# Death penalty



## Draconus Nox (Dec 29, 2006)

In this thread i raise three poitns

1. WHY is there a death penalty, for surely it merely makes the state as bad as the criminal.

2. Why is it done in such an inhumain way, Electrocuting someone to death, Breaking their neck with a rope, or posioning them!

3.  How  do the exocutioners sleep at night

Please elaborate lol


----------



## Scribble (Dec 29, 2006)

1. Not enough people choose to speak up (and in turn not enough care to listen), and because they can.
2. It was always done that way. Maybe they are just lazy, or, quite probably, the just don't care all that much how it's done.
3. Likely in a bed, but I could be wrong, some of them may have futons.


----------



## MrTamborineMan (Dec 29, 2006)

1. There is a death penalty because people are entitled to the natural rights of life, liberty, and property... until they violate the rights of somebody else.  If a person steals somebody else's property, why should he be entitled to property of his own?  Hence, he deserves prison-time or a fine.  If a person takes somebody else's life, why should he still be entitled to his own?  Performing the death penalty does not make the state as bad as the criminal, because the state is ensuring that the deserving people get to keep their natural rights while those who do not deserve them do not.

Furthermore, look at the crime rate of Washington D.C., a city in which the death penalty is illegal.  This city has the highest murder rate in the country, at 35.4%.  Obviously, the threat of life in prison is not enough.  Now observe New York, where the death penalty is legal.  The murder rate is only 4.5%. New York City might have a bigger population and more gangs than Washington, but it has a much lower murder rate.  Sure, many states that have outlawed the death penalty have lower murder rates, but many of those states (Iowa, North Dakota) have much smaller populations and less gang activity to begin with.  The death penalty is necessary in high crime areas.

2. Inhumane?  American Death Row prisoners are treated like royalty.  They get the nicest cells, the best prison food, a last meal with pretty much anything they could ask for.  And face it,  the methods of execution that we use are very humane.  The lethal injection is basically like a peaceful drug overdose.  For the most part, we don't do hangings anymore.  The electric chair is quick, which is important for the most part.  Americans have never done poisonings.

3.  If I was an executioner, I'd sleep very well at night knowing that I helped justice to be served.


----------



## americanwriter (Dec 29, 2006)

*Worth discussion.*



			
				MrTamborineMan said:
			
		

> 1. There is a death penalty because people are entitled to the natural rights of life, liberty, and property... until they violate the rights of somebody else.  If a person steals somebody else's property, why should he be entitled to property of his own?  Hence, he deserves prison-time or a fine.  If a person takes somebody else's life, why should he still be entitled to his own?  Performing the death penalty does not make the state as bad as the criminal, because the state is ensuring that the deserving people get to keep their natural rights while those who do not deserve them do not.



Actually, Kansas City was recently voted the country's most dangerous cities with a 40% increase in homicides in the last year.  St. Louis, I believe is second in the running.  And we're talking multiple victims per crime scene in K.C.  Every night there are multiple homicides.  It's sickening.  



> Furthermore, look at the crime rate of Washington D.C., a city in which the death penalty is illegal.  This city has the highest murder rate in the country, at 35.4%.  Obviously, the threat of life in prison is not enough.  Now observe New York, where the death penalty is legal.  The murder rate is only 4.5%. New York City might have a bigger population and more gangs than Washington, but it has a much lower murder rate.  Sure, many states that have outlawed the death penalty have lower murder rates, but many of those states (Iowa, North Dakota) have much smaller populations and less gang activity to begin with.  The death penalty is necessary in high crime areas.



One of the greatest elements of debate over the death penalty is the idea of the death penalty as a deterrent.  Take it from someone with a long history working in and around the criminal justice system, including having been a law enforcement officer, criminals do not consider the potential consequences of their actions before or at the time the crime is committed.  They're operating on baser emotions not rational thinking, and some of the time under the influence.  Basically, they're high-risk takers, gamblers if you will.  They're in it for personal gain and the thrill and ability to control what's driving them.  When we all accept that the death penalty is a deterrant ONLY for the person who commits the crime -- i.e. he/she will commit no further crimes once dead -- we'll have a clearer understanding.  I am for the death penalty for those who take a life willinging and deliberately. 



> 2. Inhumane?  American Death Row prisoners are treated like royalty.  They get the nicest cells, the best prison food, a last meal with pretty much anything they could ask for.  And face it,  the methods of execution that we use are very humane.  The lethal injection is basically like a peaceful drug overdose.  For the most part, we don't do hangings anymore.  The electric chair is quick, which is important for the most part.  Americans have never done poisonings.



I would ask if you've been inside a prison, walked down death row, or are you basing your concept of their luxurious conditions off what you've seen on TV?  Not trying to belittle, but as someone who's been inside a penitentiary I can tell you there are no luxury cells.  Death row inmates are segregated and have little contact with others.  They exist in small cells and are in lockdown 23 of every 24 hours.  What few privileges they are granted are merely because our prison officials have learned that prisoners are more dangerous when they are deprived of all information.  They must have outlets for their minds or they can become an even greater threat to those that guard them.  They aren't in the Hilton, they're in prison and they're never going to see daylight outside prison walls again, and they have a death sentence hanging over them.  Don't kid yourself.  It's no picnic.  Visit a prison sometime if you can.  It's a very different feeling inside than looking in from the outside.  

Also, the lethal injection is poison and it's not painless.  What do you think the inmate feels when those fluids start through their veins and their body fights to reject them?  We should never condemn ourselves for finding more humane ways of carrying out an execution when it must be done, but we shouldn't kid ourselves into believing that because it's quick that it's painless.  Public hangings serve no purpose except to satiate the public's rage and titilize those with sadistic tendencies, and if you read up on hangings you'll find that there are things that can go wrong and the emotional aftermath is almost as tough on the executioner as the rope is on the hangee.  



> 3.  If I was an executioner, I'd sleep very well at night knowing that I helped justice to be served.



I wonder.  Talk to a few people who have been the ones to throw the switch, or those responsible for the lethal injections, or if you can find someone who has witnessed a hanging (a legal one) if you can find out who they are.  They don't like their identity to be known.  Ask them how they sleep at night.  Ask them if the faces of the condemned do not sometimes come back to them in their dreams.  They were justified in doing their jobs, but common sense says that they weren't blind to the fact they were bringing an end to another human being's life -- regardless of what he or she had done.  

You've got a big topic here.  Hope to see you take it to the next level.  Maybe an essay or article on the executioners?


----------



## Draconus Nox (Dec 30, 2006)

thanks everyone... Good insight into it


----------



## Draconus Nox (Dec 30, 2006)

and yes i might do an essay


----------



## mammamaia (Dec 30, 2006)

this belongs in the 'lounge' or the 'debate' section, as it's not a non-fiction work, just questions...

that said:



> 1. WHY is there a death penalty, for surely it merely makes the state as bad as the criminal.


 
yes, it does... but too many believe 'revenge' = 'justice' and believe in that bloodthirsty biblical order to take 'an eye for an eye'... 



> 2. Why is it done in such an inhumain way, Electrocuting someone to death, Breaking their neck with a rope, or posioning them!


 
so, what way is there to kill someone that _wouldn't_ be 'inhum_ane_'?... again, that old 'godly' command comes into play... the officially sanctioned killers figure _their_ victims don't deserve any more tender handling than they gave their own... 



> 3. How do the exocutioners sleep at night


 
just like you and me, probably... it's just a job... how do pig raisers, chicken farmers or beef cattle ranchers sleep at night?... what they do is even worse... they murder our fellow creatures in the thousands and millions!

face it... humans are the most bloodthirsty, violent species on the planet... and, unlike their 'lesser' species killing counterparts, they have a choice... but they exercise their great gift of 'free will' in the commission of more horrendous acts of violence against their own and other species than even the most voracious of other predators... so, why are you so surprised they'd be 'executing' each other, too?

love and hugs, maia


----------



## Nightshadewizard (Dec 31, 2006)

Oh I agree this is a "Lounge type post" however it is a subject worthy of discussion. plus I am in the mood to chat about it.

All your death penalyt advocates are pretty much full of crap. Chowderheads who carry water for stupid Conaservative "Ideals". A contradiction in terms really.

Never the less i could turn a switch for certain convicted murderers. Ted Bundy would get the jolt of his life from me if i'd been there. 

It wouldn't be good for my soul but really who cares about a convicted serial killer?

That said the death penalty does no good to stop crime. Another wicked aspect is the old "Not guilty by reason of insanity" plea. OK here is why that is a stupid concept: Sane people do not run around killing other people. So by definition all premeditated murders are done by insane individuals.

The biggest sin of the death penalty is the time and resources it wastes on the criminal justice system. All that money should have gone to protect children from diseases or other worthwhile efforts.

Not to execute a punk who should have just gone to jail the remainder of his days. THAT is the real punishment. A life of horrific pain and boredom. one only has to die once.

And yet i thought the Saddam hanging was cool video.


----------



## MrTamborineMan (Dec 31, 2006)

I think the biggest boon to our criminal justice system would come if we stopped locking up drug offenders and used that money to lock up REAL criminals.


----------



## teenwriter (Dec 31, 2006)

I personally can't bring myself to say someone deserves to die.  Who are we to judge who 'deserves' to die.  This is why I refuse to work in depressing situations like this.


----------



## John Mirra (Jan 1, 2007)

To play devil's advocate, injected with some genuine opinions of my own:



> 1. WHY is there a death penalty, for surely it merely makes the state as bad as the criminal.


It only makes the state as bad as the criminal in the same way that combat made the Allies as bad as the Axis. In short: it doesn't. Putting a criminal to death, as opposed to letting them die in jail, is justified by the idea that criminals have lost their value through abhorrent behavior, whereas the victims are, at least in the most important of manners, innocent. Additionally, there is the belief that if the death penalty is bad enough to be outlawed, then it is bad enough to deter criminals who fear facing it. Furthermore, all of this is neglecting to mention that victims are buying meals for criminals with their taxes, and they would probably prefer paying Ol' Sparky's electric costs.



> 2. Why is it done in such an inhumain way, Electrocuting someone to death, Breaking their neck with a rope, or posioning them!


Because, um... it would suck to die like that, perhaps? Although some of those punishments actually were about as humane as possible for their time, they are now used because, um... it would suck to go like that (in other words, these punishments are used for the sake of revenge and deterrence). Beyond that, should it really make too much of a difference? Drawing and quartering is hardly condonable, but at this point, dead is dead (except for in a few strange cases).



> 3.  How  do the exocutioners sleep at night


Some with two pillows, some with one. I also hear they're fond of Vellux blankets.


----------



## davidisawriter (Jan 1, 2007)

My mind itself is split into two over this.

On the one hand, if a person has commit mass murder of hundreds of innocents whom in no way deserve to die, surely the murderer deserves to be killed.

But in contradiction, killing the person does not prove anything, bring anyone back and in some cases (but not in Saddam's) the "killer" may  be competely innocent.

After reading through previous entries with strong points either side, I'm still completely undecided!


----------



## Nightshadewizard (Jan 1, 2007)

Yeah well death isn't much of a punishment the way it was metted out so swiftly with Saddam. Sorta like a fast food to go procedure.

Now waiting on Death Row, that's a hard one.

But the best imprisonment requires a life sentence with a boyfriend/roomie named Bubba.


----------



## desertwriter (Jan 2, 2007)

I just want to mention that DC doesn't have a murder rate of 34.5%.... that would mean a third of the population would be murdered! Its murder rate is actually 34.5 murders per 100,000 people, or .0345%. It's also down from a high of .0806% in 1991.

All of Europe opposes the death penalty, and their murder statistics are wildly lower than ours (US). And that's taking in to account population.


----------



## Collins (Jan 2, 2007)

I was completely for the Death Penatly, that's untill I watched The Green Mile  

No, honestly I'm for it. A life for a life. Or in some cases, hundreds of lives for a life. 
To answer the question of why they do it in such an inhumane way is simple, did they show mercy with their victims? Did they kill they're victims humanely? Why should murders die quickly and painlessly when they have put a family through the hell of living without a father/mother/sister/brother, whoever they may have been. If what they did was bad enough to land them of Death row, the Death Row experiance should live up to it's name. That's just my opinion.


----------



## teenwriter (Jan 2, 2007)

Collins said:
			
		

> I was completely for the Death Penatly, that's untill I watched The Green Mile
> 
> No, honestly I'm for it. A life for a life. Or in some cases, hundreds of lives for a life.
> To answer the question of why they do it in such an inhumane way is simple, did they show mercy with their victims? Did they kill they're victims humanely? Why should murders die quickly and painlessly when they have put a family through the hell of living without a father/mother/sister/brother, whoever they may have been. If what they did was bad enough to land them of Death row, the Death Row experiance should live up to it's name. That's just my opinion.



Do we really solve the problem of death with more killing?  Is that right?  Morally, is it right to you?  I prefer to make my decisions based on my morals and beliefs, not what the government taught me.  The "eye-for-an-eye" belief just creates more problems, as it did with the Hammurabi code.


----------



## Collins (Jan 2, 2007)

Maybe you have to be either a victim, or a family member to understand how satisfying "a life for a life" can be. They can't kill again.


----------



## teenwriter (Jan 2, 2007)

Collins said:
			
		

> Maybe you have to be either a victim, or a family member to understand how satisfying "a life for a life" can be. They can't kill again.



Hypothetically, I think I would rather see someone suffer in prison then peacefully sent away.  People may be different once it happens to them personally, but I think imprisonment would be more 'miserable' if that was what I wanted the murderer to recieve.  You're right though, this hasn't ever happened to me or someone close to me.


----------



## Collins (Jan 3, 2007)

teenwriter said:
			
		

> Hypothetically, I think I would rather see someone suffer in prison then peacefully sent away.


Ahh this is my point. They should have to suffer as their victims did in their death. A friend of mine was raped and murdered when she was eleven. Being britist, the culprit was never taken to Death Row, but how I wish he was. 



> People may be different once it happens to them personally, but I think imprisonment would be more 'miserable' if that was what I wanted the murderer to recieve. You're right though, this hasn't ever happened to me or someone close to me.


I understand what you mean by suffering in prisons, and I hope the man who killed my friend is having a horrible time but for me personally, theres always this part of me that wonders "what if he escapes? What if he has a TV in his cell? What if he's better off on the inside that the outside?" But of course, our opinions will difer because of our situation.


----------



## WrittenEscape (Jan 12, 2007)

1. There is a death penalty because many perceive killing criminals off is cheaper than paying to keep them in prison for the rest of their lives.  I've done a bit of research on it, and I've found sites that have said it's cheaper one way, and sites that say it's cheaper the other way.  So who knows, really.

2. There are many more methods than that to execute a person, like stoning or the fire wall.  Mostly, that's because of tradition- there's a way that countries have done it for many years, and don't change.  Also, how many truly humane ways are there of killing a person?  

3. Not well, I would guess.  I'm sure there are some that don't care- just like some on this site don't care.  But I'm sure that many are aware that they are putting an end to a fellow human life and are affected by it.


----------

