Death penalty

[birthdayboo]

I don't quite understand the logic of people who want to murder people who have committed awful crimes.

I do understand saying you wish you could, verbalising the anger felt and not literally meaning you would actually carry out a killing yourself.

I don't understand when people swear they would actually kill

One horrific crime doesn't go away because you commit another horrific crime such as murder on the guilty?

I don't understand the death penalty either - I totally agree that life seems too good for some people, however it's still legalising murdering a human being to have the state kill them - so I just can't get my head around murdering someone because they murdered someone. Perhaps some form of voluntary self administered euthanasia being available by prescription to individuals who will never leave prison in their lifetime would be a solution to how much money it costs to house prisoners however it's not even like people get death penalty and it happens soon, they spend ages and have money spent on holding them prior to execution

After my dd was murdered I was driving in my home town, I stopped at the lights and there he was walking happily across the road. Before I could react my foot automatically went on the accelerator I so wanted to die and take him with me. I can honestly say if dd2 had not been in her car seat in the back I would have done it.
Nobody knows how they would feel, or what they would be capable of when your child is involved.

Another argument against the death penalty is that juries are less willing to convict.

Would you rather see a murderer walk free than get a life sentence because two people on a jury won't be responsible for them being executed by the state?

Oh my goodness Parkhead , I can’t inagine your pain . What a bastard ! I hope he rots in hell.

Parkhead

I don't think I'd have stopped

Cost factors cannot come into it. If you are going to argue for the death penalty because it's cheaper than prison, then we should kill everyone who is convicted of crime. In fact, let's save ourselves all the trial expenses as well, and kill everyone we even think might commit a crime in future.

I used to be anti but would now be pro the death penalty in certain limited circumstances such as serial killing or sexual murders of children .

I know all the arguments against btw so anyone thinking they can engage in debate on it with me can save their typing fingers.

I don't believe in the death penalty. Once you are dead you cannot be punished. Life imprisonment means you are punished for the rest of your life!

I’d have no issue with the criminally insane being euthanasied.

Juries should decide if the suspect is guilty . The judge can decide the sentence .

Death is punishment if hell exists and you’re burning in it!

Theoretically I am against the death penalty, I think for many perpetrators it is an easy way out.

However, I don't think I would be outraged if it were introduced for child rapists/murderers, who would seriously protest against Ian Huntley, Roy Whiting et al being given the needle? Not me. I cannot see the use or validity of keeping such monsters alive, they will never be rehabilitated, they are just taking up what could be a useful cell.

I’d have no issue with the criminally insane being euthanasied

Seriously? You want to euthanise people with mental health problems? 😳

Juries should decide if the suspect is guilty. The judge can decide the sentence.

Still, the evidence shows that if juries know that the death penalty is a possibility they are less willing to convict. So there is a greater possibility that, rather than suffering the death penalty or imprisonment, the person walks free.

I am against the death penalty as I think it is a bit of an easy way out. I think life should mean fucking life and people who rape/murder (anyone tbh but especially children) should literally be locked in a tiny room and actually punished. No socialising, no games consols and visits from family and friends.

Death is punishment if hell exists and you’re burning in it!

Well, yes. But it doesn't.

^^pressed send too soon.

If I ran a prison for people who had committed these acts, I guarantee you I would save a lot of money and the punishment would be a fate worse than death tbh

Aintnothingbutaheartache you literally took the words out my mouth that's EXACTLY what I think should happen to any case that is 1000% proved guilty.

I am all for the death penalty in some instances. Paedophillia of any kind for example.
The way i see it, we euthanise dogs who attack children despite there usually being a bonefide reason for it happening. There is no excuse or justification for abusing a child, yet we give paedophiles a community order or a shitty prison sentence before letting them loose again. I'd much rather eliminate the risk entirely.

Same with murder.

I’d have no issue with the criminally insane being euthanasied

Seriously? You want to euthanise people with mental health problems?

Being criminally insane is rather a step up from mental health problems. A murder has still been committed. There should be no get out of jail free (or never have to go to jail) card .

I am against the death penalty but I don't think insanity is an excuse.

A friend's dd was working in a unit for juvenile "criminally insane" if you will. Very, very depressing, but nevertheless the young inmates could not be allowed to live freely in society due to their histories/proclivities.

Criminally insane means that they have committed a crime due to mental illness though

Like in a psychosis... believing delusions...

It's tragic these crimes happen, but the person who commits it was not in control and very unwell... which is different to someone just simply in rational mind being evil

I am against the death penalty but I don't think insanity is an excuse.

It is though. Any criminal act has 2 elements - the physical act and the mental element. If someone can’t form the mental element to commit the crime then they can’t be guilty of it.

But they've still committed a crime. It might be the reason why they murdered ten people, but not an excuse . You can be "cured", or medicated, but the crime still was performed by that person.

Otherwise, as I previously stated, you start going down the route of Mervyn murdered five women. But he's Sheila now so they are a different person. What's the difference?

I have been against the death penalty majority of my life - until I had kids. I know I would be fully capable of doing it myself if someone murdered one of my children.

I don’t understand why it’s apparently so difficult/inhumane to kill someone by lethal injection as I’ve read.

Several reasons:

Anaesthesia is complicated and requires specific drugs. Getting it right reliably takes a LOT of training.
Lethal injection, even in America cannot be overseen by a doctor, the AMA is very clear on this point.
Big pharma has come under huge pressure with respect to the use of their products, as a consequence the 'tried and tested' 3 drug cocktail can no longer be sourced so different mixtures are being used (and in some states the penitentiaries cannot source the drugs at all).

Human beings are naturally violent, even those who have a veneer of civilisation .This is evidenced by the number of people who believe they could easily kill (with no remorse) anyone who hurt a member of their family, particularly a child. Our court and justice systems are the way that as a society we have chosen to manage that natural inclination .

Historically in some societies (for example Viking) killing someone was considered OK for almost any reason. What was not OK was for it to be done in secret. Openly challenging someone for something (e.g being very irritating) was fine and if you were stronger then then and managed to kill them, there was no punishment. This is because bravery and strength was much more valued than kindness and fairness.

In our modern, westernised society we have chosen other values to live by because if you only value strength and bravery without kindness and fairness then society becomes very very violent.

Of course I would want to kill anyone who hurt/killed my DS (and probably could do it reasonably easily and without much remorse).

It is also likely that I would just accept the first person who looked like they might have done it to hate/kill without really trying to prove it, because I would want justice/revenge so strongly that making sure I had the right person would be secondary to that.

I would probably convince myself it was the right person no matter what as the desire for revenge and the hurt would be so strong that I would be unlikely to be able to see clearly or rationally.

It is because of all this, that I am glad I don't have that possibility and that punishment is handed out in a more impartial way. I also do not want any innocent people to die. This is not a very rare occurrence on death row, it is fact quite common.

I do not agree with the death penalty because I do not agree intellectually with killing people unless there is impartial cast iron clad proof that they have done something terrible and that they are absolutely without hope of remorse or redemption. This level of proof is in fact very very rare. Much more rare than the number of people on death row would suggest

One of the prices of having a society that values kindness and fairness (and not just bravery and strength) is that we may have a few irredeemably bad people who do terrible things who are not killed for that. For me that is an acceptable price to pay for a safer society overall. And societies without the death penalty are safer overall, despite the argument that it is a deterrent, which it clearly is not.

I am not saying that societies are safer because they don't have the death penalty but that they are societies that have fairer systems of justice and less violence generally and part of that ethos is not having the death penalty.