# Do you agree with capital punishment?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Norsefire, Dec 17, 2007.

?

## Do you agree with capital punishment?

32.7%

49.1%

18.2%
1. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
I am not that crazy about burgers, but I would definiatelly kill chicken! Actually, if I get a machine gun, I might kill cows too....

Prisoners, yes, they still need to be killed for their organs, and your argument about their health is silly. If we can check normal donors for every disease, why can't we check prisoners?

3. ### Frud11BannedBanned

Messages:
567
Well, some organs can be removed without the need for a cadaver, but sure, a dead body is cheaper to work on, and all you need is a freezer, rather than an expensive ward and nurses and doctors.
The Chinese believe that a prisoner's organs are worth the price of a bullet, for sure. The cost of inspection could be met by finding the best price on the market, so defraying "production costs" (not sure how this is arranged in China).

This arrangement (the killing of prisoners for their organs), would not of course lead to any increase in capital sentences, because any nation that adopts such a practice, like China, obviously has way too high a moral sense to descend to that sort of level...

Last edited: Jan 25, 2008

5. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
Here is a lovely story from England, the victim is a hero, but that is not the point:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...in_article_id=509962&in_page_id=1770&ito=1490

The point is that one of the attackers was an escapee from prison, thus locked up doesn't mean he can not get out and hurt people. dead people can not...

The other point is that all 2 still alive assholes (one comitted suicede) should be executed. And I don't even ask anti-CPers how they would feel when there is a knife to their daughters neck....

7. ### C1aySkepticistRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
162

So, a security hole needs to be fixed. Dead people cannot be released if they are later found to be innocent....

8. ### Frud11BannedBanned

Messages:
567
What about all the soldiers who commit murder (under illegal orders, even), every day?

There is zero excuse for unwarranted killing, even if ordered to shoot unarmed prisoners (a war crime), a soldier is required to refuse, because they should be well aware that the order is invalid.

I think the remaining relatives of people murdered illegally by US and other soldiers or mercenary contractors, who commit war crimes daily are justified in believing that these asshole soldiers are just as low, and just as big an asshole, as any of those referred to so far (the ones who get caught and locked up). Surely death is the only solution (and we get to make money by selling their organs).

9. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
Agree, just like we could say that we have to make sure only guilty people get executed.

A safety hole needs to be fixed, you know....

10. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Staff Member

Messages:
37,343
Yes, we understand that killing people is what's important to you. But that guarantee is impossible. Remember that while politicians like to play "tough on crime", they also like to cut corners with the budget. As long as you nickel and dime the corrections system, it will surely produce disappointing results. Of course, since those disappointing results only help the argument that killing people is good, you have every reason to advocate an inadequate correctional facilities. Hell, a lot of homicide advocates already think prison is a "vacation". Imagine how they'll complain if we ever put a sincere effort into our correctional system.

11. ### C1aySkepticistRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
162

That should already be the case. The problem is that it isn't. I really don't have a problem with killing guilty people that deserve to die but ONLY guilty people that deserve to die should ever face the executioner. I see no room for mistakes.

12. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
I agree again. Just like no prisoner should be allowed to escape...

13. ### NorsefireSalam Shalom SalomRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
11,529
And what if they are not found innocent for four decades? They might as well have died.

However, assuming we do develop a system where we have little to no wrongful executions, would you then be supportive of it?

14. ### NorsefireSalam Shalom SalomRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
11,529
Syzgysz brings up a good point which I've noticed. Criminals should be executed, but that can be beneficial! How? Relatively healthy criminals can have their organs removed and then we can use those organs to save innocent lives. That's alot better than letting them rot in prison, causing havoc, wasting time and money.

15. ### C1aySkepticistRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
162

I've already stated earlier that I support death for those that deserve it. I simply expect 100% accuracy in judgment. It is unacceptable for any innocent person to ever face an executioner of the state. The condemned should be guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt.

16. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
So do we. But we also live in the real world, so we know it is not going to happen.

Anyway, let's get slightly offtopic with the organdonor thingy:

What if prisoners were allowed to exchange some of their time for their organs? Let's say you get off 10 years for a kidney, etc. The logic here is that society is low on good organs, and prisoners needs time while they can still enjoy life. So this way both society and the prisoner win...

17. ### C1aySkepticistRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
162

Sure it can. Not for everyone we'd like to execute but there are plenty that are guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt. There's a guy, Brain Nichols, facing charges in Atlanta, GA who shot a judge in front of a whole courtroom full of people. He's so unquestionably guilty that he shouldn't even be eligible for appeals.

Those we can't convict with that level of certainty can be held securely. We've got plenty at Supermax now and they'll never get out or escape. It also costs less to house them for 50 years at Supermax, around $2.5 million, than the average death penalty case, around$4 million plus. It's estimated that Brian Nichols case will exceed $5 million before it's over. So far his public defenders have gone through$1.8 million and the trial hasn't even started. The taxpayers would be better off seeking life at Supermax for him.

18. ### NorsefireSalam Shalom SalomRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
11,529
That isn't a bad idea, but ten years is too much. No, for every organ we can perhaps increase privelages or take off a few months. However, for those who are executed, they become property of the state and therefore have their healthy organs removed.

19. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
Clay, we agree.

Norse, the excange rate between organs and time is negotiable, but nobody will give up a kidney for a few months. Even for 1-2 years I wouldn't. 5, yes...

20. ### NorsefireSalam Shalom SalomRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
11,529
They are criminals, anyway, we shouldn't give them anything. Just drug 'em and take them in.

Messages:
12,671