MagiStream

The death penalty is a highly controversial topic, even though it is performed in the most humane way possible. There are many legitimate arguments from both sides, and I would like to hear other people's opinions on this topic.

I myself have not formed a definite opinion on it yet, which is one of the reasons I am creating this topic.

With that said- debate away!
(But please- be respectful. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.)

People who are on death row have done unspeakable things to get there in the first place. Unfortunately, most of them rot away and die on death row and never actually reach lethal injection.

If you happily slaughtered hundreds of people and admitted to it with no guilty conscience whatsoever, I think the gallows is too good for you.

But then again, I believe in an eye for an eye. If someone beats an old lady to death with a bat simply for the contents of her purse or for the ring on her finger, then they should be taken out the same way. Harsh? Yes, very.

But I bet criminals would think twice about committing such crimes.

/end.

I don't really support the death penalty, but not because it's harsh. I don't think it's harsh enough; it gives them a fast, simple out, no matter how bad we think death may be. If someone hurt me in some way bad enough to warrant the death penalty, I would probably vote instead for their continued life in jail where they can suffer longer for what they did. Of course, I'm not terribly proud of that opinion, but I've always had a hard time accepting that bad people automatically go to some terrible hell, so death just seems too easy.

Added to that, I don't really think we have the right to kill someone, even if killing was their crime. I didn't always feel that way, and I haven't explored my boundaries on it, but I do stick with that general idea.

Hm..double debate here. True, I do think that for someone who have done crimes that deserve them a place on death row, giving them lethal injection is kinda like an easy way out. I mean, the families that they effected now have to live their lives without the people that they loved and the person who did it...hardly might seem like justice to the victim's family. Though, that is only one side. Then, you have the issue of that it does cost the state government money to house someone for the rest of their life (randomly pulled from the California state government page) it can cost nearly $50,000 a year to house an inmate. So for someone arrested for capitol crimes in their 20's or so, they could have a good 50 years worth of living to do.
So...I have no opinion? Nah, more is it is to late and I shouldn't be trying to formulate a good debate while I am sick

As a self-professed hard core liberal, this is where I start splitting hairs as to my stance. I am pro-death penalty. For a very simple reason, which shadows all the other little reasons I could list to support it...

If you took the life of another human being, without reasonable doubt, and you are not in any way mentally impaired, I feel as though you should lose your rights as a human being. You made the conscious decision to end another person's life, therefore you've forfeited your own life.

Saying I feel murderers should lose their rights does not it's okay to torture them or some such silliness. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard than that. A humane death is perfectly acceptable.

This sounds very cold, but in a world where even celebrities can get away with murder, I think we need to reevaluate our system right now.

BlackDdraig wrote:Hm..double debate here. True, I do think that for someone who have done crimes that deserve them a place on death row, giving them lethal injection is kinda like an easy way out. I mean, the families that they effected now have to live their lives without the people that they loved and the person who did it...hardly might seem like justice to the victim's family. Though, that is only one side. Then, you have the issue of that it does cost the state government money to house someone for the rest of their life (randomly pulled from the California state government page) it can cost nearly $50,000 a year to house an inmate. So for someone arrested for capitol crimes in their 20's or so, they could have a good 50 years worth of living to do.
So...I have no opinion? Nah, more is it is to late and I shouldn't be trying to formulate a good debate while I am sick

I am kind of at this place when it comes to my position.

I think that criminals SHOULD be punished, and in a way to deter future crimes from happening. For capital crimes, such as murder, I think I am leaning towards a yes to the death penalty, for quite a few reasons. But I still have my doubts.

My arguments FOR:
1. This is just me, but I am terrified of death. If I were to commit a crime, death would be the worst punishment for me. And for some criminals, they deserve the worst punishment possible that is still humane.
2. It is EXTREMELY expensive to keep someone in jail for the rest of their life. If they did something bad enough to land them in jail for the remainder of their lives, it is likely that they could be put on death row.
3. Peace of mind for the victims. Often, people in jail get out early for good behavior. If the family of a murder victim heard that the murderer of their loved one was being paroled for 'good behavior,' I'm sure they would have all sorts of different emotions on that.

However, I also have some arguments AGAINST the death penalty. *sigh.. how I hate my indecisiveness*
1. THERE IS ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE PERSON COULD BE INNOCENT. Yes, I know our forensics is amazing nowadays, but it has happened before, and I'm sure it will happen again.
2. Trials are extremely expensive, especially ones that can last as long as death row. These cases get appealed many times, and it is a very long process.
And finally...
3. Even though these criminals are very bad people, do we, as human beings, have the right to take their lives, whether justified or not?

And I appreciate everyone's outlook on this, as well. Maybe someone along the way can help me make up my mind, one way or the other.

MadameRed wrote:People who are on death row have done unspeakable things to get there in the first place. Unfortunately, most of them rot away and die on death row and never actually reach lethal injection.

If you happily slaughtered hundreds of people and admitted to it with no guilty conscience whatsoever, I think the gallows is too good for you.

But then again, I believe in an eye for an eye. If someone beats an old lady to death with a bat simply for the contents of her purse or for the ring on her finger, then they should be taken out the same way. Harsh? Yes, very.

But I bet criminals would think twice about committing such crimes.

/end.

I'm pro-death, too.

But I will mention I don't agree with this all the way.

While I would LOVE for the eye-for-an-eye thing, there's a few things here. One, who are you going to get to do that sort of thing? How would they not be tainted by it eventually? If they enjoy it, how are they any different? And if you stoop to do the same thing that the one person did, are you better than them? Is your reason more "righteous?"

Would criminals think twice about committing such crimes? Sadly, I don't think so. Back in the day, you had the rack, the stocks, the wheel, the Iron Bull, the stake, the gallows, drawn-and-quartered, the wooden shoe, thumbscrews, etc, etc, ad nauseum. And people still committed every crime from lying to murder. You can't fix the broken. You can only cart them off the mortal coil and how you go about it won't stop it from being necessary, so why pollute yourself along with them?

Do I think people need to go out of their way to not cause them pain? No. Gallows or firing squad, go for it. But a long, drawn-out death by 1000 cuts because that person did it is tip-toeing the line of darkness.

I will agree I wish the process was faster. Granted, part of it is probably to make sure they know they're killing the right person, and there's an alarming number of people who are exonerated, but when you have Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, or Massoui on death row, kill them. Don't give them three squares, health care, and privileges you don't give your straight-and-true citizens. That's my biggest pet peeve with this. There's children dying of starvation in this world and the bleeding-hearts of the world would see an axe murderer go free than get his just desserts.

Where's the justice in that, people?

Wolfsister wrote:I don't really support the death penalty, but not because it's harsh. I don't think it's harsh enough; it gives them a fast, simple out, no matter how bad we think death may be. If someone hurt me in some way bad enough to warrant the death penalty, I would probably vote instead for their continued life in jail where they can suffer longer for what they did. Of course, I'm not terribly proud of that opinion, but I've always had a hard time accepting that bad people automatically go to some terrible hell, so death just seems too easy.

This is pretty much my stance on it. As I failed 12th grade once, I had to discuss this topic two times and though there were many good arguments both for and against the death penalty, to me there was no argument stronger than the one Wolfsister posted here.

As I too don't believe in the concept of hell, because I'm not even convinced there is an afterlife, the death penalty to me seems like an easy way out for the offender. Of course it usually takes quite long until it is caried out, but in the end they are dead. And that's it. They are dead and the only people possibly suffering from it are family and friends of the offender.

The only thing that unnerves me is what others here mentioned already: The fact that they get better health care than the people leading a "normal" life.

But on the topic of cost: Isn't it so that actually death penalty is more expensive than being sentenced to life without the possiblity of parole? I have a hard time finding websites I actually would trust (might be due to not being used to search for such things in English), but I know that this topic came up several times during the discussions in school. And as the teacher's weren't providing any additional information on it, maybe someone here could give me a better answer to it.

Though I honestly do not know what my stance on it would be, if a family member or friend was killed and the option of death penalty would be there.

I agree with the death penalty, but think all the beaurocratic bullshit involved in getting someone put to death should go out the window, if it is decided you are getting the death penalty, it should be carried out the very next day, in the cheapest way possible, a single bullet to the head should probably do the trick.
Forget about housing and feeding someone for several years, and wasting taxpayers' money.