Is money the only justification for no execution here? Does it matter what is more expensive? Ask yourself, what is more fair for a criminal who massacres and rapes a-plenty, a vacation in jail (as sandy puts it, and I would say so), or an execution?
Do you agree with capital punishment?
- Thread starter Norsefire
- Start date
It's more expensive to kill someone. Jail isn't a vacation. What about the possibility of killing an innocent person? Doesn't that enter into your equation at all?
Betrayal and disgrace
Depends on who you ask. If you read through the topic, you'll find plenty of other arguments.
In the meantime, Norsefire, would you be so kind as to help me understand a phenomenon that we see around Sciforums from time to time?
It just seems that the question ignores the rest of the topic.
Help me out here, Norsefire ... while the money is mostly a concern of people who think prison is "a vacation", what in the world would suggest that money is "the only justification for no execution here"?
Only to those who would appeal to the pocketbook with silly arguments that depend on treating prison like a "vacation" or other privilege. Consider Kadark's question: " What the hell has jail ever solved?" Given that prison—allegedly a house of "correction" or rehabilitation—tends to cultivate criminals (after all, rehabilitation so that an offender can make a useful contribution to society is "soft") so that many of the people we sent to prison for mere possession of drugs emerged prepared to commit other, more serious crimes, is seems rather disingenuous to call prison a "vacation".
A chance at proper correction and rehabilitation would be best, but people are willing to believe that's too complicated and too expensive to ever work as long as it means nobody can call them "soft on crime".
This is a common quirk of a group of sociopolitical assertions often associated with one another. If people keep insisting on the inappropriate "solution" until the problem gets out of hand, the inappropriate "solution" becomes more attractive. In other words, if we administrate the prisons badly enough in order to not be "soft on crime", the poor result might compel more people might take the emotional bait and support state-sanctioned homicide.
It's a sellout. A betrayal. It's a disgraceful way to go about this business called justice.
Norsefire said:
Depends on who you ask. If you read through the topic, you'll find plenty of other arguments.
In the meantime, Norsefire, would you be so kind as to help me understand a phenomenon that we see around Sciforums from time to time?
It happens every once in a while that a debate will be taking place with diverse arguments given for a certain viewpoint; in this case, that viewpoint is the argument against the death penalty. Some of the arguments (note the plural) include:
• Capital punishment is barbaric.
• The U.S., by executing criminals, is in the distinguished company of nations it would vilify.
• The innocent should not be mistakenly executed.
• Capital punishment is expensive; the alternative is to be less careful—see preceding point.
• Capital punishment does not deter crime.
And then one day someone makes what is, ultimately, a superficial and emotionally-driven argument, such as, "I'm sick of paying for them to vacation in jail. Fry 'em all." Someone responds with the point that it is expensive to get it right and make sure we're executing the right person. And then—and this is what puzzles me—someone pops off with a question like, "Is money the only justification for no execution here?"• The U.S., by executing criminals, is in the distinguished company of nations it would vilify.
• The innocent should not be mistakenly executed.
• Capital punishment is expensive; the alternative is to be less careful—see preceding point.
• Capital punishment does not deter crime.
It just seems that the question ignores the rest of the topic.
Help me out here, Norsefire ... while the money is mostly a concern of people who think prison is "a vacation", what in the world would suggest that money is "the only justification for no execution here"?
Only to those who would appeal to the pocketbook with silly arguments that depend on treating prison like a "vacation" or other privilege. Consider Kadark's question: " What the hell has jail ever solved?" Given that prison—allegedly a house of "correction" or rehabilitation—tends to cultivate criminals (after all, rehabilitation so that an offender can make a useful contribution to society is "soft") so that many of the people we sent to prison for mere possession of drugs emerged prepared to commit other, more serious crimes, is seems rather disingenuous to call prison a "vacation".
A chance at proper correction and rehabilitation would be best, but people are willing to believe that's too complicated and too expensive to ever work as long as it means nobody can call them "soft on crime".
This is a common quirk of a group of sociopolitical assertions often associated with one another. If people keep insisting on the inappropriate "solution" until the problem gets out of hand, the inappropriate "solution" becomes more attractive. In other words, if we administrate the prisons badly enough in order to not be "soft on crime", the poor result might compel more people might take the emotional bait and support state-sanctioned homicide.
It's a sellout. A betrayal. It's a disgraceful way to go about this business called justice.
I do not have a problem with death for the truly guilty, never have. If I witnessed a horrible crime, and had a weapon, I would not have a problem with killing them myself. However, as I have pointed out, our society seldom has the good fortune to be able to be competely sure of guilt. That is why I would rather err on the side of keeping a criminal in jail for life. I never turned in favor of it as a matter of public policy.
Correction and rehab don't work. Almost never have. That's why there's so much recidivism. Criminals are a whole different breed of human. They don't respect the law/authority (probably never have) and they don't care about anyone but themselves.
Some do get "saved" in prison and let God deal with them/turn them around. But these are very few and far between.
I especially support frying child molesters, terrorists, and repeat criminal aliens. They are sub-human scum.
I didn't always think like this. I was kind of a bleeding-heart liberal in college. But then I grew up, got a HUGE dose of reality, and now tolerate self-responsibiity only. No more bs.
Some do get "saved" in prison and let God deal with them/turn them around. But these are very few and far between.
I especially support frying child molesters, terrorists, and repeat criminal aliens. They are sub-human scum.
I didn't always think like this. I was kind of a bleeding-heart liberal in college. But then I grew up, got a HUGE dose of reality, and now tolerate self-responsibiity only. No more bs.
Like I said before, if they just needed overwhelming evidence and a gun, then YES, I would advocate Capital Punishment.
Correction and rehab don't work. Almost never have. That's why there's so much recidivism. Criminals are a whole different breed of human. They don't respect the law/authority (probably never have) and they don't care about anyone but themselves.
Some do get "saved" in prison and let God deal with them/turn them around. But these are very few and far between.
I especially support frying child molesters, terrorists, and repeat criminal aliens. They are sub-human scum.
I didn't always think like this. I was kind of a bleeding-heart liberal in college. But then I grew up, got a HUGE dose of reality, and now tolerate self-responsibiity only. No more bs.
Why fry'em when you can just take them out back and shoot them in the head?
Then why not give them a cyanide pill and say goodbye?
Who are these "Bleeding hearts" anyway?
Correction and rehab don't work. Almost never have. That's why there's so much recidivism. Criminals are a whole different breed of human. They don't respect the law/authority (probably never have) and they don't care about anyone but themselves.
Some do get "saved" in prison and let God deal with them/turn them around. But these are very few and far between.
I especially support frying child molesters, terrorists, and repeat criminal aliens. They are sub-human scum.
I didn't always think like this. I was kind of a bleeding-heart liberal in college. But then I grew up, got a HUGE dose of reality, and now tolerate self-responsibiity only. No more bs.
rehab does and can work for the people who really want it, my mate went through re hab and it has worked for him
I believe that capital punishment should be allowed under special circumstances. If the murderer is a sick, twisted torture-murdering-rapist, then kill him! If it was just a murderer that killed 1 person, then 1 life sentence.
Sandy said:
They are, historically, fairly new concepts. It's not like the centuries of punishment, torture, and execution that preceded modern perspectives did anything to solve the crime problem.
And how does that "breed" arise? Is it genetic? Is it determined by God? Or is it, perhaps, a product of society? While there are, indeed, a certain number of natural psychopaths and sociopaths out there, would you pretend that number is large enough to accurately describe the American prison population?
Then they are the exception. Good for them. Seriously.
What if that one person was you? And you were tortured/raped/starved/etc. You still want your killer to get life? What if it was your Mother or child?
Choices. Bad choices. Probably since day one. Not genetic. Not God. God doesn't make junk. Thoughts, choices, actions, put them there. That's why if we keep the thoughts positive/focused on the positive, we win. I don't go for temporary insanity either. It's bs. You're either sane or not. No grey area.
I don't believe in "natural psychopaths and sociopaths". They are created. By their parents/thoughts/etc...Give me 10 minutes with one of them. I will get to the bottom of it.
People who are way too soft in their thinking. Kindness, patience, love, compassion, gentleness, forgiveness, etc are fine. The law is the law. You break it, you pay.
Remember the circumstances Sandy!
Did the murderer just stab him/her or was it torture-murdering?
It doesn't matter. He CHOSE to stab someone. If it was self-defense, that's one thing. But just out of anger/rage is different. I especially love these guys who blow criminals away after they rob stores, terrorize/hurt innocent people.
That POS criminal who smacked the kid with his gun is burning in hell now. Too bad so sad.
Do keep in mind that it is the jury that comes up with the verdict.