different to physical assault.
>>71007257
It's the legal justification. It's not based on a study. It's the law.
>>71007579
We don't hang rapists, but we do hang drug traffickers.
>>71003739
The prison system is meant to remove people from society until such a time that they have been rehabilitated and can be returned to society as functioning members. The death penalty exists for people deemed incapable of rehabilitation.
Yes, I know the difference between the theory and the practice, nobody thinks you're clever for pointing out the obvious.
Some people can't rehabilitate making a bullet or a rope cheaper.
Like what's the point in keeping Charles Manson around? That guy is never going to be able to integrate into society.
My issue with the death penalty isn't that I feel its bad to kill horrible criminals. I do believe the state has a right to take the lives of evil people who do not deserve the life they were given. Such people do exist.
My issue is the fact that there have been many wrongful convictions. Our justice system is too flawed to have such power.
This thread reminds me of Troy Davis. He was a Georgia man who was executed to the murder of a police officer. Such a crime does warrant execution, however there was too much doubt in his case as well as lack of concrete evidence. There was a very high chance that he was innocent. Even if he was guilty as sin, reasonable doubt should have saved his life when it didn't.
Pic related.
>>71003739
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes.
Yes it does. Incarceration in a hellish prison and a painful death by execution would deter normal people from committing crimes (regardless of severity) out of fear. That's the whole point.
Rehabilitation doesn't work. Fear works. Fear of pain. Of being raped and defiled in prison in any way, shape or form. Of dying in prison in the most horrendous way imaginable, either by inmates or by being executed, especially through means other than lethal injection.
Mentally deranged people are beyond salvation (of course) and will kill regardless, and should be executed to serve as an example for everyone else.
It reminds people that there are dire consequences. If you remove this, then you remove the fear, which will embolden more people.
>And how can the victim's family feel better knowing that the criminal is going to be put to death by the state?
Most families of victims actually want the criminals to be executed. Some want revenge. Some just want to make sure that the criminal never victimize others again. Some want both.
>Should the state have the right to take someone's life because of a criminal act?
Yes.
>>71007694
>It's the legal justification. It's not based on a study. It's the law.
The state ending people's lives as referred to legal justification is legal revenge.
Things not based on studies to be debated, and separating these to "just" law, if true, is horribly biased and wrong.
I hope you just don't know what you're talking about.
>>71007860
PS
although I also think it depends on the crime in question.
General murder doesn't deserve the death penalty, cruel ISIS-tier murder (decapitation,vivisection,etc.) on the other hand would warrant something like that.
>>71008056
>Rehabilitation doesn't work
Citation please
>>71006000
And sending criminals like that back in society where theres a chance they'll do it again is good for society how? Shit like burglary, theft and nonviolent crimes is whatever to me, but taking someones life on purpose is a whole different ball game. A life is more valuable than money, its something you cant get back.
>>71003739
>Whats the point in having a death penalty?
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes.
yes it does. if texas didnt have a death penalty i would be the biggest mass murderer in recent memory
>>71007579
Nope. But they do execute drug dealers.
I spoke to a co-worker who had lived in Saudi Arabia for some time.
He said the threat of brutal punishments and murder did nothing to deter rapists and murderers.
But they DID deter petty criminals and political dissidents.
If the punishment far outweighs the crime, for smaller crimes it becomes a deterrent.
But an eye for an eye in regards to murder?
It's about the same.
One of the anon's above mentioned torture.
This was employed in Europe for centuries, and worked to a degree. People were willing to die for a cause, but often not willing to endure what the Catholic Church would put you through if they got you alive.
No one really wants to live in that society though. And I should add that they seemed to reserve that for crimes against the "state" rather than individuals.
>>71008064
That's the Japanese system.
They reserve the death penalty for "worst case scenario" crimes.
In Australia we no longer have the death penalty, but we reserve Life - No Parole for those circumstances. It's rare to get it, but it happens.
A case like the Anita Cobby murder is where all five guilty men were marked "Never To Be Released" (they kidnapped a young woman from a train station, raped, beat and tortured her for several hours and then decapitated her with a hunting knife - all the offenders, but especially the ring leader - had previously committed repeated violent sexual assaults from a young age).
In these cases, the death penalty may as well be employed. These men will never be rehabilitated and have zero value to society and are unquestionably guilty. We had one case where a guy had committed violent rapes since his early teens. Had been in and out of jail his entire life. Every time he was let out, he went back in for extremely violent rapes. He eventually was caught for several torture/murder/rapes, and they realized he had committed some more he hadn't been caught for previously. He confessed, talked about what he did. He admitted that regardless of his age, he would kill women if released again.
What do you do with a guy like that? Is there any reason to sustain him in a prison until he dies? For expediencies sake why not hang him?
>>71008160
>A life is more valuable than money
>You can't get it back
You can't get back the time you lost earning that money either.
It's why I'm infuriated by soft punishments for property crime.
>Guy steals thousands of dollars worth of stuff
>Does 3 months in jail
Compared to the years I did in work to earn that stuff, it's nothing.
Especially since a portion of all that work was already going towards paying for his welfare so he didn't have to steal in the first place.
> just make it faster bro pop a bullet in their skull like stalin haha
They're thorough with that shit for a reason. Ridiculously so? Yes, but it's to make absolutely sure that they don't accidentally send too many innocent folks to meet god for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Also, doesn't the idea of instant death penalty sound a little retardedly tyrannical?
>>71008160
In countries that don't have a private prison system with interest in keeping the 'customers' coming killers are for the most part people that either people who got in a fight and took it too far, people going after personal enemies or psychos.
The first and second could very well never kill again, the third needs medication.
You say life is more valuable than money, than you say you rather take a life of an alleged killer (look up the statistics on how often people who could get the injection turn out innocent) rather than pay for a life sentence.
>>71008685
I agree, white collar crime should be punished with the money as a multiplier.
The people that intentionally cause misery for millions of people should get 1000+ years.
>>71003739
>It doesn't deter people from committing horrible crimes.
Sure it does. But this really only works on intelligent, rational people.
>>71003739
>le death penalty has no purpose meme
It's to remove shit heads from society. What's the point of keeping a serial child rapist around?
>it's better to keep them in a facility for the rest of their lives where we have to feed them, clothe them, hire guards to watch them, etc.
You people are fucking dumb.
