Botched execution in the US

James J said:
I'm not sure how I feel about capital punishment, as one one hand you have basically state side murder, whilst on the other, you have to support that criminal often for the rest of their life, leading to wasted taxes in my opinion.
Click to expand...

The trouble is, you still end up paying at least as much, regardless, so a cost argument really isn't effective.

James J said:
I agree with the point that until its 100% proven guilt, the death sentence should never be applied. Innocent people should never be executed! However I don't see the point in trying to rehabilitate the most violent members of society. I'd rather let pharmaceutical companies use them for human testing then allow someone like Anders Behring Breivik out of prison.
Click to expand...

If we were to do that, what would it make of us? I feel that we should try to rehabilitate even the very worst of us, because ultimately it is the right thing to do. However, I do appreciate that there are those who cannot be rehabilitated, and thus would never be safe for release, and that is fine.

The chances of Breivik actually being released from prison are rather slim. He has shown no remorse for his actions, which would do him no favours in any argument to secure release on grounds of rehabilitation, and so his sentence would likely be extended at each review.
 
But in the case of Anders Behring Breivik, if we keep him in prison for his entire life, that'll cost the tax payer far more than it would to put him down though.
 
James J said:
But in the case of Anders Behring Breivik, if we keep him in prison for his entire life, that'll cost the tax payer far more than it would to put him down though.
Click to expand...

The cost of incarceration would cost more than the act of execution itself, yes, but as has been pointed out many times in these debates on capital punishment, the cost of the procedures necessary to bring about execution (on top of incarceration whilst this is ongoing) outweighs just a lifetime in a cell.
 
James J said:
I'm not sure how I feel about capital punishment, as one one hand you have basically state side murder, whilst on the other, you have to support that criminal often for the rest of their life, leading to wasted taxes in my opinion.

I agree with the point that until its 100% proven guilt, the death sentence should never be applied. Innocent people should never be executed! However I don't see the point in trying to rehabilitate the most violent members of society. I'd rather let pharmaceutical companies use them for human testing then allow someone like Anders Behring Breivik out of prison.
Click to expand...

Cost shouldn't really be a reason to actively end someone's life, surely?

As for rehabilitation, there is more than one purpose to it. Breivik (rightly for such a heinous crime) probably will never be released, but if he is rehabilitated within prison then consider what that means. He will be in a position to recognise the wrongness and the suffering he caused, and with such realisation could come both answers and remorse. Or, at least, the knowledge for those wishing revenge that he would be wracked by guilt
 
I quite like the idea of gladiatorial games again for some of these criminals.

Edit,

Actually a choice, should be given.

Death via firing squad.
Incarceration in a super-max style prison until they hit retirement then general population

OR

THE GAMES !!!!
 
Last edited:
As mixed as my feelings about the death penalty are, I cannot summon the slightest amount of sympathy for someone who shoots and then buries a person alive and someone who raped and murdered an 11 baby.
 
Actually being a little more sensible about it, i don't think the death penalty is the answer and it is not deterrent that's a given. But more because its the easy option. These people do not deserve the easy option.

They should be in prison and treated like cattle nothing more.
 
JHeaton said:
The cost of incarceration would cost more than the act of execution itself, yes, but as has been pointed out many times in these debates on capital punishment, the cost of the procedures necessary to bring about execution (on top of incarceration whilst this is ongoing) outweighs just a lifetime in a cell.
Click to expand...

Yup! Glad someone else said it this time :P
 
Part of my disdain for the death penalty is that it ignores the history & the casual factors which led to the person becoming that abhorrent rapist & murderer (as it's revenge, not justice or about the projection of the population).

At what stage does a child being abused & beaten change from being an object of the most concern - to the thing hated most (if they then act out in an expected way as a result of said abuse?).

"No one suggests that abuse or brain damage makes a murderer, but Dr. Lewis says that while most damaged people do not turn into killers, almost every killer is a damaged person. She concludes that most murderers are shaped by the combination of damage to the brain, particularly to the frontal lobes, which control aggression and impulsiveness, and the even more complex damage visited by repeated, violent child abuse."

Interesting articles.

http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1278&context=fac_articles
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CunninghamDeathRowReview.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/21/arts/damaged-brains-and-the-death-penalty.html

The usual (and very stupid response to this is "OMG you are making excuses for killers, you are excusing killers, you want to let them off for everything allowing them to murder) - which is frankly the most idiotic & ill thought out argument I've ever heard.

Understanding the causal factors is required to prevent these horrible crimes from occurring in the first place, if a person isn't interesting in understanding them then frankly they don't have an opinion worth listing to
 
Last edited:
Allnamestaken said:
Oh and you are an authority on what is murder and what is not?

An eye for an eye should not be part of a civilized society.

Murder is murder plain and simple what ever the reasons behind killing an individual it is murder. Say you kill someone for killing someone else for example, in the mind it is no different to if you were the person who committed the crime. The only thing that changes is the reasoning is behind the decision to do it.

At the end of the day executing a murderer is still a form of murder whether it is legally justified or not...

Our whole system is wrong, prison should be about rehabilitation but as you can see from many prisons in the UK let alone the US they are not.

There is also small percentage of people who have been executed that were innocent and there are many more that people may not even know about.

The fact that there could be a 1% to 4% chance of innocent people being executed means we should not do it at all until we have a 100% method of determining true guilt in my opinion.

The entire system is flawed.


Its hilarious seeing people with there kneejerk reactions about killing someone or throwing them off a cliff in response to someone elses murder. That is really not the kind of thinking we want in our society as it only serves to make things worse.
Click to expand...


You even contradict yourself above, and move goalposts proving killing is not the same as murder.

If a burglar enter a home and the owner kills him he is not a murderer.

You do not rehabilitate a child rapist/murdered. :rolleyes:

Oh and you are an authority on what goes on in USA or not?
 
dirtychinchilla said:
Yup! Glad someone else said it this time :P
Click to expand...

Thought you could do with a break. :p

Thing is, doesn't matter how many times it's said, you'll always get someone saying "bullets are cheap" or some such, without taking anything into consideration. Worse are the ones saying that they should do away with the appeals and long wait times, and just execute them immediately. :o

elmarko said:
Part of my disdain for the death penalty is that it ignores the history & the casual factors which led to the person becoming that abhorrent rapist & murderer.

At what stage does a child being abused & beaten change from being an object of the most concern - to the thing hated most (if they then act out in an expected way as a result of said abuse?).

"No one suggests that abuse or brain damage makes a murderer, but Dr. Lewis says that while most damaged people do not turn into killers, almost every killer is a damaged person. She concludes that most murderers are shaped by the combination of damage to the brain, particularly to the frontal lobes, which control aggression and impulsiveness, and the even more complex damage visited by repeated, violent child abuse."

Interesting articles.

http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1278&context=fac_articles
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CunninghamDeathRowReview.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/21/arts/damaged-brains-and-the-death-penalty.html

The usual (and very stupid response to this is "OMG you are making excuses for killers, you are excusing killers, you want to let them off for everything allowing them to murder) - which is frankly the most idiotic & ill thought out argument I've ever heard.

Understanding the causal factors is required to prevent these horrible crimes from occurring in the first place, if a person isn't interesting in understanding them then frankly they don't have an opinion worth listing to
Click to expand...

na m8, filfy crimz dont diserv it, jus put em down lyk dogz

I think it is quite sad that people are so ready to completely ignore these circumstances and call for blood. I think there was a post earlier in this thread that demonstrates it, and certainly a great many in the reddit threads I've read about this same incident.
 
dirtychinchilla said:
This is moronic. It is highly hypocritical to say to everyone "you may not murder" whilst at the same time carrying out state sanctioned murder. Who makes the decision on whether the capital punishment is carried out? They become a murderer by association. Who injects the lethal dose? They become a murder by action.

Killing and murdering are exactly the same thing, other than that murder may not be premeditated, where apparently killing is.

So, if the state has the power to kill, why shouldn't the citizens? How can you announce that something so damn important is wrong on one hand, and say it's fine on the other.

Your argument is complete rubbish.
Click to expand...


The only thing moronic is your do-gooder nonsense.

You make a post full of contradiction moving goalposts.

Your post is complete rubbish.
 
jh30uk said:
The only thing moronic is your do-gooder nonsense.

You make a post full of contradiction moving goalposts.

Your post is complete rubbish.
Click to expand...

How have I moved the goalposts? You said that killing and murder were different. They are, but not in the respect that matters; they both involve the death of a third party.

Why is it do-gooder? You'll be calling me a leftie next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom