Why we should enforce the death penalty

[Troubleshooter]

Originally posted by marichiko
"The State should strive to the same ethics as the individual, but the state has responsibilities that we do not and must sometimes add corrallaries to those ethics to cover those situations. Otherwise it could not function in a way resembling it's goals."

Exactly, the State bears a heavy burden of responsibility to those it governs. All the more reason that its actions be ethical without resorting to the cop-out of situational ethics.

You selectively edited out the part that was most important.

"The State should strive to the same ethics as the individual, but the state has responsibilities that we do not...

Some ethics, by definition, have to be situational. Polar logic isn't always applicable.

Originally posted by marichiko

"I think that the lack of deterrent effect is due to the disparity between the ideal of capital punishment and its lack of proper implementation."

Then why do nations that do not embrace this "ideal" still have a lower murder rate per capita than we do?

My point was that it's possible that it doesn't have the desired deterrent effect because people know the liklihood that they will actully be executed is so slim as to be effectively zero and that their lives inside are better than their lives outside.

[ladysycamore]

Originally posted by jaguar
I'm with syc.

The problem with emotion and this issue is emotion has no place in deciding justice.

But the people that actually make the decision to issue the death penalty to a guilty murderer are not the emotional ones. It's the victim's family/loved ones left behind, so what's the harm if they wish the murderer dead?

[Troubleshooter]

Originally posted by Catwoman
But you're quite happy to point guns?

That's my job.

Originally posted by Troubleshooter


My point was that it's possible that it doesn't have the desired deterrent effect because people know the liklihood that they will actully be executed is so slim as to be effectively zero and that their lives inside are better than their lives outside.

How do you figure their lives will be better inside? Convicted murderers are not sent to "country club" prisons, by a long shot.

Originally posted by Episode



This is a pretty interesting debate, so of course, I'd like to throw a big left turn into it...

Question for the antis...if you are being attacked, is it alright for you to kill in self-defense? I mean, what if the assailant is insane and not responsible for their actions, or perhaps they were motivated by extreme need or hunger or something else that society was ultimately responsible for?

When *is* killing for protection, either personal or societal, justified?

I would kill in self defense if forced to. In fact, I once actually made a plan to kill someone. This man had been stalking me for three years. He once pushed me out of a moving car. Another time he came after me in a parking lot at 2:00am with a length of re-barb. I got a restraining order on this individual and changed my phone number. Somehow, he got my new phone number and left threatening messages on my phone. He cruised my house on a daily basis. He stole my cat and actually held it hostage. The last straw was when he began to leave messages on my phone that he was going to kill my mother and my best friend. I had a friend who was a tough ass biker chick and I had my Dad’s military officer’s gun – a semi-automatic colt 45. My biker chick friend told me that the next time this creep came to my door that I should sit down in my living room with the gun and shout taunting remarks at him which would cause him to become enraged and break the door down (he’d done this once before). I was to wait until he was inside the room and then shoot him. My friend said that if I hit him and he kept coming, to shoot him again. We rehearsed the whole thing, and I was mentally prepared to do it. Colorado has a “make my day” law, and I would have been acting in self defense. Thank God, I never had to do this. The police picked up the guy on a warrant he had from out of state and I never saw him again.
I still do not believe in the death penalty, however. Had this monster killed my mother or best friend, frying him would not have brought them back. His death in the first scenario would have saved their lives. Life without parole would have prevented him from harming anyone else in the second.

[i]
And do you know why I'll be the last liberal standing? Because I'll have a motherfucking gun! [/b]

We’ll be the last TWO liberals standing (see above).

[ladysycamore]

LadySidhe:If someone killed a member of my family, you bet I'd pull the switch, drop the floor, inject the drugs, pull the trigger, whatever. Like LadySyc, I'm vengeful by nature. I'd want to look into their eyes when I did it, too. Why should they live when my loved one is dead? It may not bring them back, but it would be a start on the healing process for me.

And you know what? I'd sleep like a baby afterward.


Catwoman:
Remorse and forgiveness - terrible burdens, eh?

That may or may not come later. And why does it matter so much how the victims family reacts? They are not the ones that will issue the decision of whether or not the murderer gets the death penalty or not.

And I would sleep like a baby afterwards as well.


Ladysycamore: So what then? Just make that person deny their true feelings for the sake of people who don't agree?

Catwoman:
I would never advocate denial as therapeutic or antidotal. By all means experience these emotions, just don't act on them.

Never said that anyone SHOULD act on them. But, I wouldn't blame anyone for feeling that way. In other words, I would WANT to kill the person who has harmed my loved one, but more than likely, I would not act on that.


Lady Sidhe: But if we KNOW someone is guilty, I say FRY 'EM.

Catwoman:
Fry 'em. Fry them? I just cannot comprehend this brutal animality.

Then don't. That's how Lady Sidhe feels. Why should she change that just because you do not agree?

Catwoman:
It is vulgar, reprehensible and reduces everything you have said to the same level as these vile individuals you would so relish seeing 'fried'. You are as guilty and sadistical as them:

You forgot to say, "IMO" after your assessment. Ever think that you can be just as sadistical as the next person for allowing a criminal to live? I'm sure someone out there thinks that of people who are not pro-DP.

If all this is based on one's morals, then it doesn't (or maybe even shouldn't) hold water in this conversation (seeing as though morality isn't a fixed concept). One man's yin is another man's yang, etc.
.

LadySycamore: Why is it so difficult to comprehend that some people are going to feel that way..period? Just because YOU wouldn't DARE feel that way, don't say that others don't have the right to do so.
"Your right doesn't make me wrong." (told to me by a very wise man)

Catwoman:
Of course- no doubt I would feel just as much hatred, anger and desire for revenge as the next person, but emotions should not necessarily be translated into action. They are subjective and not a reflection of fact, or reality, and thus can only perpetuate the cycle of crime.

IMO, you are taking this a bit to the extreme. Just because someone would feel that way, doesn't mean that they would actually do it. And futhermore, you wouldn't be able to stop them from doing so anyway, so why even get all upset about it?
If Lady Sidhe feels the need to shoot the murderer, I say oh well, what am I going to do about it? The BEST I could probably do is try to talk her out of it, and not call her names as you have done (guilty, irrational, sadistic...how is that helping?)

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by ladysycamore
But the people that actually make the decision to issue the death penalty to a guilty murderer are not the emotional ones.

Not necessarily...you've been on a jury before.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally posted by sycamore
Among the basic arguments for the death penalty:

--"An eye for an eye"
--0% recidivism rate
--Closure for the family
--Saves the state/federal government money

Among the basic arguments against the death penalty:

--It is cruel and unusual punishment
--Having to live to remember those crimes is punishment enough for the murderer
--Killing the murderer doesn't bring back the victim

--"An eye for an eye"
Dated, as well as not alwas appropriate.
--0% recidivism rate
Logically true. Problematic in being sure of guilt, but sound essentially.
--Closure for the family
I'm not interested in closure for the family. I'm interested in protecting society. I'm not the guy you come calling on when you need to feel better about something.
--Saves the government money
[b]If implemented properly it will in the long run.

--It is cruel and unusual punishment
Punishment has to be cruel and unusual or it won't work. For punishment to work it has to stand out in the memory as TRAUMATIC results for poor decision-making.
--Having to live to remember those crimes is punishment enough for the murderer
You're kidding right?
--Killing the murderer doesn't bring back the victim
No, it doesn't, but that isn't the only goal of justice.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by ladysycamore
That may or may not come later. And why does it matter so much how the victims family reacts? They are not the ones that will issue the decision of whether or not the murderer gets the death penalty or not.

They can have influence though.

And I would sleep like a baby afterwards as well.

I doubt it...I suspect that you'd have a guilty conscience later.

Then don't. That's how Lady Sidhe feels. Why should she change that just because you do not agree?

No one is expecting her to change.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally posted by ladysycamore
But the people that actually make the decision to issue the death penalty to a guilty murderer are not the emotional ones.

Ah, but they are if it's a jury.

How many lawyers do you think actually expect a jury to use their heads instead of their hearts in making a decision? Don't forget what the jury pool is made up of.

[DanaC]

You forgot to say, "IMO" after your assessment. Ever think that you can be just as sadistical as the next person for allowing a criminal to live? I'm sure someone out there thinks that of people who are not pro-DP.

There is something of a difference between wishing the murderer dead and wishing the murderer to experience the maximum available pain and mortal terror and/or relishing the details of that pain and terror and/or finding it appropriate material for casual humour. Wishing the murderer dead may be a responsible and reasonable answer to the problem...delighting in their suffering is sadism, taking pleasure in the manner of their death is sadism.

I am sure there are those out there who think us antis are reprehensible and irresponsible but I think we are stretching the definition of sadism if they believe us to be sadistic on those grounds. If we said we wished that murderers could stay alive so we could watch them rape and slaughter virgins maybe.....but suggesting another solution beyond execution is not sadism and if theres someone out there who thinks that then they need to invest in a dictionary

[Troubleshooter]

Originally posted by marichiko
How do you figure their lives will be better inside? Convicted murderers are not sent to "country club" prisons, by a long shot.

I live in an area that is severly depressed. I've had interactions with people who have told me that they'd rather be in prison than have to worry about keeping food on the table.

Also, a friend of mine is a detective with the local PD and has had the same conversation with people.

Some people have lives that really are that bad.

[DanaC]

I live in an area that is severly depressed. I've had interactions with people who have told me that they'd rather be in prison than have to worry about keeping food on the table.

In that case perhaps you chaps should invest in some sort of social security and then the lawabiding people who live in freedom wont be so desperate as to wish themselves in a place where they are likely to experience their first rape within the first 15 minutes of incarceration or where they have to share a tiny cell with no amenities and every single act from their toiletting to their sleep being dictated and observed by people who have power overthem.

I have no idea where people get the idea that prisons are a pleasant or even habitable place to exist in. If the prisons in America are anything like the prisons over here then the inmates are barely skirting a reasonable existence. Given some of the stories I have heard I am inclined to think they are probably marginally worse.
As to the fact they get three square meals a day...the meals in some prisons in the UK simply dont bear thinking about. They look ok on paper but much ofthe food is unfit for human consumption and cases of food poisoning abound.

I do think when people are so desperate as to wish they were in prison they maybe have in mind a prison more akin to a holding jail rather than the large industrial sized penitential facilities which they would actually find themselves in if they committed serious crimes

Imagine sharing a small, cramped and colourless space with four or five guys all of whom are pretty fucked up and desperate people......often spending 22 or 23 hours with them in the cell sharing a toilet with no privacy no release from the relentless boredom. Imagine never being able to make a choice for yourself again. Not the choice to sleepwhen you want or be awake when you want. Not the choice to read what you want or watch the tv channel of your choice. No choice in what you eat , no choice in what you wear no choice in any aspect of your life.


Before I am blown off my feet by the shouting, I know......they are criminals they made their choice and they now have to lie in the prison cot they made for themselves...I dont deny it. Nor do I think this is the best time to start a debate on the merits of prison and whether or not the concept of punishment is useful.....I just think that we would do well to recognise how harsh life in prison actually is.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by Troubleshooter
Dated, as well as not alwas appropriate.

Agreed. Plus, as I see it, because you used your brain to think about committing the crime, your brain should be removed...not your hand, foot, etc. I don't see much support for that.

I'm not interested in closure for the family. I'm interested in protecting society. I'm not the guy you come calling on when you need to feel better about something.

I think we have to take the victim and their family into account, at least to a small degree. After all, they're part of the society we're attempting to protect. And if you lock a person up and "throw away the key," society is still protected.

If implemented properly it will in the long run.

I don't think the cost would be such a big deal in the long run if we cleared some of the prison population out (e.g. nonviolent drug felons). In addition, if we put the prisoners to work, then the money is not being wasted.

Punishment has to be cruel and unusual or it won't work. For punishment to work it has to stand out in the memory as TRAUMATIC results for poor decision-making.

How do you propose reconciling this with the 8th Amendment?

You're kidding right?

Absolutely not. You are sent to live in an 8' x 8' cell, where you may or may not have a TV, where you will have to spend anywhere from 12-23 hours a day. You face the possibility of being killed or raped or infected by other prisoners...and this will go on for the next 30-50 years.

I don't know about you, but that sounds like hell to me. A death sentence almost seems kinder.

[Lady Sidhe]

Originally posted by DanaC

... in a place where they are likely to experience their first rape within the first 15 minutes of incarceration or where they have to share a tiny cell with no amenities and every single act from their toiletting to their sleep being dictated and observed by people who have power overthem.

I have no idea where people get the idea that prisons are a pleasant or even habitable place to exist in. If the prisons in America are anything like the prisons over here then the inmates are barely skirting a reasonable existence. Given some of the stories I have heard I am inclined to think they are probably marginally worse.
As to the fact they get three square meals a day...the meals in some prisons in the UK simply dont bear thinking about. They look ok on paper but much ofthe food is unfit for human consumption and cases of food poisoning abound.

Imagine sharing a small, cramped and colourless space with four or five guys all of whom are pretty fucked up and desperate people......often spending 22 or 23 hours with them in the cell sharing a toilet with no privacy no release from the relentless boredom. Imagine never being able to make a choice for yourself again. Not the choice to sleepwhen you want or be awake when you want. Not the choice to read what you want or watch the tv channel of your choice. No choice in what you eat , no choice in what you wear no choice in any aspect of your life.

.....I just think that we would do well to recognise how harsh life in prison actually is.

Remember when I said I was accused of something I didn't do? Well, I spent a single night, two days, in our parish prison. It sucked, but you know what?

You don't share a small, cramped cell. There were eight of us in a single cell about half the size of the house I live in now. There were two rooms, each of which had two bunk beds each; There were two shower/bathrooms, and a central common area with a tv. There was also a phone in the cell. You could order books if you wanted. You could go to church or classes. The lights went out at ten pm, and came on at seven am. Sure, the food sucked, but mostly because it was cold. No one ever threatened me.

This wasn't a jail; this was a permanent facility. I'm not saying they're all like this, but it can't be the ONLY one that is.


Sidhe

[DanaC]

Welll.....without having the evidence in front of me to examine and without knowing much about the prison system of America I am going to take a wild stab in the dark and suggest that maybe rapists and murderers who have actually been convicted and sentenced and incarcerated in the State Penitentiary probably dont get the same luxurious conditions you describe. I am guessing that was a small local prison used mainly for lower grade crimes and people who are being held for a few days.

As I said, I think people who have come to the conclusion that prison is an easy option might have in mind one of the smaller holding jails rather than the large scale prisons in which your average rapist or murderer might find themselves.

Edited to say
I do beg your pardon. I assumed by the term Parish Prison that you were referring to a small institution.....I went seeking more information and have fund that "Parish Prisons" are seemingly just as likely to treat their prisoners in an appalling fashion as the larger prisons are.
Found this in an ACLU site

The ACLU, since 1969, and its National Prison Project (ACLU-NPP), since 1979, has had the Orleans Parish Prison (OPP) in litigation over cruel, unusual and inhumane treatment of inmates in its care. This has amounted to "unquestioned and serious deprivations of basic human needs" and/or "the minimal civilized measures of life’s necessities," as defined by the US Supreme Court. In pursuing a minimal level of care at OPP, the ACLU has tried to prevent a tragedy such as the death of arrestee JoAnn Johnson, a brittle diabetic, on April 6, 1999.

Link to full paper

The section I found most disturbing was this

After interviewing over 100 women in OPP regarding medical care and conditions of confinement, the ACLU-NPP on December 8, 1998, filed a motion for emergency relief and enforcement of agreed entry on medical care provisions governing women’s OB/GYN and prenatal care ......... The ACLU found evidence of the following violations, which taken together "threaten the lives of women prisoners and their fetuses:"· Chronic and acute gynecological conditions such as ovarian cysts and vaginal discharge go untreated; Deputies tell pregnant women that they cannot go to the hospital to deliver their babies until 1)their water breaks; 2)they suffer heavy bleeding; or 3)the baby’s head emerges.