Is it moral? Is it needed? Does it need outweigh any moral holdbacks?

------------------
Manu Narayan

Ah, I have been waiting on this one. This is so hard to answer. This is where I know I am going to get people, but I believe that when these people die and meet there true match (God) they will pay dearly. But keeping to the question, I think that everyone should pay for there mistakes. Death Penalty is hard to answer. If it was my relative, child, etc..Hell yeah I would want it.. Looking on the outside in though, I think these poor bastards should be kept alive to think every day the pain they have caused..But then you have the ones that have no remorse..SO, what do you do with them. Hmm the more I type I am realizing ...I have no clue what I think about this.. Get me started guys...:P

------------------
"The grand essentials to happiness in this life are something to do, something to love, and something to hope for"
-Joseph Addison

Originally posted by Princess:
Ah, I have been waiting on this one. This is so hard to answer. This is where I know I am going to get people, but I believe that when these people die and meet there true match (God) they will pay dearly. But keeping to the question, I think that everyone should pay for there mistakes. Death Penalty is hard to answer. If it was my relative, child, etc..Hell yeah I would want it.. Looking on the outside in though, I think these poor bastards should be kept alive to think every day the pain they have caused..But then you have the ones that have no remorse..SO, what do you do with them. Hmm the more I type I am realizing ...I have no clue what I think about this.. Get me started guys...:P



Urgh, this is the kind of stuff that gives semi-religious people like me a bad name... just kidding. Yeah, I agree with what you say about if it was your child, etc., but that just serves to prove that many advocates of the death penalty are blinded by grief or sorrow, rather than thinking rationally.

-Patrick

------------------
"The difference between an individual terrorist and a government in some cases may be simply that the former has a bomb but doesn't have an air force."
-William Blum

I'm very much against it...bah, go read the McVeigh thread if you want to hear my whole stance. I'm not writing up another 5 page dissertation for this thread.
Immoral, unnecessary, and a horrible waste...

------------------
"I have no regrets. Regret only makes wrinkles." - Sophia Loren

I am all for the death penalty, pretty much how we use it now. People use the 'eye for an eye' example, but HOW many people convicted of murder actually get the death penalty? How many of them don't sit on death row for years and years?

Some people say that it is a worse punishment to be kept alive your whole life, etc etc, and it probably is, but the fact is that there is no 'justice' in that.

People talk about keeping justice blind, etc etc, since when has the justice system been emotion free and blind?

How many times have minorities been persecuted? How many times have celebrities gotten off easy? Any serious criminal case is just as much about justice/(vengence?) as it is about keep everyone ELSE safe.

I don't get how wanting a man to stay behind bars his entire life, not being able to interact socially with anyone (other than other people of the same gender), and never being able to do anything really more humane? People talk about the death penalty as sick/twisted/disgusting.

They also say the punishment of life is 'worse.' In what sense? Justice? Vengenace? If you want someone to get a worse punishment then isn't that being vengful?

Somoene in the McVeigh thread mentioned that the death penalty is callous, and that people cna reform. We're not giving them much of a chance to reform if they have life in prison with no parole are we?




------------------
Manu Narayan

i dont understand it really.i mean oviously i know how it works but i dont see how they sort out who gets the chair and who doesnt and how that is that.

"Somoene in the McVeigh thread mentioned that the death penalty is callous, and that people cna reform. We're not giving them much of a chance to reform if they have life in prison with no parole are we?" -Manu

Not necessarily, what I meant when I said this is that it may be possible to reform a "criminal" while he/she is in prison, rather than sending the guilty to the chair. The purpose of prisons should be as much to help the inmates reform as it is to punish them. It is more humane to give a criminal a chance to redeem himself than to kill him.

-Patrick

------------------
"The difference between an individual terrorist and a government in some cases may be simply that the former has a bomb but doesn't have an air force."
-William Blum

Frankly Id rather see a million bazillion guilty men go free than one innocent man executed. Killing people is for weaklings and sissies. Frankly, if someone ever kills me i hope they get off.

------------------
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -Nietzsche

Originally posted by CodyChaos:
Frankly Id rather see a million bazillion guilty men go free than one innocent man executed. Killing people is for weaklings and sissies. Frankly, if someone ever kills me i hope they get off.




My thoughts exactly. Or not get off, really, but just get jail time. Maybe I'll make that a clause in my will or something - if I was killed, don't execute the person who did it.

------------------
"I have no regrets. Regret only makes wrinkles." - Sophia Loren

Well, since our justice system is based upon the Roman model, what about the idea of letting the punishment fit the crime?

------------------
Artist formerly known as Reindeer

I think the punishment should fit the crime. If someone does drugs, they shouldn't get the same punishment as someone who murders. But I don't think that an eye for an eye capital punishment is appropriate, effective, moral, or worthwhile. The death penalty has no place in our society today.

------------------
"I have no regrets. Regret only makes wrinkles." - Sophia Loren

So the punishment shoudl fit the crime. So someone takes a life, and they get to live theirs out? That makes sense.

On what grounds is it immoral? I mean, that is your opinion, and that is great, but like, how is that a reason for not doing it? And I am not sure the last time a drug user was executed, eh?

------------------
Manu Narayan

But, see, two wrongs don't make a right. You kill someone for killing someone, there's two people dead. It's a waste.

And I do think it's immoral. I don't think that *anything* gives a person the right to kill someone else, no matter what they've done.

I just found this comic the other day...thought it was apropos.
http://downtoearth.ncbuy.com/archives/index.html?strip=480

------------------
"I have no regrets. Regret only makes wrinkles." - Sophia Loren

Well, one would have to think where the term "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" came from. Moses spke of it in the book of Leviticus... therefore, if you acknowledge Cristianity or Judaism as a valid religeon, then the idea of taking a life for a life is moral.

------------------
Artist formerly known as Reindeer

Originally posted by Manu:
So the punishment shoudl fit the crime. So someone takes a life, and they get to live theirs out? That makes sense.

On what grounds is it immoral? I mean, that is your opinion, and that is great, but like, how is that a reason for not doing it? And I am not sure the last time a drug user was executed, eh?



Having the punishment fit the crime doesn't necessarily suggest an eye for an eye system. What it means is that you have varying degrees of punishment depending on the severity of the crime, according to the MORALS and values of a society. This is why it matters whether or not the death penalty is moral. Personally, I think it's hypocritical. I mean, the reason we've made murder a crime is because we think it is immoral, and we value human lives (please, no one get sidetracked and turn this into an animal rights argument...). Therefore, in my oh-so-humble opinion, to kill someone violates the same morals which dictate our code of laws.

-Patrick

------------------
"The difference between an individual terrorist and a government in some cases may be simply that the former has a bomb but doesn't have an air force."
-William Blum

Originally posted by Turbostang:
Well, one would have to think where the term "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" came from. Moses spke of it in the book of Leviticus... therefore, if you acknowledge Cristianity or Judaism as a valid religeon, then the idea of taking a life for a life is moral.




Yep, the Bible's full of little gems like that. I found this posted on another site:

"Dear God, few questions that i think make you outdated.. but i may be wrong...

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Clarification would be greatly appreciated..?? "


Yep yep...definitely can take everything the Bible says directly at face value...I would consider myself a Christian, but I hardly think that everything the Bible says is the truth. The Bible was written by a bunch of men with their own slant on things. So while I may agree with the basic gist of things, I hardly feel that you can take everything said there at face value. If being in the Bible makes the death penalty moral, then so does selling your daughter into slavery. I believe they also encourage killing an unfaithful wife...I don't remember where this was, or I'd quote, but I always thought the Bible was a bit severe at times.

------------------
"I have no regrets. Regret only makes wrinkles." - Sophia Loren

Moral code, do unto others??? BAH! YOU SIR ARE A RETARDED LIBERAL!!! ITS ONLY FITTING THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE POWER TO MURDER ITS PEOPLE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW. SHAME SHAME UPON YOU PAT!!! heh heh...

Originally posted by PatTheAnarChrist:
Having the punishment fit the crime doesn't necessarily suggest an eye for an eye system. What it means is that you have varying degrees of punishment depending on the severity of the crime, according to the MORALS and values of a society. This is why it matters whether or not the death penalty is moral. Personally, I think it's hypocritical. I mean, the reason we've made murder a crime is because we think it is immoral, and we value human lives (please, no one get sidetracked and turn this into an animal rights argument...). Therefore, in my oh-so-humble opinion, to kill someone violates the same morals which dictate our code of laws.

-Patrick





------------------
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -Nietzsche

Originally posted by CodyChaos:
Moral code, do unto others??? BAH! YOU SIR ARE A RETARDED LIBERAL!!! ITS ONLY FITTING THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE POWER TO MURDER ITS PEOPLE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW. SHAME SHAME UPON YOU PAT!!! heh heh...





Heh, ok, I'm confused...

I wuv you Cody,
Patrick


------------------
"The difference between an individual terrorist and a government in some cases may be simply that the former has a bomb but doesn't have an air force."
-William Blum

Dude I was being facetious.

------------------
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -Nietzsche

Putting the death penalty aside (which I am totally for as long as every measure has been taken to insure they have the right person).
Getting back to the punishment fitting the crime. Look how low crime is in many countries where they hack off your hand for stealing, public executions and all that stuff...
Obviously, harsh penaltys do have a deterring effect of some kind.

Im not saying Im all for enacting this kind of stuff, Im just throwing it into the salad here.

------------------
Man — every man — is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
Ayn Rand

Originally posted by Powerboss:
Putting the death penalty aside (which I am totally for as long as every measure has been taken to insure they have the right person).
Getting back to the punishment fitting the crime. Look how low crime is in many countries where they hack off your hand for stealing, public executions and all that stuff...
Obviously, harsh penaltys do have a deterring effect of some kind.

Im not saying Im all for enacting this kind of stuff, Im just throwing it into the salad here.



Or maybe most of the people in those countries are hardcore Muslims who shy away from the criminal behaviour to begin with. I hear they are pretty draconian in Cambodia, Colombia, and Russia too but crime is outrageous in those countries. Hell why not just enact the death penalty for everything from misdemeanors on up. Under the detterant theory that would end all crime, wed live in a Utopia.

------------------
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -Nietzsche

[This message has been edited by CodyChaos (edited 06-07-2001).]

Im gunna have to disagree with several of you here... Im 100% pro death penalty... **** man if you dont wanna do it give me a .45 and let me find the mother****er who killed my kid/wife/whoever and Ill solve that problem... Maybe eye for an eye isnt the answer to everything... but you know what...the prison system DOESNT rehabilitate people... and if you have a desensitized mass murderer then Im all about watching him fry... now MAYBE you wanna talk about morals... but if someone has violated the "morals" of society, they are going to be punished... IMHO

------------------
-----------------
"Who wants some? Huh? Who wants a little?"
-TOAO Ash

Originally posted by Aphasia:

Yep, the Bible's full of little gems like that. I found this posted on another site:

"Dear God, few questions that i think make you outdated.. but i may be wrong...

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Clarification would be greatly appreciated..?? "


Yep yep...definitely can take everything the Bible says directly at face value...I would consider myself a Christian, but I hardly think that everything the Bible says is the truth. The Bible was written by a bunch of men with their own slant on things. So while I may agree with the basic gist of things, I hardly feel that you can take everything said there at face value. If being in the Bible makes the death penalty moral, then so does selling your daughter into slavery. I believe they also encourage killing an unfaithful wife...I don't remember where this was, or I'd quote, but I always thought the Bible was a bit severe at times.



Actually, useless tidbit here: it's speculated that the Adam and Eve story was written by a woman in King Solomon's court because, unlike the seven days creation story, a woman is given a prominent role. We discussed this in depth in my Western Civ class last spring.

-Patrick

------------------
"The difference between an individual terrorist and a government in some cases may be simply that the former has a bomb but doesn't have an air force."
-William Blum

Originally posted by DaOgre:
Im gunna have to disagree with several of you here... Im 100% pro death penalty... **** man if you dont wanna do it give me a .45 and let me find the mother****er who killed my kid/wife/whoever and Ill solve that problem... Maybe eye for an eye isnt the answer to everything... but you know what...the prison system DOESNT rehabilitate people... and if you have a desensitized mass murderer then Im all about watching him fry... now MAYBE you wanna talk about morals... but if someone has violated the "morals" of society, they are going to be punished... IMHO



Ogre, I doubt there's a person living who'd trust you with a gun http://discussanything.com/Ubb/biggrin.gif

Hugs and Kisses,
Patrick



------------------
"The difference between an individual terrorist and a government in some cases may be simply that the former has a bomb but doesn't have an air force."
-William Blum

Well i mean if the point is just to punish people, why bother with prison. We might as well just beat people with rubber hoses itd be cheaper and waste less time. The whole point of prison/jail is to separate dangerous/undesireable people from society and reform them over a period of time so that they can be reintroduced into society. Unfortunately it seems somewhere along the line the penal system lost sight of this goal. Now there are a few shinning exceptions such as the Naval Welding program at the Chico State Penitentiary as well as some experimental prison in Minnesota or Wisconsin or somewhere (Chyenne something i think it is). Its silly to think that punishment is going to keep someone from comitting a crime, to most violent criminals (who generally arent the brightest people)the concept of punishment probably doesnt loom very high in their mind. On top of the fact who willingly committs a crime and plans on getting caught? For most criminals the punishment doesnt really figure into their equation because they are confident they arent going to get caught. You really think they sit down and draw out a T chart to balance the pros and cons of robbing that bank before they do it? You really think they look up the state legal code and say 'hmmm the penalty for murder in comission of a felony is too stiff so ill just commit aggravated assault instead'? No the detterant effect of punishment ends once they decide to commit the crime, and id imagine most hardcore criminals barely think twice about it. Like i said earlier if the Death Penalty is capable of actually deterring the most heinous crimes than why not simply apply it to all crimes? I fail to see what benefit increasingly severe physical or mental punishments have to anyone. I mean sure I guess if you are a twisted **** it will help you jackoff at night thinking about those guys' eyeballs exploding when they fry in the electric chair or maybe it inflates your ego when you imagine giving your consent to the executioner to kill a defenseless man as he sits in chains. Frankly I dont see how it does society much any benefit, to kill people or even lock them away without trying to address the reasons they arecomitting crime in the first place. The simplest and most effective solution would simply be to permanently banish all criminals from society. I wouldnt be surprised if everyone on this board has broken the law dozens and dozens of times. If you are really concerned with justice and restitution to society you ought to march right down to your local courthouse and have em taking down your deposition on everytime you have made a right hand turn without signaling, crossed in the middle of a street, driven with over .08% BAC (or any at all), confess everytime youve threatend somebody, everytime youve 'borrowed' something that wasnt yours, everytime you gave your self a few more dollars deduction than you can prove, everytime youve used/purchased/sold illicit substances, everytime youve driven over the speed limit, eveytime you struck someone, everytime you threw out that jury summons, etc etc etc.

------------------
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -Nietzsche

http://www.northernsun.com/nsm/images/1867DeaPen.jpg

------------------
"Discrimination is a hellhound that gnaws at Negroes in every waking moment of their lives to remind them that the lie of their inferiority is accepted as truth in the society dominating them"
Martin Luther King Jr.

Originally posted by CodyChaos:
Well i mean if the point is just to punish people, why bother with prison. We might as well just beat people with rubber hoses itd be cheaper and waste less time. The whole point of prison/jail is to separate dangerous/undesireable people from society and reform them over a period of time so that they can be reintroduced into society. Unfortunately it seems somewhere along the line the penal system lost sight of this goal. Now there are a few shinning exceptions such as the Naval Welding program at the Chico State Penitentiary as well as some experimental prison in Minnesota or Wisconsin or somewhere (Chyenne something i think it is). Its silly to think that punishment is going to keep someone from comitting a crime, to most violent criminals (who generally arent the brightest people)the concept of punishment probably doesnt loom very high in their mind. On top of the fact who willingly committs a crime and plans on getting caught? For most criminals the punishment doesnt really figure into their equation because they are confident they arent going to get caught. You really think they sit down and draw out a T chart to balance the pros and cons of robbing that bank before they do it? You really think they look up the state legal code and say 'hmmm the penalty for murder in comission of a felony is too stiff so ill just commit aggravated assault instead'? No the detterant effect of punishment ends once they decide to commit the crime, and id imagine most hardcore criminals barely think twice about it. Like i said earlier if the Death Penalty is capable of actually deterring the most heinous crimes than why not simply apply it to all crimes? I fail to see what benefit increasingly severe physical or mental punishments have to anyone. I mean sure I guess if you are a twisted **** it will help you jackoff at night thinking about those guys' eyeballs exploding when they fry in the electric chair or maybe it inflates your ego when you imagine giving your consent to the executioner to kill a defenseless man as he sits in chains. Frankly I dont see how it does society much any benefit, to kill people or even lock them away without trying to address the reasons they arecomitting crime in the first place. The simplest and most effective solution would simply be to permanently banish all criminals from society. I wouldnt be surprised if everyone on this board has broken the law dozens and dozens of times. If you are really concerned with justice and restitution to society you ought to march right down to your local courthouse and have em taking down your deposition on everytime you have made a right hand turn without signaling, crossed in the middle of a street, driven with over .08% BAC (or any at all), confess everytime youve threatend somebody, everytime youve 'borrowed' something that wasnt yours, everytime you gave your self a few more dollars deduction than you can prove, everytime youve used/purchased/sold illicit substances, everytime youve driven over the speed limit, eveytime you struck someone, everytime you threw out that jury summons, etc etc etc.



I agree that the prison system is not acomplishing its current goals. I wouldnt argue with you on that one. Though I dont think you can say that it is completly worthless either. If there was no penalty for robbery... it would be going on a lot more... look at times when rioting breaks out and people think they can get away with whatever crime...looting happens alot more.

I dont think the death penalty is a deterant as much as it is vengance for the people that died... or society deciding that this person is beyond the ability to mesh back into society... not really sure where Im going with this

------------------
"Who wants some? Huh? Who wants a little?"
-TOAO Ash

Originally posted by Aphasia
I'm very much against it...bah, go read the McVeigh thread if you want to hear my whole stance. I'm not writing up another 5 page dissertation for this thread.
Immoral, unnecessary, and a horrible waste...

What about the immorality of the victims deaths? Were they necessary? Weren't their deaths a waste?

Some people try to use religion as a crutch to oppose the death penalty... Doesn't the bible say "an eye for an eye"? I am not a religious person, but I believe wholeheartedly that the punishment should fit the crime. Being locked up with cable, computers, book deals, gyms, college courses.... is this fitting punishment for a killer? Why can't the victims have cable, and college, and a free membership to a gym... OH WAIT... It's because they're DEAD at the hands of the people you say it's cruel to kill....

Originally posted by Aphasia
But, see, two wrongs don't make a right. You kill someone for killing someone, there's two people dead. It's a waste.

And I do think it's immoral. I don't think that *anything* gives a person the right to kill someone else, no matter what they've done.

I just found this comic the other day...thought it was apropos.
http://downtoearth.ncbuy.com/archives/index.html?strip=480

------------------
"I have no regrets. Regret only makes wrinkles." - Sophia Loren

I think a person has a moral right, maybe a moral obligation to kill if neccessary to protect his family, to defend his country, and his property. Some killing is moral, some not, some illegal, some not.