Do you support Capital Punishment?

[nightdrot]

Voted "No." The purpose of the law in general and the penal system in particular is first and foremost, to protect society, second to punish the guilty and third and least, to reform the criminal if possible. In that order.

Capital punishment, generally speaking, does not seem to afford those benefits. First, it is the surety of punishment, not its severity, that is a deterrent to crime. If an individual is sure that they will be punished, they will likely not act. If that individual believes that they might get away with it, they will likely run the risk.

So in that sense, capital punishment fails its first and most important test. It does not deter and therefore it does not protect the society. Throw in that it applies only in cases of premeditation - crimes of passion are not premeditated - and the range of those whom capital punishment applies becomes proportionately smaller.

Secondly, it is axiomatic that we shape our laws and then our laws shape us. In that context, capital punishment reflects - and is a result of - the society's treatment of life as a means rather than an end. In this it is the parallel of the abortion argument. The planted axiom of liberal abortion laws is that life has no value save that which each individual attributes to it, therefore the law has no proper standing to afford it protection.

Capital punishment is a case of the society deciding that the value of life is contingent rather than absolute. That action decides life's value rather than life's inherent worth. When the society places vengeance over any inherent value to life, it will apt in its larger context to see more of the former and value the latter less and less.

To be sure, in the matter of capital punishment that is at the margins and dealing with decidedly unsympathetic individuals. Arguably the case can be made that "killing the killer" suggests that society places a much higher value on life. However, on balance, the inspiration of capital punishment is vengeance and not justice and thus both the value of life and the value of justice is undermined.

Beyond that, humans are imperfect and there are issues related to failings of the legal system. In the question of justice, the accidental execution of the innocent is not an injustice that can be undone. Indeed, it is what suggests that vengeance - and not justice - is what inspires laws that condone capital punishment.

In short, capital punishment harms society with too few countervailing benefits.

[NaultD]

"Those who hunt monsters see to it you yourself don't become monsters. For when you gaze at the abyss the abyss gazes back"

It's self indulgent at the expense of justice. The pleasure you get seeing the life exiting from the person's eyes you loss that amount in your own humanity. It's so much so that you don't want to stop that crime from happening in the first place.

The amount of pleasure and self
indulgence, you will need a constant flow to satisfy your needs. That's not justice. With justice you need to do what is needed because any results hurt you just as much whatever happens.

That's the point of jury of peers. You have to do right by your neighbor at the same time have to do right by all your other neighbors. That's the point, to tear you apart and the only thing to do is the right thing to do. You should be in tears as a jury convicting someone of a crime because that was the only way to be right with your other fellow neighbors because it hurts you all the same.

[Flower7]

No, because it's a double standard to kill a person, when that's the same thing they're being punished for. How can someone say murder is wrong and then do the exact same thing themself?

[ADFSDF1996]

Nope

It might look good on paper but it still causes problems.

1.) Innocent people can fall victim to it, there have been countless cases of Innocent people being wrongly executed.

2.) It is a violation of the 8th amendment, while lethal injections are considered physically painless. Death penalty still causes psychological distress for death row inmates. It also robs the “guilty” a chance at redemption.

3.) Death Penalties are more expensive than life imprisonments but most people are too ignorant to realize it.https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs

[AbleLearner]

Yes I support Capital Punishment for several types of crimes, including but not limited to Murder, abortion, rape, perjury in a capital trial, treason, terrorism, Blasphemy, Insanity, Intentional False Prophecy, Necromancy, Witchcraft, etc.

Capital Punishment exists because some crimes are rationally unforgivable, and because some crimes cannot be rationally, truthfully repented of. And if a crime cannot be rationally, truthfully repented of, then the offender should be put to physical death. Murderers and Rapists and perjurous persons, and the like without exception show no evidence of ever repenting of their crimes. Presently, we punish perjury with a few years in prison at most, and most people who do it never actually do prison time. Perjury is a Capital Crime which is supposed to be punished by agonizing physical death (and by implication eternity in Hell Fire).

Insanity is not a moral excuse to get out of punishment. Insanity is by definition of itself, already a Capital Crime punishable by physical death, because by definition any person claiming to not be capable of knowing good from evil should be put to death for everyone else's safety. No Free Moral Agent, including God himself, is Morally responsible for the well being and care of a truthfully insane person, because by definition they deserve physical death for everyone else's safety and well being.

[NineBreaker]

Yes, but only under 2 conditions:
1. Overt crime, where there is no doubt of guilt, like a mass shooter, for example.
2. Victim's family requests retaliation: If the victim's family unanimously vote against it -> Life in prison. If a single family member votes against it, then the condition is met.

I prefer life in prison over capital punishment because:
1. I would want the perp to experience regret, which can be a potent punishment. A lot of people prefer death over loss of freedom.
2. The result is less severe, and may be rectified if innocence is proven.

[bulletbob555]

I don't think every one that gets it deserves it. Considering some things I've read about some people deserve to die. Also feel it shouldn't be right away so the innocent have a chance to prove it hopefully. As DNA and the innocence project has shown us

[soleil2666]

It's a hard call to make - for some of the gruesome crimes, it is deserved - but in cases it could get mis-administered/the convicted person is not guilty, the graveness of the mistake is so huge it's difficult to fathom.

[anube]

We live in a world that is able to find a homeless person guilty of a crime , when in fact to do so is a treasonous act, yet everyone is to blind and ignorant

[MoscowMitch]

I voted no because it's a binary choice, but sometimes I do. I might read about some awful crime and turn into a one-man lynch mob.

[CaptainSmartass]

Got to deal with the commies somehow. Why not with the rope, or the assault rifle?

Simples...

[Edanurus]

No, someone at some time will slip through the cracks and in that case its just sanctioned murder.

[SissyFrenchMaid]

too often mistakes are made. Juries can easily be prejudiced and not always open minded.

[goaded]

No. The UK got rid of it in the 1960's, Germany even earlier. It's too dangerous. Trump wanted the (innocent) Central Park 5 executed, iirc.

[gangster123]

Definitely yes.. on rape cases. There is no fear in society on what they are doing. Strict punishments and public shaming of such people is required to bring fear among themselves...

[skeetskeetskeet]

Fuck yes. .. id like to see it done like the old days... molest a kid... guess what fucker were chaining you to a bonfire later on so we can see how that turns out

[sheepdip]

I do - but only in extreme cases and with huge oversite. I'm not wedded to the idea however, so if anyone has any particularly good points to make in opposition I'd love to see them.

[Nadim171]

Well, only to extremely dangerous criminals and terrorists. Because these people have followers that will do anything to rescue them

[Liam_Hayden]

Yes, for egregious crimes where there is incontrovertible evidence.

[Surely]

If found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt! YES
Public whipping for lessor crimes.

[termanator]

No, the human justice system is still to flawed

[JCT666]

I support capital punishment.

[harryowell]

So many time they get it wrong

[Gsm24diecast]

Yes 100%

[Anonymous]

Yes!

[SportsNerd]

Yes..