Out of curiosity, how do you all feel regarding capital punishment? Please state whether you are for its implementation/continuation in your country (and to what extent if so) or not, and explain why. Also, please refrain from posting idiotic one-liners and flaming each other on this thread (yeah, I'm asking for the impossible :p ).

I'm all for it. A person who willingly kills or even molests should be blown off the face of the earth. Of course, I have a unique perspective. I am a corrections officer in a close custody(1 step below supermax) prison. I see these convicts day in and day out. they deserve to get what they get. They are not in prison or on death row 'casue they are rocket scientists.

being very vague...

i'm not for it, i hate the thought of a miss sentence, or the other side being able to misconstrew the facts to make an innocent person guilty (paranoid probably)

justice being blind, its very hard for me to accept a punishment like that

I'm for the death penalty ideally, but I'm against it in our society today. If people were sentenced to death and taken out behind the courthouse and incinerated, then I'd be all for it. However, it costs millions and millions of dollars and years and years of appeals to finally carry out the sentence, which is ridiculous.

I'm all for capital punishment, coming from sweden where we don't really even have prison sentences over 14 years (might be a lil bit longer) unless you're a looney, in which case you can get out either really quick or almost never at all, depending on when they think you're "sane" again.

Like this summer in the town where i live, a bunch of guys beat up and jumped on one guy til he died, the one who got the longest sentence (one awaiting sanity hearing thingy) was 8 years, and he did the jumping. Mind you this happened in the middle of the street, in the middle of town. I think something like that deserves a death sentence really. Also all child molesters should be executed if you ask me.

I am for capital punishment, but it really needs to be changed in the US to a more swift form of justice.

On another note I also feel we need to bring back corproal punishment for lesser offenses as it is one of the best ways to cut down on petty crime.

I can think of many worse penalties than death. Death happens to everybody at some time. You're not gonna care if you had a long life or a short life when you're dead.

I don't see the point in the death sentence, murder is not justice.

i am all for Death penalty. Maybe our country will finally have some money instead of paying for Jails and for them to eat. Since i don't really do anything bad that could get me thrown in jail I wish they would promote the Code of Hammurabi, "Eye for an eye, Tooth for a tooth" If you steal something.. you get you hand cut off... so next time you wont steal. I also think there should be public hangings, it costs less then lethal injection and for all you treehuggers, we are also conserving energy instead of pumping extremely high voltage into someone on "the chair."

I'm for the death penalty because some people just deserve to die. In fact, I don't think we kill enough criminals. I was watching the news about a year ago and this rapist was released on parole. Two days after he was released he barged into a random apartment while a young mother and daughter were having dinner. Screaming at the top of his lungs, he pointed a shotgun at both of them. The girl began to cry and when her mother leaned over to comfort her the man shot half of her face off. She lived through it. One minute she's eating dinner with her daughter, the next she's laying on the floor with half her face missing all because some asshole found her door unlocked. Imagine being the father and finding out about what happened to your family while you were away.

Do you think the guy in this link deserved to die?

Click here if you have a strong stomach (http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/fish/gracie_1.html)

I am for the Death penalty and think the US does a pretty good job of it now. However I would like to see a new level of guilt used in death penalty cases. Today we use the "Beyound all reasonable doubt" system. For death penalty cases I would go for " beyound unreasonable doubt".

Do not get me wrong. I am very happy with our system. I am sure many more innocent people are murdered by people we release back into society than innocent people are put to death. I stand behind our system.

BTW isnt this thread just kinda troll the Euros thing? not that that is bad.

A is A.

Actually, Deaath, no; I have never trolled in the past, nor do I intend to start now. I'm interested in a sample of this community's views for a research project.

And don't automatically assume that all the Euro folks are against it. It may not be needed to as great an extent in a smaller nation, but everyone has their own opinion. Hell, take my family as an example: my dad feels that every felon convicted without a doubt should face a firing squad, with the worst getting some alternative beyond the limits of 'cruel and unusual punishment', whereas my mom wouldn't even want the Nazi leaders hung after the Nuremberg trials.

I read that account Samuel.I will probably have nightmares now.That sick son of a bitch got off way too light.Death is way too good for him.

I'm - obviously - against the death penalty.
But I think it all derives from your perspective of other things. It's how you view the world.
I guess it specifically boils down to how you feel about the justice system and the way society treats crime and criminal acts.
For example, I feel when something is wronged, it needs to be put to right. When someone commits a crime, they've fucked up. They've lost the plot. Throwing them in jail for long periods, or murdering them via the death penalty - solves nothing.
Society needs to tackle crime, not try and cover it up. But I guess that's an entirely different can of worms.
Back to the death penalty, it's barbaric, it's hypocritical, and it's something that most civilised society has gotten rid of. Emphasis on 'most'.

I personally would rather see criminals locked in a 8x8 cell with no tv, no outside exercise, bread and water to eat, no library no bull shit that I have to work my ass off to enjoy. Prison nowadays is a goddamn mini vacation.

Hehe, just getting back from the middle east, it amazes me how they can have so much wealth running around the streets and almost 0 % violent crime.

Why?

Because...

Murder = Death
Rape = Death
Armed Robbery = Death
Assault with a weapon = Death or a 25 year sentance
Theft = Loss of right hand
Sexual Harassment (this includes taking inappropriate pics of women without their permission IE: Boob and butt shots) = 2 Years in prison
Public Drunkeness = 2 years jail
Resisting arrest = 3 months jail for each account
Adultery = 100 lashes or stoning
etc, etc....

Wanna know something? I felt safer there than in my own back yard. When you go to prison there, there is no TV, no 3 squares a day, no steak nights, no education. There's just hard time and chain gangs. And if you don't have family there to look after you, then have fun living on one meal a day. Far as I'm concerned, it's more than ye deserve. Oh! And the death penalties are public as well. Firing squads, beheadings, removal of hands, floggings...

I thought going over there with these rules, I'd feel threatened. Now I realize, the only time I'm threatened is when I walk down a street by myself at night or when I forget to lock my front door :/

i think it has it's place for certin crimes, but the jail system needs to totaly be reformed, people who grow up on the streets and gettos , live in jail is probaly safer and less stressfull sure they dont want to be there but it's not that bad, but you take some middle class man put him in jail it is hell.

when i was in a highschool i did drugs and hung around that croud, i knew people that went to jail for like 8 years for possision of a few pounds of pot , he was out in 16 months and smoking pot the day he got out .


do i think our criminal system works ? no

i think they need to be put through hell, not torture , but they need to worked every day, they need to be put in a spot where once they get out they will never want to go back but also you dont want them comming out with their minds gone like some flipped out war vet.

That system sounds good Binuven, but it has lead to serious criminals getting the advantage using fear, and the criminals are the people who run the countries.

im sick of sseing bums and homeless people commit crimes right before a harsh winter just to be put in jail where they get meals and a place to sleep.. that sickens me. I mean i dont want then to live on the streets but they should get jobs if they dont wanna live on the street.

Easy to say.Hard to do.Considering that the average age of a homeless person in NYC is 9,kinda hard to get a job.
I know you are speaking of the older ones you see.But imagine going to an interview looking like they do,would you hire them? Not to mention that alot of them have mental illnesses.
Its real easy to say get a job,but its never just that easy.

Actually, some of the rulers over there aren't that bad. It's the bad apples that you tend to remember, not the guys that do a good job. ;)

I stand by tougher and more severe sentances. These days the criminals have more friggin rights than their victims. What even sickens me more is when they write books about all the hurt and evil they've done and make millions.

There should be no plea bargains, and no "loop holes". If a person is known to be guilty, then they're friggin guilty. I don't believe in this "due to a technicality, criminal_A gets off and walks free despite blatantly admitting to such a heinous crime". To me, THAT is a miscarriage of justice.

Evil reigns when good people do nothing.....

Prison nowadays is a goddamn mini vacation. You arn't fucking lying. Let me tell you all what they get. Mind you this is a HIGH security facility.

Cable TV
Jobs that pay straight cash. allbeit only like 60 cents a day bow but still cash they can use to buy frootloops and shit.
videos of first run movies that i have even yet to see.
education. of course this is supposed to better them.
almost free health care provided by the state as a mandatory. this means they WILL get a heart transplant while your poor uncle will not because his insurence wont cover it.
3 hot home made meals a day.

Now alot of this shit is to hopfully better them selfs. our recidivism rate is almost 80%!! I propose that if we killed off more quicker then that is what would truely cut the crime rate. they see it as an easy time. so what is the real urge to straighten out?

But look at the other side of the argument. There is a large population base in prisons. For the taxpayer, it is probably more productive to educate those who are in prison and rehabilitate them. They can then return to the world, get decent pay, and end up returning tax pay, and then return to the world of consumerism.

People don't want to put effort in to rehabilitation, Jamman. They'd rather try and dispose of the situation, to make everything clear and easy.
Society can't have complicated issues flying around like redemption, and errors, and loosing your way.
The world will define actions like this - Good and Evil.
You know the way people will try and turn a murderer in to a monster, a devil? Because they don't want to face the fact that a person can do wrong. It's easy if they discard them as monsters, because it's simpler to deal with a problem like that.

You know the way people will try and turn a murderer in to a monster, a devil? Because they don't want to face the fact that a person can do wrong. It's easy if they discard them as monsters, because it's simpler to deal with a problem like that.

Are you trying to tell me that a murderer is not a monster? I'm not talking about an accidental death. I'm talking intentionally killing. put drunk driving in that catagory too. I find that trying to rehabilitation is crap. teach these fools how to live and what do they do? fuck up. 95% of all convicts in our DoC will be back on the street while close to 80% re-offend. your way does not work. eye for an eye would.

I'm sorry, people like Pedophiles and Serial Killers cannot be rehabilitated imho.

At the very least physical castration. (Yes, I'm almost a father now, I have new fears and concerns)

If we're gonna put these people in prison, make it HARD! Make it so they DON'T wanna go back. You give someone both regular and porn movies, money, good food, education, free medicare, etc, etc (don't tell me there's no drugs in the prison system, cause that's just bullshit), then release them into society where now they have to pay for most of this shit, guess what? They're just gonna keep coming back.

Make prison hell, so that when they make it out (if they make it out) that they never, NEVER want to go back. I'm sorry, when they violated their victims rights, it was at that very moment that they forfieted their own.

'Are you trying to tell me that a murderer is not a monster? '

- Yep. Sorry to burst your bubble. Someone who kills someone else is a huamn being. They don't grow little fangs, or horns, or claws. They are you and I. I'm afraid it's not as easy as discarding them as monsters.

They are not you and I. Do you go home and catch your woman in bed with another man and then decide to cut the mans head off. Slit your wofe from mouth to pussy spilling her open? when the cops show up to your door do you roll the head down the steps and they cuff you up? Nope. you would be highly pissed but not resort to that. and dont even go to it was a crime aof passion. you have to decied to kill someone like that. thats a monter. not a human making a mistake. we have a dude in the place i work. he's not human. he walks in the general population but no one thinks he right.

It matters little what you want them to be.
Brutal truth of it all, is that they are human. And it's what human beings in this society are capable of.
And it needs to be addressed. Not dismissed.
You seem to be so angry about murder, yet think the best way to solve it is by murder in return. You see no contradiction in the death penalty? Didn't any of your mum's teach you that two wrongs don't make a right?
Once again, they don't grow horns. It's not as black and white a situation as people try and turn it in to.

The most frequent type of killing are murder's of passion.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

They may be flesh and blood but nothing about people like my example have any shred of humanity. Really are caged animals in all respects.

Now im talking about murderes and molesters and the like. the lowest of the low. The drug freaks and the white coller crimes are more normal. There still dumber then a bag of hammers and deserve no slack but they are certainly not in the same class as "them". I agree the judcial and penal system is whacked beyond repair but I simply believe strict rehabilitation is not an answer. what the correct one is lies somewhere between "an eye for an eye" and helping everyone to understand there own stupidity and choices.

A large number of convicts had very bad childhoods. Being brought up in conditions of poverty and violence within their families. That can seriously affect some people's morals. Most paedophiles and murderers were abused themselves as kids.
It does make them seem like terrible people to the rest of us, but it doesn't make all of them monsters when they are not entirely to blame for their warped frames of mind.
They are lunatics, driven to their lack of morality by their upbringings and surroundings, in most cases.

If two wrongs don't make a right.. then I can kill someone and get a free vacation to Bermuda? If they commit murders or crime THEY MUST PAY. If there was no punishment we wouldn't be humans.. we would be animals. "Survival of the fittest." All we would be doing is killing eachother, I mean wtf there are alot of people killing others right now. We need to keep the peace.. if the criminals wanna kill people put them on a island isolated from the rest of the world and have them kill eachother.. What goes around, comes around.

They had a bad childhood, ok fine. That still doesn't excuse the fact that there are people out there that would take a child, sexually assault him/her, probably video tape it (because we all know they wanna show their sicko friends), kill them then not bat an eye about it when they get caught.

What do they care? They go to prison, get an education, live comfortably, get out on parole for good behavior then do it again. Then to top it off, the father out of grief snaps and loses it, shoots the bastard then gets a stiffer sentance than the man that took his daughter away. Know what? I really don't care what happened before. They are human beings with FREE WILL. If they wanted help, they would have sought it. Dispose of them, they are a threat to society. Again, we're so caught up in their rights that we forget about the rights of the people that didn't do anything wrong and ended up being the victims. I say bring back drawing and quartering. Electric Chair is too good for em.

Q: My view on the death penalty?

A: Thank God for Texas.

I did a little research. Hope some of you find it interesting.
I speak from an English bias, and i speak comparatively with what i read in the newspapers over here. My opinions would quite possibly differ if I was an American.

From yearend 1990 to
midyear 2000 --
* The rate of incarceration in prison and jail
increased from 1 in every 218 U.S. residents to
1 in every 142.
The US prison population has grown from 739,980 in 1990 to a staggering 2 million in March 2000.
This represents 25% of the worlds prison population. The US now has a higher proportion of its population in prison than any other country in history.
There are currently 3600 people awaiting execution - 463 in Texas alone.
The cost of building jails has averaged $7billion per year for the last decade and the annual bill for incarcerating prisoners is now $35billion. The US prison industry employs more than 523,000 people making it the largest employer after General Motors.

Comparison:
The British prison population in March 2000 was 65,400
Total British population mid 2000 - 59,755,700
Total US population mid 2000 - 281,421,906
The US had 4.7 times the population of the UK at mid 2000
Therefore the US had 2.4 times the number of inmates compared to it's population than the UK did at mid 2000.

Sources used:
www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/pop0801.pdf
www.census.gov/population/www/
www.criminal-justice-system.gov.uk/library/pdf/CjbqrQ402.pdf
www.portia.org/chapter07/stats.html

I'm against the death penalty.

One other big problem is that it is irreversible.
There are already several innocent people executed in the US.
How can this ever be corrected?
Simply saying sorry or paying a load of cash wont change a thing, although that might be a start.
There can be no legal system so perfect that it can justify convicting someone to death. You have to be 100% sure and there can be no doubt or mistake.
And well where people work mistakes are gonna be made.

-enter US bashing mode
Allot in the US legal system depends on the representation you get. If you have a bad lawyer well you're basically dead, regardless of you're guilty or innocent.
Getting a good representation depends on the amount of cash you have, so if you're poor well you're basically dead.
Maybe this is a bit exaggerated but there are allot of innocent people waiting on death row especially in Texas.
-exit US bashing mode

Big question is IMO :
What do you do when you are/where wrong?

Just my opinion

Haven't posted here in what seems like forever, so I suppose I should get back to these old habits.

Anyways, I'm not a supporter of the death penalty, which probably won't suprise any of you who have discussed any political topic with me on these boards.


im sick of sseing bums and homeless people commit crimes right before a harsh winter just to be put in jail where they get meals and a place to sleep.. that sickens me. I mean i dont want then to live on the streets but they should get jobs if they dont wanna live on the street.
As Selwen covered, and I totally agree with, thats such a commonplace thing to say about "bums", that they should just "go get a job". But the reality is exactly as Selwen said, so many of them try to get hired, but when you are living in those conditions where you can't feed yourself well, you aren't groomed, you are dirty, etc, who is going to hire you over another applicant who is most likely able to drive, has clean clothes, a place of residence, and all those things we take for granted. Its not that many, I might even hazard to say most "bums" aren't willing to work. Of course there are many that won't work, that refuse to, are unfit to mentally, etc, and that is a shame. But a very large number of homeless people are actually people who have a family, got laid off in work, couldn't pay bills, and had to give up their house. It happens, and more than you'd think. There are some really respectable people who are homeless who can't seem to get a break, and so when faced with the decision of whether to spend a cold winter on the streets and freeze to death (I'm not kidding, bums die on the street all the time, many of them can't be identified and, at least in Phoenix, are given mass burials by those willing to spend some time to do it for them) or to find some type of shelter where they will survive, they make the obvious choice anybody would make, even you Talari.


If two wrongs don't make a right.. then I can kill someone and get a free vacation to Bermuda? If they commit murders or crime THEY MUST PAY. If there was no punishment we wouldn't be humans.. we would be animals. "Survival of the fittest." All we would be doing is killing eachother, I mean wtf there are alot of people killing others right now. We need to keep the peace..
Sorry, this isn't supposed to be Rip on Talari Day, but that statement is absolutely ludacris. I know you are use to all the killing and brutal revenge you see in the movies, but guess what, there are other alternatives.

I think it'd be a grand idea if our justice system went back and changed life sentances for a murder in the first degree from a "life" sentance, which ends up being like, 22-27 years or some crap like that, to a complete and literal "life" sentance without any chance of parole. In fact, many states have already done so. You commit pre-meditated murder, you do not walk again in free air. Ever. What is more of a deterrent to you? Knowing you'll be free from the annoying crap of sitting for 16 hours a day in a cell after 10 or so years in a quick instance of pain, or knowing that every day you will wake up in the same cell until the day your lungs give their last breath? You want to talk deterrent, THAT is a deterrent. Shit, I can't even imagine going through that. Does it cost more to hold somebody in containment that long? Possibly, depending on his or her age when he or she commits the crime and when his or her sentance would have run out. But also keep in mind that its more costly in murder 1 trials where the death penalty is an option, as they are on average somewhere around 43% more time consuming than a murder trial not having capital punishment as an option. So what does that mean? Well, since 90% of those executed have been unable to pay for a lawyer and have had a state-appointed attorney, this is an important issue to look into for financial reasons. Also keep in mind, there are around 2000-3000 inmates awaiting execution in our prisons, whereas there are around 2,000,000 people in prison for all reasons. When you talk about over-crowding in prisons, it really isn't quite the issue that it is simply because of murder 1 convicts at all. Not even close. Regardless, however, finanacial reasons are downright shitty reasons to support the death penalty in the first place in my opinion. Some people may disagree, but capital should not be put at a higher stake than a human life. A human life that may potentially be innocent. Some 107 former death-row inmates have been released since the death penalty was re-instated in 1976. Thats 107 innocent people condemned to death for crimes they did not commit. That number may not be that staggering for some of you, but that means for every 6 people who were executed, 1 was let free. 1 proven innocent so far for every 6 dead, so far. If maybe it was like 1 in 1000 where some random error happened, it would be a risk that could be considered understandable. But 1:6 is rediculously scary. Our system is not even close to reliable enough. A Columbia Law School study showed that around 2/3 of all capital punishment trials contained errors, and that 80% of them, when retried, did not result in the death penalty, while 7% of them were completely acquitted of all charges. This is a good sign that many people were saved from potential errors, but its also suprising how many trials really were filled with errors and how easy it is for things to go wrong. But after all, thats not a big deal, right? Its only somebody's life you are talking about.

And you also have to wonder what the real motive behind capital punishment is. Does the taking of that life, the life that one believes to be the guilty party, does that somehow rectify the situation? Better than that person spending their whole life in prison without parole? Or is it still a slightly malicious way to get revenge, a primitive action that our country for some reason still engages in. We, along with South Korea and Japan, are the only democracies in the world that still practice this. We are in the company of such nations as Iraq, Iran, and China- countries which we condemn for their barbaric practices and unrefined societies. Even countries such as Colombia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua, which have long had problems with brutal governments, have now reformed to abolishing the death penalty. But we haven't. Does it really provide that much comfort knowing they are dead rather than that they will never breath again in free air? Do you know people who have had their loved ones murdered? In my humanities class we had a girl who's mother was killed a few years back. They still haven't found the murderer, and during the discussion many expected her to be a staunch supporter, to want revenge on this person. Afterall, thats what society tells us that everybody wants if they lose loved ones. "Wait til you lose a family member, then tell us you don't want the death penalty." But isn't the idea behind that that it is merely revenge? The girl in my class knew that it was. Even when they caught the murderer, she knew it was naive to believe that it would somehow make her happy, somehow bring her mother back when she saw him fry. She was one of the biggest opponents to capital punishment in the class.

I also think there should be public hangings, it costs less then lethal injection and for all you treehuggers, we are also conserving energy instead of pumping extremely high voltage into someone on "the chair."
Go to Delaware or Washington and watch an execution Talari, they have hangings there and you seem to have some sense of enjoyment for death. From the tone of your posts you seem to think there is some comedy in this subject, which is kind of a shame. I suppose a lack of maturity could lead to such a lighthearted view of such an issue, but seriously-- it shouldn't be a joke.

Shit, Daidal, you summed up roughly half of my research material :\

I feel that capital punishment for anything short of mass murder/serial killing ought to be put on hold for several years while systematic reforms take place in the judicial system. Some ought to address the quality of public defense attorneys and discrimination; others should modify the system so there can be no second+ appeals for those sentenced to death in order to put an end to bullshit stalling. I figure that the latter is perfectly fair - it's pretty much the flip side of the 'no double jeopardy' clause in the Bill of Rights, IMO. In a worst-case scenario, the current death row residents could be switched to life in solitary confinement w/o parole until the system is functional and relatively fair.

Overall, I'm all for the death penalty, but our current implementation is just too half-assed as it is.

I think it'd be a grand idea if our justice system went back and changed life sentences for a murder in the first degree from a "life" sentence, which ends up being like, 22-27 years or some crap like that, to a complete and literal "life" sentence without any chance of parole. In fact, many states have already done so. You commit pre-meditated murder, you do not walk again in free air.
That non-free air is this
Cable TV
Jobs that pay straight cash. allbeit only like 60 cents a day bow but still cash they can use to buy frootloops and shit.
videos of first run movies that I have even yet to see.
education. of course this is supposed to better them.
almost free health care provided by the state as a mandatory. this means they WILL get a heart transplant while your poor uncle will not because his insurance wont cover it.
3 hot home made meals a day.
I smell freedom right there.

I can agree that some people do get off death row on mistakes, but there have been more criminals that have been found no guilty.. don't make me bring up the O.J trial! I agree that we should make trials over a longer period of time to investigate longer and Find out all the information, including multiple juries to get different opinions

Go to Delaware or Washington and watch an execution Talari, they have hangings there and you seem to have some sense of enjoyment for death.

You think I enjoy death? here is a example of what I think will happen...

Public Hanging at 12 noon.. thousands of people watching from their homes and in the streets. The people getting hanged are as follows : 18 year old male raped a 8 year old girl ( when he has 16 ) trial when he was an adult, they found him guilty. 32 y-old female killed her husband when she walked in on him and another partner having sex, she picked up a hammer and killed him with several blows to the head.

If people see criminals tortured and killed this is what pops up in there mind.. " Oh man that like it must hurt, I hope I never have to die like that. I'm not going to commit any crimes in my life time I don't want to turn out the them" That is what I think would happen.

I do not enjoy death, I might have seen too many actions movies but I cant help that I like them, alot of them are good. There is no "right" way to do this.. all people have different ideas, To say that I'm "wrong" is dogmatic (sry couldn't think of another word to describe it ) No one is wrong its just our opinions... on Talariville we do things differently compared to Planet Daidal

I'm more of an eye for eye guy when it come to punishment.

You kill someone, then let the state kill you.

You steal from someone, then let the state steal your freedom and send you to jail.

You rape someone, welcome to Chino, CA. Bring your KY with you to the shower.

I smell freedom right there.
Then make it solitary confinement with no such privileges. Most privileges are earned in prison. Make it so it can't be earned, then there is no freedom. It really isn't that hard to fix, in a super high security prison like that, if we were to adjust our laws, we could make that a reality quite easily.

but there have been more criminals that have been found no guilty.. don't make me bring up the O.J trial!
Please do bring up the O.J. trial. Why on earth did he get off when it seemed so obvious that he was guilty to all of us? Because he was able to hire a lawyer that could defend him so well that he created a certain level of doubt that was enough to get him off. Do you know how much time a good attorney should spend on a Murder 1 trial? Its been estimated a good 600 hours should go into the preparation, and 700 hours into the actual trial. Many district attorneys are paid 20-40 dollars an hour, so they have absolutely no motivation to put in even 1/20th of the preparation a normal attorney would put in to a trial like that, much less a high priced outstanding attorney like Johnny Cochran. Thats exactly the problem with out justice system, it isn't blind to factors of money, despite what we'd like to believe.


I agree that we should make trials over a longer period of time to investigate longer and Find out all the information, including multiple juries to get different opinions
Longer trials won't solve it unfortunately. It isn't the amount of time that is spent in the actual trial, its the preparation and evidence and arguments that a district attorney will get being paid so little compared to what somebody who gets paid millions for a large trial will do. Its a matter of motivation and the ability to prepare. Some attornies get their cases the day of the trial. Multiple juries isn't a practical solution, and it won't make trials more accurate. The juries merely decide what is the best verdict based on what is presented to them as factual evidence.


If people see criminals tortured and killed this is what pops up in there mind.. " Oh man that like it must hurt, I hope I never have to die like that. I'm not going to commit any crimes in my life time I don't want to turn out the them" That is what I think would happen.
Unfortunately, the problem with this is simple yet overlooked: People do not expect to be caught. Very few people actually expect to be caught when they go into the act, and thus a punishment of being hung from a tree until their limbs rip off their bodies and they bleed to death is no more of a deterrent than being imprisoned for 45 years. In fact, in talking deterrents, states without the death penalty have lower death rates. Many will argue a small surge of murders in the early 90s in these states, but to refute that argument before it begins, there is also a similar surge in every US state during the time period, so that argument is irrelevant. And personally, I'd honestly rather get the death penalty then live my whole life behind bars. There really is no question about it to me, death would be such an easy way, such a "cop-out", if you will, compared to living forever in imprisonment. Also note that a public hanging like that wouldn't be a deterrent simply for reasons of pain, like you seemed to indicate, because a proper hanging will kill the recipient immediately once they fall and break their neck. Unless of course its a botched execution, and there have been a decent amount, sadly, and that would very possibly be classified "cruel and unusual", thus making it definitely not something any government body would do publically to keep more people from committing a crime.

There is no "right" way to do this.. all people have different ideas, To say that I'm "wrong" is dogmatic (sry couldn't think of another word to describe it ) No one is wrong its just our opinions... on Talariville we do things differently compared to Planet Daidal
Sounds kinda naive to me, to be quite honest. If I didn't believe what I believe to be correct, I wouldn't believe it, and I wouldn't be defending my position. I understand of course that we can differ in opinions, so I encourage you to defend your position and we'll see if we can reach a solution derived from intellect through our little dialectic debate we got goin here, instead of letting it get to be flaming like most debates do on these boards, lol. Thanks.

Death penalty is great ... Over population is the problem with the world. All species over populate and die off. Its biological law and not even humans can escape it.

Exceeding the carrying capacity of the planet is something nature abhores. Disease, war, starvation, poverty are all inevitable in an over populated area.

If I didn't believe what I believe to be correct, I wouldn't believe it, and I wouldn't be defending my position.
YES WHAT YOU BELIEVE! I believe that my way like you believe in yours, there shouldnt be a problem with that is there? Everyone has different opinions. How dare you call me naive for my opinions.. im not judging what you believe and telling you your wrong... but your right to you and im am right to myself. Besides there is no such thing as a correct opinion, it would be a fact and not a opinion.
Also note that a public hanging like that wouldn't be a deterrent simply for reasons of pain, like you seemed to indicate, because a proper hanging will kill the recipient immediately once they fall and break their neck.
Shame on you :P i never said proper hanging, there is no pain and torture in that. If you want pain and suffering you gotta stand him on a stool and make sure he can touch the ground with just his big toe. Kick the stool see him choke.. cut him down. Put him up there again and make it so he cant touch the ground and he dies.. his next would snap or it wont on the fall then he shokes to death. (oh yes dont forget to quote me and tell me how childish i am and how stupid i am for having an imagination) Yes i stole this from "the mummy" cause i was watching it last night :o

Oh and by longer trials i ment longer time before trials so if any evidence is newly found it can still be used in court.

Death Penalty: Swift, inhumane, and painful 100%

Make it such a deterrant that people will not just think twice about it, but think long and hard about it.
Kill a man? Not Self Defense? Not saving someones life?
Get a HJ (Hang Job) hang em high, pad their neck abit to let em feel the pain, straggle abit, and put it live in prisons, even further deterrant.

Now I don't mean cut off little jimmy criminals hands for stealing a cd of green day from your local audio disc shoppe.. I mean someone who killed someone. Don't be kind about it, don't give them "15 years for manslaughter" ...just tell em: "Bitch, you gonna die." and set the day recent, not 10 years down the road.

Now obvious fine tuning is involved, like more people you killed, the slower and more painful the death. Am I being a little barbaric? Yes. Sound unfair? Maybe to you, but ending someones life isn't joy and sunshine.

Also: Obvious fine tuning, such as mercy death etc etc.


Orun

YES WHAT YOU BELIEVE! I believe that my way like you believe in yours, there shouldnt be a problem with that is there? Everyone has different opinions. How dare you call me naive for my opinions.. im not judging what you believe and telling you your wrong... but your right to you and im am right to myself. Besides there is no such thing as a correct opinion, it would be a fact and not a opinion.
Examine your posts Talari, and examine mine. Yours are filled with nothing but opinion saying why the death penalty should exist with public painful executions and the Code of Hammurabi should be instated in the US. But you lack any hard evidence or factual information to back you up. Sure an opinion is great, I'm glad you have one, congratulations. But to be quite honest, you'll discover that your opinion is worth jack shit unless you can tell why you believe what you believe. Learning to back up your beliefs is one of the most important things you can do. Honestly though, who would you believe here?:

Bob: I believe this because of factA, factB, and factC, in addition to the fact that factD proves that I am right beyond reasonable doubt for assuming we should do this.
Jim: I believe we should do it this way because I"m entitled to my opinion.

Of course you are thinking the same thing I am. I'm asking you to back up what you are saying with some sort of real reason why what you want to see happen is a good idea.

Also, I didn't call you naive for your opinion on the matter. I called you naive for stating that your opinion is just as valid when you haven't offered any factual reasoning behind it, but still believe it is entitled to be considered a good opinion. It wasn't an insult, more a challenge. A challenge for you to tell me not just what you believe, but why too! You can't get by with the feel-good "I believe what I believe, and therefore I"m right for me!". The relativist outlook won't get you that far when you decide you want to discuss your opinion. Nothing is really more annoying than somebody who puts in an opinion like they have a reason behind it, but just can't justify it with anything other than "thats how I feel".

And really, I'm not trying to belittle you in the least. I see some hope in discussing this with you, whereas some people (*ahem* Shewdogg *ahem*) seem to be very unwavering with their conviction that Texas should be praised for executing over 35% of all those executed in this country. I just want to hear why you do believe that.

Many moral concerns are brought up by the death penalty used as punishment. The Bible (Genesis 9:6) says, ‘Whosoever sheds man's blood, by man may his blood be shed.’ This argument in favor of the death penalty has usually been interpreted as a proper and moral reason for putting a murderer to death.

Results suggest that 76 percent of active criminals and 89 percent of the most violent criminals either perceive no risk of apprehension or have no thought about the likely punishments for their crimes
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=214831 (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=214831)
This adds to my reason. If they are in jail longer, till death or on deathrow they cant get out of jail on a small sentance, commit another crime, harm someone then go back into jail.

Sixty-seven percent of former inmates released from U.S. state prisons in 1994 were back in jail within three years, according to a study conducted by the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The figures indicate re-arrest rates have increased by five-percent since 1983.
usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa060702a.htm (http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa060702a.htm)

In Using Sentence Ehhancements to Distinguish between Deterrence and Incapacitation (NBER Working Paper No. 6484), Daniel Kessler and Steven Levitt analyze the outcome of one such law: California's Proposition 8. Passed by popular referendum in 1982, this law requires courts to lengthen the sentence of repeat offenders in cases of willful homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault with a firearm, and burglary of a residence. Kessler and Levitt find that the law requiring longer sentences has been effective in lowering crime. Within three years, crimes covered by the law fell an estimated 8 percent. Seven years after the law changed, these crimes were down 20 percent.
www.nber.org/digest/oct98/w6484.html (http://www.nber.org/digest/oct98/w6484.html)

Facts ^, added links just incase any1 wanted to see where i got them from.

Results suggest that 76 percent of active criminals and 89 percent of the most violent criminals either perceive no risk of apprehension or have no thought about the likely punishments for their crimes
Awesome statistics... or at least for what I'm trying to say. If I read this correctly, and I do believe that I do, so correct me if I'm wrong, these statistics state 76 percent of those who commit crimes, and 89 percent of those who commit extremely violent crimes, which I assume would probably consider rape, assault with a deadly weapon, and murder, don't see themselves at risk for being arrested, or they don't think about the possible repercussions of their actions. In essence, exactly what I was saying here:

Unfortunately, the problem with this is simple yet overlooked: People do not expect to be caught. Very few people actually expect to be caught when they go into the act, and thus a punishment of being hung from a tree until their limbs rip off their bodies and they bleed to death is no more of a deterrent than being imprisoned for 45 years.

So in essence, you are proving exactly what I wished for you to see: the death penalty is not a deterrent. Well, that isn't necessarily true as some form of punishment is always a deterrent, but what is true is that it is no more of a deterrent than any other punishment that could be associated with getting convicted for murder. Therefore, I don't see how that link supports the case that the death penalty is a necessity in our society.

This adds to my reason. If they are in jail longer, till death or on deathrow they cant get out of jail on a small sentance, commit another crime, harm someone then go back into jail.

"Sixty-seven percent of former inmates released from U.S. state prisons in 1994 were back in jail within three years, according to a study conducted by the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The figures indicate re-arrest rates have increased by five-percent since 1983."

Nor could they get out of jail on a small sentance if they are given life without parole. I still am not convinced a death penalty is necessary by any stretch.


In Using Sentence Ehhancements to Distinguish between Deterrence and Incapacitation (NBER Working Paper No. 6484), Daniel Kessler and Steven Levitt analyze the outcome of one such law: California's Proposition 8. Passed by popular referendum in 1982, this law requires courts to lengthen the sentence of repeat offenders in cases of willful homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault with a firearm, and burglary of a residence. Kessler and Levitt find that the law requiring longer sentences has been effective in lowering crime. Within three years, crimes covered by the law fell an estimated 8 percent. Seven years after the law changed, these crimes were down 20 percent.
Fine. Good. Great, even. Still irrelevant information. Life without parole wouldn't require sentance enhancements, nor would it leave any chance for a repeat murder 1 convict to be back out causing more crime. Good statistics, I'm glad the proposition has been effective... but it has zero relevancy as to why the death penalty is necessary over life without parole.

As far as the religious aspect, it is important to take into consideration, at least for a Christian like myself, the context of anything written in the Old Testament. Not saying it is unacceptable or wrong, but if I were to support that as a means to justify the death penalty, I'd also be supporting a testament that would issue death for being disobedient to my parents, breaking the sabbath day by doing any type of labor whatsoever, adultery (which could include heavily lusting, as it was called adultery inside your own heart), etc. Instead, in taking after Jesus' example of healing, understanding, and forgiveness, in which He encourages us to love our enemies and, during His own death by capital punishment in such an excruciatingly painful way that it makes your hanging technique seem so incredibly humane in comparison, Talari, He prayed for His executioners, saying, "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do." I honestly don't believe there is any religious basis in the Christian faith for capital punishment anymore, but that is still a topic of debate. Regardless, the seperation we have of church and state should not allow that to be a legitimate reason for the death penalty to continue. So unfortunately, I'm still at a loss as to why it should exist. If you'd like to read why it shouldn't exist, however, go to page 2 and read my first posting. Some of the information, if you haven't read it yet, is shocking, to say the least.

"Many people who live deserve death.
Many people who died deserve to live.
Can you give life back to them ??
So don't be to eager to deal out death penalties...."

Gandalf, the grey

you make em productive to a society they have no respect for and id agree with you on the solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. i wont let the governement spend my money housing and feeding them for 40+ years. id rather they get their due process to the standard we have set (exceeeeeeeeedingly long process to carry out a death sentence) and a quick execution *cough* a bullet costs 9 cents *cough*

the criminal justice system is far from perfect. its the system we as a nation have built and put our faith in over the years. its supposed to hold the rights of the accused to such a high standard as to make mistakes in favor of the defendants. that system has freed so many guilty people that i can live with the relatively small numbers of innocent people put to death. you are outraged if an innocent man goes to prison or is executed for something he hasnt done yet the guilty people that system sets free to offend again illicits a mere /shrug thats how the system works. sorry im not that hypocritical. yes innocent people may fall thru the cracks and yes its wrong but i won't accept the idea that we should treat every criminal as if he is wrongly incarcerated. the statistics are staggering. when a cop kills an innocent civillain what happens? maybe cops shouldnt be allowed to carry sidearms because one innocent person may get killed. please.

the cons of the death penalty are that its expensive and its permanent. if 99 percent of criminals put to death are guilty of not respecting the lives of innocent human beings, society as a whole is better off imo. make it cheaper and quicker and im satisifed with it as a solution.

the deterant effect of the death penalty is neglible imo. a better deterant is less liberal gun politics. an armed confrontation is more of a deterant than a 15 year stay at a county holiday inn. ask any criminal.

'Death penalty is great ... Over population is the problem with the world'

- *rolls eyes*
This is why it's so hard to debate on this fucking forum.

if you think demographics doesn't play a part in this debate then its obvious you shouldn't participate halo

Killing people is good to keep the population down?!?!
That's not a reason you idiot. It's a dumb fucking comment, which resides a rightful place next to anything that came out of Hitler's mouth.

If you take something from someone, that cannot ever be given back (kill them, child molest them etc.) then why should you be allowed to live your life, if they cannot live theirs?

KILL KILL OMG! EYE FOR AN EYE!

Kill = Be Killed
Molest/Rape = Get ass raped by big burly black boy


OMG!

Number of posts before someone said "Hitler" : 51

Goodwin's Law (http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_Law) wins again.

Godwin's law (Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies, Sexton-Godwin Law) is an adage in Internet culture established by Mike Godwin on August 18, 1991, which states that:

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this ("Godwin's law! Thread over!") , although it is not the original formulation.

Killing people is good to keep the population down?!?!
That's not a reason you idiot. It's a dumb fucking comment, which resides a rightful place next to anything that came out of Hitler's mouth

First off I have to point out the obvious and say if you wanna lower the population then killing people is a "good" way.

However that was not my point. How does Hitler have anything to do with population density, its affect on crime and the fact that NATURE will fix it? We wont "STOP" the crime problem with an inflating population. Death Penalty or no.

'If you take something from someone, that cannot ever be given back then why should you be allowed to live your life, if they cannot live theirs? '

- Oh the contradiction.
Disgust at someone taking life away from another.
Solve the problem?
Take life away from another.

OH NOS IM GOING INSANEZ!111

/sigh

must be tough battling all those emotions all day long halo, or is it something you save up all day and need internet message boards to vent through?

the death penalty is about attaching a value to human life. someone willing to take the life of an innocent person has zero value. so yes putting a criminal to death is an acceptable solution for a society that puts a higher value on the life of people that respect and cherish life (theirs and others) over and above their own self interests

stop knee jerking halo and open yer eyes. every time we pay our issurance bills we assign a value to human life. you think if we kill someone in a car accident our insurance company and the state doesnt assign a value to the life we took and the criminal justice system isnt assigned the task of determining what was in our hearts at the time? i just hope your personal philosophy has as few repercussions for you as the amount of thought you put into it. typical liberal. wag your crooked little finger at someone else halo. check the pokemon message boards im sure they need a message board mother more than this one.

'every time we pay our issurance bills we assign a value to human life'

- First of, allow me to pay my respects to my leader.
Hail Hitler! *raises arm*
Second. You're so American.

you betcha halo /wink

You're so American.


That's the nicest Halo has ever said to us. It's not even Christmas yet either.

Halo you insult and demean all the people that Hitler murdered in the name of racial cleansing. These were men, women and children who had done nothing more than being born. To compare them to convicted murderers/rapists is as insulting and ignorant as any post Ive seen on this board.

Interesting that you claim to be the "caring" one yet you mock the deaths of 6 Million Jewish people just for a chance to stab at a few Americans.

It took longer than I expected for you to push another thread from vaguely thoughtful into a Euro/US hate bashing. Im done with this stupid thread.

'To compare them to convicted murderers/rapists is as insulting and ignorant as any post Ive seen on this board.'

- Me no thinks me compared them to eachother. Therefore, if you could stop creating words that were never typed, then we'll be A-OK.
What I was doing, is imagining something like 'Killing people is a great way to keep the population down' coming right out of Hitler's mouth.
Because it's fucking retarded.

First off I have to point out the obvious and say if you wanna lower the population then killing people is a "good" way.
Dunno, I fail to see how this can be a good way. Espacialy in the context of death punishment. The moment you take a more educated look at the overpopulation problem we face, you find it out. Or does Texas have a proplem with population?

And Halo, Hitler never had in mind to kill people because of population problems. Therfor that argument is kinda void. Now, if you say that approach is fascistic - maybe, altho still weak.

To bring death sentences and controlling overpopulation in context shows nothing more then tremendous stupidy and a very doubtful ethic mindset.

Yeah what he said.

Euro/US

Ehm ... not really.

I am European (no really?!) and I am in favour of the death penalty.

If someone kills a person who does not wants to be killed (ruling out euthanasia) and if someone kills someone who is not yet born (ruling out abortion - but should be motivated better) and if someone kills someone by accident (car accident (non toxic) etc) ... then ... someone who kills a person should receive the death penalty of this can be proven beyond and possible doubt (aka must be 100% proven, not 99,99%).

In my country Pim Fortuyn (a politician) got shot. They caputerd the guy shooting him with the gun still in his posession, he got identified as the kiler by eye witnesses, the bullit was from his gun and only his fingerprints were on the gun, he was also the guy who bought the gun. This guy should have received the death penalty ... instead he got 18 years.

If someone rapes a child they should cut his dick off. If someone uses violence on someone who does not deserve it they should lash his ass to kingdom come....

I know a guy who put the feet of his little kids on a hot stove burning their feet so bad ... man ... He IMO should be put in the town square in one of those things you have to stick your hand and head through with a notification of his crime ... and let people sort him out.

Tired of criminals who think they own the world and tired of humans who brutalize others for the "fun" of it.

So you think justice is best served through inflicting the crime you're aparantly angry at? The entire concept in itself is a contradiction. It serves no logic to be disgusted at something, yet turn around and do it right back.
And remember one thing, nothing can ever be proven without a doubt. There will always be doubt, with everything. Nothing is certain. Besides that fact, you live in a world where certainty can be bent and twisted like a mother fucker.

If I put a gun to your head and have the entire country watch live (live as in people present to watch it) then ... without a doubt, when I fire a bullit through your skull and this kill syou we all can without a doubt say I killed you.

This is what I mean without a doubt ....

100% can be achieved ... and only then I feel the death penalty is ok.... as long as there is 99% I feel the person should be locked up, people should look at why did this person do it and of the chances the person will do it again.

Every man/woman can kill .. we can we all know it. This does not make you a murderer thou ...

Some people are just sicko's, complete and utter freaks who enjoy cutting of a womans breasts before they kill em to see em scream and have some fantasy orgasm doing it ... sorry ... those people don't belong in society ...

And I am not angry at the fact a person killed a person. I am angry at the fact that someones life was taken that he did not want to be taken. Death I can't get angry at, but yeah I get angry if my son would get shot by some fuck who thinks it was just his time .. but I would not bring such a person to justice either .. I would handle those matters personally if I knew who did it ..

And I would glady take the death penalty for that too ..


edit: editted a little flaw :)

and if someone kills someone by accident (car accident (non toxic) etc) ..

Unfortunately, you've already created a gray area.

This morning, for instance, a construction worker on a busy expressway was clipped by a car during morning rush near my house. She died. Should the driver be put to death?

(added via edit)
Things to know: The construction worker stands VERY close to traffic. There's a 50% chance that the driver was not obeying the construction zone speed limit (but neither was anyone else) and there's also a chance that the vehicle was a truck, which is too wide for the narrow lanes in the construction zone.

Actually, after re-thinking it. I have changed my mind on the death penalty. Think of it as job security for me. The more people that get excecuted means the less they need corrections officers to watch over them. So i say lets not kill anyone and fill up the prisons so we have to build more and more. Then I can be assured of haveing a high paying job until I choose to retire or are killed. I'm serious no more death penalty.

Are these words actually coming out of your mouth?
Some of the reasons here are just.. I dunno. No clue what to make of 'em.
Death seems to be such a willing and loose term for a lot of people here. It's frightening.

Death is as natural as life....

I am for the death penalty. But it needs checks and balances.

After someone is sentanced to death, a member of the jury, the judge, or the prosecuter, must volunteer to die -- or at least risk death -- as well. A 50/50 chance of death would be enough to salve my conscience.

I would open it up to the general population, but that would just generate waiting lists of suicidal people, not people who have weighed the evidence and decided the price and risk was truely worth putting this person out of life.

The false conviction rate for horrible crimes is much worse than many people think. I mean, if you are a DA and a horrible murder occurs, you HAVE to convict someone. So, you find someone to convict.

Death is as natural as life....
The difference is, if you want to get moderately philosophical, is that "death" is a finite point of existance, the end to the existance that is "life", which is all that one knows. Yes death is as biologically natural as life, but "life" and organized self-reflection and free-will and everything that comes with this life: those aren't proven to be biological, so you are aruging something very different. You actually don't believe that we should all spend our lives (or un-lives) in the state of "death" when you say it is just as natural, because that simply wouldn't be possible, even though according to nature's laws, it would; you are just stating an argument which cannot simply be refuted on those grounds because it simply cannot be simply refuted. Make sense? ;)

I think we'd all agree that it is the responsibility of a society to ensure the welfare of its members.

When someone breaks a law (for whatever reason) they are saying "I am not a part of this society" - for whatever reason it might be. For some people, it might be out of need (stealing food to eat so they don't starve, whatever).

For others, it is a deliberate alienation of themselves- they break laws to further their own selfish goals. They put themselves above the rules of the tribe/clan/nation whatever. Sometimes they can be helped and brought back into the fold. However, sometimes they prove themselves to be a habitual offender- in other words, they don't care to fit in, for whatever reason.

The moral dilema happens here: Most of us would agree that society should try to help the starving person- not all of us agree that society owes someone who breaks away anything. Extending this point of view, is it WORTH THE DRAIN ON SOCIETY it would be to keep the habitual offender around? In olden days, you could tell them to leave the villiage, keep walking and never come back. Now, they have nowhere to go.

What should a society do with someone who refuses to integrate themselves?

Send them to "the island"

'What should a society do with someone who refuses to integrate themselves? '

- I think that's going a bit out of phase with the death penalty.
I mean, main stream socieities and sub-groups is an entire different can of worms. For example, who says being in main stream society is the 'right' place to be. What is the right place? Who defines it? Who has the right to define it?
Etc.

Some countries use exile to punish people. That would suck pretty bad.

Yeah. Imagine getting exiled to like... canada. Or great britain.

*shudder*

//Kiv

Hmm didn't Great Britain send their criminals to Austrailia a long time ago?

I mean, main stream socieities and sub-groups is an entire different can of worms. For example, who says being in main stream society is the 'right' place to be. What is the right place? Who defines it? Who has the right to define it?
Etc.

The laws of society are the rules by which I am measuring "mainstream society". The society that created those laws determines what is "right"... and people are expected- even required- to live by them, or they become criminals. It is the right of a society to define the rules that its members will abide by. In the United States, it is also the right of the indivudual to challenge the law through the proper venue or to leave and go somewhere else.

Over time, the morals and what is considered "right and wrong" in a society might change- that is called progress. However, some basic things are usualy considred wrong- theft and murder are among them.

Death penalty is a tricky topic.

Should it be an eye for an eye? I dont think so.

Also.. Vengence should not be the most important reason for use of the death penalty... There has to be other considerations and it should never be a easy option to envoke.

A huge reason for it in my estimation is rehabilitation. Even if that person is going to be in jail for the remainder of his or her life, he will be in a society and the people in that society also have rights.
Additionally by the commission of a crime a person does not lose his or her rights.
If a person is considered and proven by an independant panel of psychologists that he or she is un-rehabitable, and unable to function even in the society of a prison.... what are these persons options?
Should, for the remainder of his or her life be confined to a maximum (level 5) security prison?
The way these prisons work is that an inmate is given a solo cell, completly isolated by sound proof walls, requried to remain in shackles at all times, no books, no magazines, no letters. For 23.5 hours a day he remains, for the 30 mins a small door on the back of his cell opens and he is allowed to walk, alone, in a small circle. He is allowed 2 showers a week in which a small shower is attached to the door and 3 mins of cold water is delivered from a nozzle.
Oh ya.. the lights are kept on 24 hours a day.

Most institutions have found that a human being can exist like for about 3 months before his mind starts going and he reverts to a animalistic stage, even more violent than before.

But what choice do you have for some people? Some people are just broken, irrepairable. The easy thing to say is.. ok.. just warehouse them away, so you dont have to see them. But what about the other inmates? what about the Prison guards? what about the mans basic human rights?

In some cases, a death penalty is a mercy.

Additionally by the commission of a crime a person does not lose his or her rights

No... but being convicted of a crime will result in the loss of a great number of rights.

For it.

Expand it.

Violent crime?
3 strikes you're out.

Possession with intent to sell?
3 strikes, you're out.

Possession with intent to sell?

I won't have anymore friends with that law!

We're too "nice" to our criminals in North America.

Far as I'm concerned, criminals (violent crime criminals) are nothing more than an untapped "chain gang" resource that should be used for menial labor. If they can't do that, then dispose with them. That simple.

Harsh? I think so. But it's like this. I'm a good citizen. I pay my taxes, do my work, obey the law. I also have a student loan to pay off as well as a line of credit. I have to pay (granted not much, but still) every time I go to a doctor or a dentist. I BUY my steak.

Now, A_Violent_Criminal_1 doesn't pay his taxes, or work, or obey the law. He/She rapes, murders, robs at gun point, etc. They go to jail (good chance not for the first or last time either). They get their education for free, no student loans, we can't have that. They eat VERY well, steak every Thursday. Cable TV, with Porn once a month. Free, and I mean FREE medicare. And who pays for it? Give you three guesses and the first two don't count......That's right! The tax payers!

All those single moms out there that can only afford to feed their kids KD all the time but still pay their taxes are funding the deadbeats of the western civilization. Everytime you pay for a good or service and there's tax on it, you're putting a big fat juicy steak infront of a felon. Everytime you pay to go to school, you're paying for a criminal to do the same.

I dunno, maybe I'm stupid or something, but this system seems a little backward to me. The criminal does the bad thing, I think that I should get free stuff off of his blood, sweat and tears, not the other way around. Just me I guess.

Thanks for the feedback folks :) Most of your views really helped me out, especially Daidal's with regard to the counterpoint.

Now to quote a passage from my masterpiece :p :

"Our collective moral values are at stake. We tolerate people among us who have killed for personal gain, many of whom are not only kept alive but often released back into society after some time. To put things in perspective, imagine Shakespeare's plays set in the United States today. Imagine Hamlet filing a criminal case against Claudius. Imagine Macduff capturing Macbeth and sentencing him to a wretched fate of twenty years in prison with a possibility of parole for good behavior. Imagine Othello killing Desdemona and then hiring Johnny Cochran to defend him in court for a few years..."

Haha Will..

Methinkith my friend that you and I share the same almost unnatural compulsion to view all manners of the human condition through shakespearan Lenses..

I often wondered what a book about the Civil War, written by Shakespeare would be like...
Great men done in before they even start by their own innate flaws...
It is unjust for some people to die...

If they can't do that, then dispose with them. That simple.
Sure its that simple if you know they're all guilty. But what about all those facts I listed off about how unjust our legal system can be? How biased it is to those with large amounts of wealth, how 90% of all those convicted on death row had a court-appointed attorney, or how 1 person has been exonerated from death row since the death penalty was reinstated since '76 for every 6 that have been executed? Its so easy to think that we should just rid the world of these mindless, inhumane, savage convicts if we paint the picture in our mind that all of them are these horrific monsters. But the actuality of the matter is that it is not so, and we need to take into account the fact that our justice system fails, and seems to fail rediculously often. Is it safe to execute people so surely while thinking we are infalliable, when in actuallity we are not even close?

Ok, I've changed my mind. People who shop lift should also get the death penalty.

Naw, just cut off the right hand. And make it a public spectacle. Show the public what happens when you break the law, it's that easy. My father worked in a correctional institute, believe me, I have the scoop on all the fringe benefits.

I'm sorry, I don't sympathize with criminals at all. If we're unsure about their guilt (I mean not 100% sure, ie: person wasn't seen with the smoking gun in their hands as the person killed dropped), by all means, don't kill them, I'm strict, not bloodthirsty.

But if they are found guilty in a court of law, I'd make damn sure that they are chained, and working on bettering society (IE: cleaning up streets, shovelling snow for elderly people, etc) instead of living the easy life.

But there are plenty of cases, especially with the forensics we have these days, where we are sure of guilt, without a doubt. These people? Take them out in publick and shoot them.

Fact is folks, we are creatures that learn from fear. If we fear something, we don't do it/go near it. If you kill my wife and all you get is 10 - 25 years in prison, meaning that I am paying for all your benefits while I work and you sit on your ass, then why should you feel any remorse? You took someone else's right to live and are now enjoying the rewards.

Instead, I would make your life a living fucking hell. You owe my wife, you owe her family, you owe her friends, you owe her employer, and you owe me, a debt that you could never repay. There would be no book deals, no collector cards, no TV series. You are scum and should have no rights. Your rights ceased existing when you took my wife's rights away the moment you snuffed out her life. You would most certainly not get fucking rich off of killing somebody.

No matter how hard you work, what you do, you can never bring back my wife. I would engrave it on your brain that what you did is wrong. I'd make you live with it day in, day out. I'd make you wish you were dead. I'd make sure you saw my wife's face in your sleep and know that what you did has caused this. And when all was said and done? You would never want to go back, that's for sure. And by making it public, the populace know, if you break the law, this is what happens. Yep, sometimes fear is a good thing. It keeps you alive and out of jail.

Heck, the way society is going now, why not just make a reality series about it? Up for a viewing of the Running Man , the REAL deal anyone?