Death penalty.

[CurlewKate]

Why don't they use an anaesthetic? Then do whatever barbaric thing they're going to.

No, technology isn't foolproof although it is leaps and bounds better than it was even 20 years ago and will improve exponentially.

An no, the death penalty is not a deterrent.

This is especially so for psycopaths who kill, rape and torture for pleasure/power. They are usually identifiable at a young age as they are fascinated by torturing animals and inflicting pain on other children. There is no rehabilitation for them and the joy they derive from their actions outweighs any punishment.

The death penalty is not a deterrent nor is it morally justifiable. At all.

I will say again, I am strongly against the death penalty.

But it is not morally wrong to support it. I do wish people on our side wouldn’t argue this. The problem with it is that it’s claiming a moral superiority that’s completely bogus.

We accept that life can be taken lawfully in some circumstances, by individuals or by the state. Mistakes are sometimes made in those circumstances. But we don’t accuse armed police who open fire when they genuinely believe there’s a severe risk, of being immoral. Or terrified householders who think they have a dangerous intruder in the house and stab them, of being immoral. Even if in both cases there’s a mistake.

I do agree that the death penalty isn’t a deterrent. And there are lots of other good reasons to oppose the death penalty. But doing so is not a badge of morality.

If you kill an intruder in your house you're in big trouble.

I said nothing about moral superiority. Only moral justification. I think you misunderstood my words.

This is very true and sensible!

Not if you have a strong enough argument of self defence. Juries are unlikely to convict if they believe the householder was in genuine fear of severe harm.

Absolutely 100 percent against the death penalty. If just one person is killed who was innocent it's too many.

This guy though, he did it for 17 years! What did the think being an executioner would involve? You'd think he'd have stepped away before he got to 62 people if it upset him so much.

@BlastedPimples "If you kill an intruder in your house you're in big trouble."

Well, if you shoot them in the back with an illegally held weapon as they run away then you might be in a little trouble, yes.

Surely the job of executioner should absolutely not be given to the type of person who would apply for it. That would then create quite the dilemma.

You did, and you’ve done it again.

You can’t say “what you support is not morally justifiable. I oppose that morally unjustifiable policy” and then say “but I’m not saying that I’m more moral than you”.

I find this an interesting view as it did give me pause for thought (my position is that the death penalty is morally wrong).

I agree life can be lawfully taken in some circumstances - such as your examples, or in war (one can argue around the morality of war in the first place but when at war very few would believe a soldier shooting an enemy soldier during combat is morally wrong).

I believe the death penalty is morally wrong because the state should not be able to directly deprive a citizen of their life (it does not have ownership over the life of the citizen), because countries such as the USA have repeatedly showed themselves unreliable in humanely executing prisoners, and because of the risk of miscarriage of justice.

I am against it for other reasons as well, but that's why I believe it is morally wrong.

Totally agree with death penalty. It would free up our prisons, they’ve lost any rights and why the fuck should I pay to house and feed them. Scum of the earth should be gotten rid of. Just sayin.

So you're definitely happy with innocent people being executed as long as some guilty ones are as well? That's exactly what you're saying. Just saying.

This level of debate is really basic to put it politely.

All murderers are scum...they should be murdered.

Brilliant

I wondered that. Surely an overdose of Propofol would more humane. Not that the health penalty is humane. Should be completely banned.

@WhatsTheUseOfWorrying I don't claim to be morally superior to people who agree with the death penalty at all.

I think being pro death penalty does not have a moral defense. It is for vengeance only.

I can see the argument - that calculated killing by the state is immoral because it’s calculated - but I do think it fails to recognise the process.

If a person is accused of a crime that carries the death penalty they should have every right to a fair trial and every presumption in their favour. But if they are convicted they’re in a position that they knew beforehand they would be in. The punishment isn’t arbitrary.

The state then executes as a means to protect itself, i.e. citizens. And where there’s general support - which there is in some US states and in some other countries - the state acts on its citizens’ expectations.

None of this makes capital punishment acceptable IMO. But it’s not immoral. (Without proper process it most definitely is immoral.)

IMO if you think the death penalty is OK you think murder is OK, because that's what it is no matter how you try to justify it.

Aaah. Murder is killing without lawful excuse. After a trial and conviction there is lawful excuse. Just like self-defence or defence of another is lawful excuse for killing.

Capital punishment is wrong, in my view, but support for it isn’t immoral and execution after legal process isn’t murder.

IMO it is. That's why I put "IMO" at the start of my comment.

I think a lot of posters have way too much faith in the police, government and criminal justice system

Yes, I get that. It’s just that your opinion has no basis.

I don't believe anyone has the right to take another person's life, including the state. It is always murder and to me murder is wrong. That's why I'd always oppose the death penalty. I totally understand that if a member of my family was murdered, I would want that person dead but I don't believe that should form the morals is of state justice. No one ever has the right to take another person's life. I can't ever deviate from that.

@WhatsTheUseOfWorrying

For countries that are signatories to certain human rights treaties, like the uk, capital punishment would always be illegal.

So what it’s basic. So basically why should I play by the rules if a twatting murderer doesn’t. Oh yeah human rights.