This is Why I Support the Death Penalty

Aramike · 06-08-09, 11:31 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525441,00.html

Quote:

NEW ORLEANS — Authorities say a 17-year-old teenager was charged with aggravated rape and first-degree murder of an 8-month-old child.

Animals like this do not justify the expense of keeping them alive for years on end. Should this person be proven undeniably guilty, he should be swiftly put down like a rabid dog, in my opinion.

August · 06-09-09, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aramike

proven undeniably guilty

Therein lies the rub. For every one of these there are 100 whose guilt is not so firmly established.

sunvalleyslim · 06-09-09, 12:44 AM

August,
If you believe that there are a hundred to one that they're innocent......Dude you're smokin your socks......

Aramike · 06-09-09, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Therein lies the rub. For every one of these there are 100 whose guilt is not so firmly established.

Point taken, although I believe that sunvalleyslim also has a point - the ratio is probably reversed (1 out of 100 whose guilt is questionable). Frankly, I find the moral dilemma to be similar regarding just locking people up in the first place - I'd hate to think of the horror of being wrongly imprisoned.

That is indeed the only argument against the death penalty that leaves me torn.

However, the fact that there's an overall margin of error does not dismiss the fact that, on a case-by-case basis, certain cases have no margin of error whatsoever. Those are the cases where I support capital punishment. A lot of times people will posit that the legal system isn't perfect, and they are correct. Yet, a single case does not represent the system as a whole. Furthermore, our legal system is based upon the single case.

I do believe that irrefutable proof must be the standard for any and all executions. I also believe that the penalty of death is warranted in many cases - especially in the rape and murder of an 8 month old baby.

06-09-09, 01:38 AM

How about a drunk driver who kills two people, say, a mother and a baby. Should that drunk be snuffed out?

Stealth Hunter · 06-09-09, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

How about a drunk driver who kills two people, say, a mother and a baby. Should that drunk be snuffed out?

Most definitely. That's manslaughter after all.

UnderseaLcpl · 06-09-09, 04:11 AM

I just can't understand this whole "death-penalty" bent. It seems inefficient and silly to me. How does the death penalty repair the damage done to people and families and society? Where is the penance?
For the most heinous crimes, in which the defendant is proven guilty by irrefutable evidence, life in a labor camp holds a lot more punitive potential.

Of course, this must be done properly in order to ensure effectiveness. For starters, it needs to be in a suitably harsh climate, way too hot or way too cold. Next, it would need to produce goods that could actually generate a profit, or at least offset state expenses so that reimbursements could be paid to the victims. Something labor-intensive, though, like making highway barriers manually.
Then, it would need to have an organizational structure similar to Marine boot camp; hardly a moment of peace, bad food (minimum calorie intake, preferably in the form of tasteless paste), little sleep, constant surveillance, stiff penalties for any infraction. It's good enough for our troops, so it should be good enough for our worst criminals, right?
Finally, no amenities. No tobacco, no visitation, no parcels, no internet, no TV, no radio, no newspapers, no anything. And 7-day workweeks, 8 hrs a day (more might be considered cruel and unusual)

After a few years in that grinder they'll wish they were dead, and they will be, after a miserable life.

What does the death penalty do, anyway? If there is a hell and evil people are sent to it, burning for eternity is going to be just as miserable and endless at the end of a life in the camp. If there is no afterlife, the death penalty just grants the criminal painless oblivion, whereas their victims live with a lifetime of pain. What kind of justice is that?

Best of all, if they are later exonerated, they could be paid a healthy compensation for their wrongful imprisonment by the state, and we can get the money for that by simply saving the money it would have cost to execute them in the present system.

Naturally, this is almost completely implausible in the U.S. due to the number of judgements and rulings that would have to be overturned, but I still think it's a good idea.

06-09-09, 12:44 AM	#3
sunvalleyslim Ace of the Deep Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Los Angeles, Ca Posts: 1,142 Downloads: 267 Uploads: 0	August, If you believe that there are a hundred to one that they're innocent......Dude you're smokin your socks...... __________________ Crew member/ decommission member TM2(SS)(SD) 3/68-7/70 DIESEL BOATS FOREVER USS SEGUNDO (SS398)

06-09-09, 04:11 AM	#7
UnderseaLcpl Silent Hunter Join Date: May 2008 Location: Storming the beaches! Posts: 4,254 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I just can't understand this whole "death-penalty" bent. It seems inefficient and silly to me. How does the death penalty repair the damage done to people and families and society? Where is the penance? For the most heinous crimes, in which the defendant is proven guilty by irrefutable evidence, life in a labor camp holds a lot more punitive potential. Of course, this must be done properly in order to ensure effectiveness. For starters, it needs to be in a suitably harsh climate, way too hot or way too cold. Next, it would need to produce goods that could actually generate a profit, or at least offset state expenses so that reimbursements could be paid to the victims. Something labor-intensive, though, like making highway barriers manually. Then, it would need to have an organizational structure similar to Marine boot camp; hardly a moment of peace, bad food (minimum calorie intake, preferably in the form of tasteless paste), little sleep, constant surveillance, stiff penalties for any infraction. It's good enough for our troops, so it should be good enough for our worst criminals, right? Finally, no amenities. No tobacco, no visitation, no parcels, no internet, no TV, no radio, no newspapers, no anything. And 7-day workweeks, 8 hrs a day (more might be considered cruel and unusual) After a few years in that grinder they'll wish they were dead, and they will be, after a miserable life. What does the death penalty do, anyway? If there is a hell and evil people are sent to it, burning for eternity is going to be just as miserable and endless at the end of a life in the camp. If there is no afterlife, the death penalty just grants the criminal painless oblivion, whereas their victims live with a lifetime of pain. What kind of justice is that? Best of all, if they are later exonerated, they could be paid a healthy compensation for their wrongful imprisonment by the state, and we can get the money for that by simply saving the money it would have cost to execute them in the present system. Naturally, this is almost completely implausible in the U.S. due to the number of judgements and rulings that would have to be overturned, but I still think it's a good idea. __________________ I stole this sig from Task Force

06-09-09, 01:38 AM	#5
OneToughHerring Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	How about a drunk driver who kills two people, say, a mother and a baby. Should that drunk be snuffed out?