d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > Death Penalty Yea Or Nay? > You May Want To Read Op Before Voting?
1238Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 10,566
Joined: May 31 2013
Gold: 0.76
Jan 8 2015 07:56am
I've tried to find some well established opinions on both sides of the coin, I have some pretty strong opinions myself which I'll hold in check for the moment.
I'll post the opinions on a every other order starting with pro death penalty first;
Quote
Bruce Fein, JD, General Counsel for the Center for Law and Accountability, in an American Bar Association website article titled "Individual Rights and Responsability - The Death Penalty, But Sparingly" (accessed June 17, 2008), offered the following:

    "Abolitionists may contend that the death penalty is inherently immoral because governments should never take human life, no matter what the provocation. But that is an article of faith, not of fact, just like the opposite position held by abolitionist detractors, including myself... The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it does not treat him as an animal with no moral sense, and thus subject even to butchery to satiate human gluttony. Moreover, capital punishment celebrates the dignity of the humans whose lives were ended by the defendant's predation."



now a con:

Quote
Thurgood Marshall, JD, late Justice of the US Supreme Court, in a June 29, 1972 Furman v. Georgia concurrent opinion, stated:

    "[Capital punishment] violates the Eighth Amendment because it is morally unacceptable to the people of the United States at this time in their history. In judging whether or not a given penalty is morally acceptable, most courts have said that the punishment is valid unless 'it shocks the conscience and sense of justice of the people.' Assuming knowledge of all the facts presently available regarding capital punishment, the average citizen would, in my opinion, find it shocking to his conscience and sense of justice. For this reason alone, capital punishment cannot stand."


pro:

Quote
Eliot Spitzer, JD, Former Attorney General and Governor of New York, in a June 13, 2000 hearing on "Postconviction DNA Testing of New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer Before the Senate Judiciary Committee," available at the judiciary.senate.gov website, stated the following:

    "Our federal and state constitutions are replete with rights we afford the accused -- the right to notice of charges, the right to a speedy and public trial, the right to confront witnesses, the right to counsel, the right against self-incrimination. We as a society have made a profound commitment to avoid punishing the innocent. This is particularly important to those of us who support the death penalty in appropriate circumstances. We have determined that there are instances when the crimes are so egregious that society’s ultimate punishment -- the death penalty -- may be appropriate. But the imposition of this punishment can be justified only if we make full use of all available tools to aid in the determination of guilt or innocence."


con:

Quote
The United Nations General Assembly, on Nov. 1, 2007, in an 104-54 vote to which the US was a primary opponent, adopted a non-legally binding moratorium on the death penalty:

    "The General Assembly... Recalling also the resolutions on the question of the death penalty adopted over the past decade by the Commission on Human Rights in all consecutive sessions... in which the Commission called upon States that still maintain the death penalty to abolish it completely and, in the meantime, to establish a moratorium on executions... Considering that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity, and convinced that a moratorium on the use of the death penalty contributes to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights, that there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty's deterrent value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty's implementation is irreversible and irreparable... Welcoming the decisions taken by an increasing number of States to apply a moratorium on executions, followed in many cases by the abolition of the death penalty,

    1. Expresses its deep concern about the continued application of the death penalty;

    2. Calls upon all States that still maintain the death penalty to:
(a) Respect international standards that provide safeguards guaranteeing the protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty... (c) Progressively restrict the use of the death penalty and reduce the number of offences for which it may be imposed; (d) Establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty..


I know it's a wall of text but I tried to keep the quality of the quotes a equal as I could, I would really like to read your opinions about this issue.
Member
Posts: 96,125
Joined: Mar 15 2007
Gold: 7,252.72
Jan 8 2015 08:01am
...some people deserve the death penalty . When we uncover such an individual through the legal process they should be executed as quickly and inexpensively as possible .
Member
Posts: 64,656
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Jan 8 2015 08:13am
I don't believe because of the number if people who were innocent and still found guilty. I'd rather have life in prison anyway, which would be worse IMO
Member
Posts: 10,566
Joined: May 31 2013
Gold: 0.76
Jan 8 2015 08:19am
Quote (WidowMaKer_MK @ 8 Jan 2015 09:01)
...some people deserve the death penalty . When we uncover such an individual through the legal process they should be executed as quickly and inexpensively as possible .



I'll ask two questions first, what crimes would you punish with death.

second, we don't rape convicted rapists and we don't burn the houses of convicted arsonists, what reasoning then do we use to kill murders?
Member
Posts: 77,539
Joined: Nov 30 2008
Gold: 500.00
Jan 8 2015 08:31am
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jan 8 2015 09:13am)
I don't believe because of the number if people who were innocent and still found guilty.  I'd rather have life in prison anyway, which would be worse IMO


this but i'd make it a life of labour for the state so that they earn their food/shelter instead of depending on tax dollars
Member
Posts: 96,125
Joined: Mar 15 2007
Gold: 7,252.72
Jan 8 2015 08:39am
Quote (Valhalls_Sun @ Jan 8 2015 09:19am)
I'll ask two questions first, what crimes would you punish with death.

second, we don't rape convicted rapists and we don't burn the houses of convicted arsonists, what reasoning then do we use to kill murders?


...contract killers and the people who hire them...serial killers...those who kill as terrorists like the surviving Boston bomber...sexual predators of children below an agreed upon age...serial rapists...major drug distributors such as cartel heads and their enforcers...convicts who kill in prison...assassins of police officers....assassins of major political leaders ...product tamperers resulting in death . I can certainly come up with more . The reasoning is that they have forfeited their right to benefit from our taxes whether it be through years of appeals down to the food we have to provide for them .

...the bolded is nonsense not worth a further reply .
Member
Posts: 11,343
Joined: Jan 23 2007
Gold: 752.10
Jan 8 2015 08:40am
Quote (Valhalls_Sun @ Jan 8 2015 08:19am)
I'll ask two questions first, what crimes would you punish with death.

second, we don't rape convicted rapists and we don't burn the houses of convicted arsonists, what reasoning then do we use to kill murders?


I forgot which state but there is a state that has the death penalty for child rape. I agree with widow that some people just need to be executed but I am opposed to the death penalty because of due process.

EDIT: Nvm about executing child rapists, the SCOTUS stuck that down.

This post was edited by nobrow on Jan 8 2015 08:42am
Member
Posts: 40,044
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Gold: 32,161.71
Jan 8 2015 08:42am
I don't necessarily agree with this persae but an alternate to the death penalty could be medical trials

What is the point of spending money on people who committed heinous crimes and will never leave a cell? In certain situations where the crimes are bad enough I think the death penalty should be utilized, serial killers etc.

Member
Posts: 10,566
Joined: May 31 2013
Gold: 0.76
Jan 8 2015 08:43am
Quote (duffman316 @ 8 Jan 2015 09:31)
this but i'd make it a life of labour for the state so that they earn their food/shelter instead of depending on tax dollars



I've lost touch with prison systems when I was a kid my next door neighbor worked as a guard and the prison he was at had an excellent wood shop they produced some really nice furniture which was sold to benefit the prison. But yeah that would seem like a good use of time and a way to rehabilitate those with less than life sentences. Getting out with a vocation and a sense of pride would be win/win.
Member
Posts: 77,539
Joined: Nov 30 2008
Gold: 500.00
Jan 8 2015 08:43am
Quote (Bazi @ Jan 8 2015 09:42am)
I don't necessarily agree with this persae but an alternate to the death penalty could be medical trials

What is the point of spending money on people who committed heinous crimes and will never leave a cell? In certain situations where the crimes are bad enough I think the death penalty should be utilized, serial killers etc.


how about experimenting on them in the name of science? the nazi's hypothermia experiments dunking jews in cold water did provide valuable information
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
1238Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll