Are you for or against the death penalty?

[iamgine]

I used to be for it, but now I lean towards life without parole (LWOP) due to these arguments:

1. Sentencing people to death by execution is three times more expensive than sentencing them to LWOP
2. No one sentenced to LWOP has ever been released
3. Death sentence results in years of mandatory appeals that often result in reversal. In a sample of 350 death sentences, 118, or nearly one-third, were reversed in part or in whole
4. LWOP allows victims’ survivors to move on, rather than keeping them trapped in decades of court hearings and waiting for an execution to occur
5. People on death row are provided much more comfortable single cells and sometimes gain celebrity status and attention just by being there
6. LWOP protects against wrongful execution

[warriorfan]

I used to be for it, but now I lean towards life without parole (LWOP) due to these arguments:

1. Sentencing people to death by execution is three times more expensive than sentencing them to LWOP
2. No one sentenced to LWOP has ever been released
3. Death sentence results in years of mandatory appeals that often result in reversal. In a sample of 350 death sentences, 118, or nearly one-third, were reversed in part or in whole
4. LWOP allows victims’ survivors to move on, rather than keeping them trapped in decades of court hearings and waiting for an execution to occur
5. People on death row are provided much more comfortable single cells and sometimes gain celebrity status and attention just by being there
6. LWOP protects against wrongful execution

I agree with most of this.

[rawimpact]

Well thought out post.


I am for the death penalty. In fact, I am for individuals who are serving life without parole to be given the option of death.


1. Sentencing people to death by execution is three times more expensive than sentencing them to LWOP
2. No one sentenced to LWOP has ever been released
3. Death sentence results in years of mandatory appeals that often result in reversal. In a sample of 350 death sentences, 118, or nearly one-third, were reversed in part or in whole
4. LWOP allows victims’ survivors to move on, rather than keeping them trapped in decades of court hearings and waiting for an execution to occur
5. People on death row are provided much more comfortable single cells and sometimes gain celebrity status and attention just by being there
6. LWOP protects against wrongful execution

Let me address some of these.
1. While this may be true, I don't know the numbers off the top of my head but that's an issue with the process itself not the action. Change definitely needs to be made here.
2. Right, but we're not comparing letting someone go to LWOP, we're comparing death to LWOP -- I can see either one considered to be a worse punishment. But if my family was the victim and the crime was severe enough to warrant either -- I think I'd want the criminal dead.
3-6 are all problems with the process not the action itself.



I'm no expert on law obviously, but there needs to be limitations to the appeals process. Additionally there needs to be a bit of time between conviction and punishment or death to allow for new evidence to be brought forward.

During that time the criminal should treated no differently than he would a criminal in for LWOP. IF no evidence after that time... lets just say 5 years of time to find new/emerging evidence then death should be executed.

BTW, why are we starting our Thursday morning with this topic? Pretty dark thoughts this early.

[ZenMaster]

It's a tough one, and like with gun control and abortion I find them really hard to decide on as I can argue it either way.

As Raw mentions, the appeals process needs to sorted out though and it definitely shouldn't come at a higher cost for the tax payers to convict someone to death vs life on parole.

[starface]

Wrongful conviction potential is the only reason I dont support execution across the board for murder convictions. Otherwise Id say put them in a year long solitary confinement (as a deterrent) and then snuff them at minimal expense.

But obv I dont wanna see the wrongly convicted get screwed in unrecoverable ways. So that remains the issue.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

For.

[Patrick Chewing]

I am for the Death Penalty.


And, the more heinous the crime, the more heinous the form of death should be.

[~primetime~]

I am very much for...one of my conservative leanings

many of those things listed in the OP don't have to be that way...it SHOULDN'T be more expensive to execute vs. keeping someone alive their entire life

also from what i understand wrongful convictions are becoming extremely rare due to DNA testing

[imdaman99]

I don't know because sometimes we find out 50 years later how someone was wrongly locked up. I know that's different from the death penalty but if someone is locked up for 50 years, you've stolen their life anyway. What the hell is someone gonna do as a 70+ year old?

Also that doesn't sound right. It costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them locked up for life? :wtf: How much do executions cost?

[CelticBaller]

Against.

It lets the criminal get away with their crime easily.

[~primetime~]

James Holmes has life without parole...our prisons are over crowed and real criminals are being released on the street, people like James Holmes should just be put to death, him being alive may be the reason another criminal is roaming.

[tpols]

Against.

It lets the criminal get away with their crime easily.

what so we have to pay for them for the rest of their life housing and food with taxes?

the problem isn't the death penalty, but instead USA lawyer culture and the overcomplicated judicial system. You think in China they waste decades debating shit? lol it's just one to the back of the head and over with quick. problem solved if the crime was bad enough.

[starface]

what so we have to pay for them for the rest of their life housing and food with taxes?

the problem isn't the death penalty, but instead USA lawyer culture and the overcomplicated judicial system. You think in China they waste decades debating shit? lol it's just one to the back of the head and over with quick. problem solved if the crime was bad enough.

This is all well and good in a world where evidence is infallible and government and prosecutors have integrity. But in the real world, it can lead to a lot of wrongful deaths.

I agree our system is OVER complicated. But you also wanna make sure you take enough time to get things right. Too much simplification leads to abuses and false convictions/execution. It doesn't make for a very civilized society.

[tpols]

This is all well and good in a world where evidence is infallible and government and prosecutors have integrity. But in the real world, it can lead to a lot of wrongful deaths.

I agree our system is OVER complicated. But you also wanna make sure you take enough time to get things right. Too much simplification leads to abuses and false convictions/execution. It doesn't make for a very civilized society.

China's society has way less crime than ours. Ditto Singapore, Japan, etc. Yea they're overly harsh, but it actually makes people stay in line better. And be more "civil". Those mfers would never let an organization like BLM survive and behave the way they are out in the streets.

[Long Duck Dong]

Multiple unrelated witnesses to a murder or conclusive video of the act, confession combined with DNA or hard forensic evidence. Execution within 30 days of conviction.

All else life imprisonment.

[starface]

China's society has way less crime than ours. Ditto Singapore, Japan, etc. Yea they're overly harsh, but it actually makes people stay in line better. And be more "civil". Those mfers would never let an organization like BLM survive and behave the way they are out in the streets.

For sure, but you also dont know how many people are falsely convicted over there. Might not seem like a big deal until you wind up on the lonely end of it.

There has to be some kind of a balance. And we're definitely still searching for it in the states. You're right tho that lawyers in America have an excess of influence on these kinds of policies. In many cases they do drag on too long. But on the other hand I don't think we wanna operate like Cambodia either.

[CelticBaller]

what so we have to pay for them for the rest of their life housing and food with taxes?

the problem isn't the death penalty, but instead USA lawyer culture and the overcomplicated judicial system. You think in China they waste decades debating shit? lol it's just one to the back of the head and over with quick. problem solved if the crime was bad enough.

Unpaid labor creates revenue from these assholes

[tpols]

Unpaid labor creates revenue from these assholes

The profits from that unpaid labor get funnelled up to the shareholders of the particular prison in use though. While our taxes mostly pay for their living expenses.

They socialize the cost, and capitalize the revenue.

[Derka]

Against. Killing a killer is meaningless. Killers should be placed in supermax conditions: 23 hours on lockdown every day all day, three hots and cot in an 8x12 concrete box in the middle of a desert. All they get is a TV screen that shows them the home movies and cell phone videos of the person they killed and audio recordings of stories of the victim as told by the surviving family and friends on an endless loop.

[Patrick Chewing]

Against. Killing a killer is meaningless. Killers should be placed in supermax conditions: 23 hours on lockdown every day all day, three hots and cot in an 8x12 concrete box in the middle of a desert. All they get is a TV screen that shows them the home movies and cell phone videos of the person they killed and audio recordings of stories of the victim as told by the surviving family and friends on an endless loop.

This is assuming that all killers are of sound mind and even realize the consequence of their actions while rotting away in prison.


I think torture should be on the table if society truly prefers for us not to execute these murderers. Maybe mental torture like telling them they are going to be executed when they really aren't.

[Kblaze8855]

If not for wrongful convictions if he pro death penalty for crimes even beyond murder.

[Axe]

In trash third world nations, it should be mandatory so criminals would be more careful.

[SouBeachTalents]

Personally, I think life in prison is a SIGNIFICANTLY worst punishment than being sentenced to death. I'd choose lethal injection in a split second over a lifetime in prison

[tpols]

Personally, I think life in prison is a SIGNIFICANTLY worst punishment than being sentenced to death. I'd choose lethal injection in a split second over a lifetime in prison

Watching a lot of crime videos on youtube, I always find it interesting how lethal injection is seen as the "humane" form of death penalty. These guys take like 5-10 minutes to die. The poison has to circulate the bloodstream for a little while before overwhelming the heart. From the prisoner's POV it looks like hell. All the other forms of execution are instantaneous unconsciousness... firing, hanging, or electrocution. The optics look worse to a spectator, but for the invididual being executed, lethal injection looks by far like the most suffering.

[SATAN]

Against. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. It's very ugly and barbaric. People get executed for petty shit like drug possession in some countries. Imagine being executed for smoking weed because some power bent ignorant dickhead who never touched it assumes it's evil or whatever. Who says it won't apply in your own backyard one day if the right circumstances arise.

[iamgine]

Well thought out post.


I am for the death penalty. In fact, I am for individuals who are serving life without parole to be given the option of death.



Let me address some of these.
1. While this may be true, I don't know the numbers off the top of my head but that's an issue with the process itself not the action. Change definitely needs to be made here.
2. Right, but we're not comparing letting someone go to LWOP, we're comparing death to LWOP -- I can see either one considered to be a worse punishment. But if my family was the victim and the crime was severe enough to warrant either -- I think I'd want the criminal dead.
3-6 are all problems with the process not the action itself.



I'm no expert on law obviously, but there needs to be limitations to the appeals process. Additionally there needs to be a bit of time between conviction and punishment or death to allow for new evidence to be brought forward.

During that time the criminal should treated no differently than he would a criminal in for LWOP. IF no evidence after that time... lets just say 5 years of time to find new/emerging evidence then death should be executed.

BTW, why are we starting our Thursday morning with this topic? Pretty dark thoughts this early.
Well if the process is as we want, and everything is perfect, then of course we'd want that. But in the real world it's never like that. I'm saying the way it is now.

I'd think as victim's family member you'd want the criminal dead in a terrible manner. The way it is now, the criminal will die painlessly after repenting his sins and eating great food.

You're right, this is a topic more for Friday evenings.

[Axe]

Against. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. It's very ugly and barbaric. People get executed for petty shit like drug possession in some countries. Imagine being executed for smoking weed because some power bent ignorant dickhead who never touched it assumes it's evil or whatever. Who says it won't apply in your own backyard one day if the right circumstances arise.
This opinion coming from a long time weed user

[Jasper]

for death Pen.
Why should someone that ruins a life due to rape, or multiple rapes live a peaceful life in jail ?
how bout a cereal killer
how bout a guy or woman destroying a kids life

HANG THEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Nanners]

I will oppose the death penalty until we can fix all the flaws in our justice system (if thats even possible)

[bison]

Against 100%. Did not read a single post in this thread.

[Proctor]

for death Pen.
Why should someone that ruins a life due to rape, or multiple rapes live a peaceful life in jail ?
how bout a cereal killer
how bout a guy or woman destroying a kids life

HANG THEM !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your illiteracy is staggering. Shut up.

[solar.hands]

what so we have to pay for them for the rest of their life housing and food with taxes?

Against. But you have a good reason.
I say find a way to make them a productive member of society. Make him work for his own money to live without ever being free. I think that is a better puinshment.
Toil for the remaining days of your life. Work until you find it so repetitive and boring that you kill yourself to end the madness.
Productive, yes. Free, no.

[SouBeachTalents]

Against. But you have a good reason.
I say find a way to make them a productive member of society. Make him work for his own money to live without ever being free. I think that is a better puinshment.
Toil for the remaining days of your life. Work until you find it so repetitive and boring that you kill yourself to end the madness.
Productive, yes. Free, no.
That just sounds like the average 9-5 job :lol

[Derka]

I'd think as victim's family member you'd want the criminal dead in a terrible manner. The way it is now, the criminal will die painlessly after repenting his sins and eating great food.
Not for nothing but prisoners do not get great food. I was briefly a screw at a county lockup and those men and women eat the bare minimum of what is required so they don't starve to death. The food is so bad that I've seen hard-ass grown men weep like babies when offered coffee and donuts from Dunkin by the place they're doing work release at.

Additionally, a death row inmate is allowed a last meal of basically whatever they want. A lifer who is on their death bed isn't given that.

[iamgine]

Not for nothing but prisoners do not get great food. I was briefly a screw at a county lockup and those men and women eat the bare minimum of what is required so they don't starve to death. The food is so bad that I've seen hard-ass grown men weep like babies when offered coffee and donuts from Dunkin by the place they're doing work release at.

Additionally, a death row inmate is allowed a last meal of basically whatever they want. A lifer who is on their death bed isn't given that.
I was talking about death row inmate.

[Patrick Chewing]

Your illiteracy is staggering. Shut up.

:oldlol:

[Norcaliblunt]

I’m for it, if one of the victims family members or friends are the ones who actually kill them.

[Pushxx]

There are good points to both sides, but the difference maker to me is if someone killed one of my family members, I wouldn't be happy unless they were dead.

I'd be pretty pissed knowing they get to live the rest of their life after taking another life.

So I am for the death penalty.

[Norcaliblunt]

There are good points to both sides, but the difference maker to me is if someone killed one of my family members, I wouldn't be happy unless they were dead.

I'd be pretty pissed knowing they get to live the rest of their life after taking another life.

So I am for the death penalty.

I agree and that’s why you should have to kill them.

[warriorfan]

I agree and that’s why you should have to kill them.

Lmao. I think the term closure is a total cliche. But if closure was a real thing this would be it. :roll:

[jstern]

Personally I feel there's something so natural about a would be victim killing the criminal. For example in an arm robbery. It's just pure nature. And if a person likes to commit say arm robberies, then really I don't see anything wrong with a victim killing them two weeks later. Or even 11 years later.

And I literally mean it's nature, natural law of evolution. From bacteria to tigers. In captivity, how can vicious tigers, who get angry and growl, and even slap each other, live with each other in a sort of tiger society for years and years with no deaths? Because in nature, through evolution, the tiger that cannot live in that society gets taken out, else there would be no tiger society. (Note: Tiger are do interact with each other in nature.)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAwsP4ee65M

[iamgine]

Personally I feel there's something so natural about a would be victim killing the criminal. For example in an arm robbery. It's just pure nature. And if a person likes to commit say arm robberies, then really I don't see anything wrong with a victim killing them two weeks later. Or even 11 years later.

And I literally mean it's nature, natural law of evolution. From bacteria to tigers. In captivity, how can vicious tigers, who get angry and growl, and even slap each other, live with each other in a sort of tiger society for years and years with no deaths? Because in nature, through evolution, the tiger that cannot live in that society gets taken out, else there would be no tiger society. (Note: Tiger are do interact with each other in nature.)

It's also natural to take what you want from a weaker being. You see a pretty girl, it's natural that you should rape her. Just because something is natural, doesn't mean it's not wrong.

[iamgine]

There are good points to both sides, but the difference maker to me is if someone killed one of my family members, I wouldn't be happy unless they were dead.

I'd be pretty pissed knowing they get to live the rest of their life after taking another life.

So I am for the death penalty.
I don't think I'd be happy. They still live for decades, get good cells, get to repent their sins and eat great food before finally painlessly die under the needle.

[jstern]

It's also natural to take what you want from a weaker being. You see a pretty girl, it's natural that you should rape her. Just because something is natural, doesn't mean it's not wrong.

What I described is a natural thing that's found in all life, and pretty well documented. Else the life form would not survive. Simply taking what you want from somebody weaker of the same species is not a common human thing, because it would not evolve in nature. It pretty much gets taken care of by my original post.

[iamgine]

What I described is a natural thing that's found in all life, and pretty well documented. Else the life form would not survive. Simply taking what you want from somebody weaker of the same species is not a common human thing, because it would not evolve in nature. It pretty much gets taken care of by my original post.

I got it's natural, doesn't mean it's not wrong when applied to human. Like in some countries they would stone a thief to death and cut the heads of people with different beliefs.

[Axe]

There are good points to both sides, but the difference maker to me is if someone killed one of my family members, I wouldn't be happy unless they were dead.

I'd be pretty pissed knowing they get to live the rest of their life after taking another life.

So I am for the death penalty.
While this one is rational, i think it also depends on the justice system of each country.