Does method of execution, crime committed or overall cost matter to you?
If you truly believe that all humans are equal then you must also believe that it is impossible for one to stand in judgment of another. I believe that killing is wrong because it is one human standing in judgement of another. Society has a duty to protect its members, but judgement and the concept of “punishment” is something that should be left to God.
The death penalty is incredibly stupid for more than one reason.
- If someone committed a crime that egregious, they should be punished every day, and you should help them live as long as possible.
- So many innocent people are put to death because our system for determining guilt is far from righteous, or right.
- You don’t talk about Fight Club.
It’s fine for other people, but I wouldn’t want it for myself.
I’m strongly against death penalty when it comes to crimes of individual against individual.
I am for death penalty when it comes to crimes of influential individual against masses though.
A murderer or rapist who ruined one life doesn’t deserve death penalty. A corrupt politician who ruined countless lives cooperating with the billionaires does.
Against, regardless of crime. Regardless of the system used to kill. Regardless of the system used to convict or identify the criminal. Even if they are unrepentant and said they’d do it again. Even under a perfect justice system.
Now life in prison, sure.
I am personally not against the death penalty for some crimes if the culprit is indeed responsible but there are too many people in prison for crimes they didn’t commit already, so the burden of proof needs to be exceptional. Also, I’ve heard before that it’s actually more costly for states and tax payers to impose the death penalty because of all the built-in appeals, with the costs of the court system and attorney fees, than it is to house someone in prison for life. I further think that those convicted should have the option to choose the death penalty and type of execution for themselves, á la Gary Gilmore.
Not really, but I’m not against it. When you remember that in order to even get the death penalty, you have to be such a horrible person that you’re pretty much no longer human, I don’t see a problem with it. And then there is also the issue of the government has to pay potentially millions of dollars every years just for keeping you in prison/jail, so it also has financial benefits (not that the government needs more money, especially considering the fact that they constantly waste it on meaningless bullshit).
But I am also aware of the potential problems, like innocent people getting the death penalty. As a result, I think the death penalty should only be used in situations where there is absolutely no possibility of innocence. This means that the motive is clear and proven, and the evidence for even committing the crime(s) is/are solid.
When you remember that in order to even get the death penalty, you have to be such a horrible person that you’re pretty much no longer human
This is just absolutely not true. Throughout history countless innocent people have been executed not because of the facts, but because they were unable to defend themselves against the accusations. Meanwhile, many wealthy or powerful people have been guilty but never even charged with a crime. In fact, the nature of a crime has almost zero correlation with the sentence.
I mean, yes, but I can tell that you didn’t read my full comment before replying. I literally stated that I was aware of this issue in my second paragraph.
I’d be against it even if we could magically know without a doubt the person’s guilty. Even if it had a negative cost. Even for raping a child.
Life is sacred, whatever “sacred” means for an atheist like me.
(And I was raped as a child, fwiw.)I agree, but for a different reason. I don’t think life is sacred, but as an atheist I do think people get off the hook too easily if they’re just killed. I think it’s fair for them to suffer the rest of their lifetime, just like the victims did.
I think it’s wrong to knowingly inflict suffering in others in any capacity.
In this reality of fallible humans, ineptness, and corruption then no.
However, if it was guaranteed that the person was definitely guilty of certain crimes (such as raping kids. Being a fascist dictator. Premeditated murder. Spraying yourself orange and shitting yourself etc etc) then yeah I’m ok with it.
Ok, life is sacred and all that but if a person is steadfastly evil then they don’t deserve life.
And you get to determine who is “steadfastly evil”?
Yep thats pretty much where I am. Its only the chance of abusing the system or getting the wrong guy that puts me off it.
I think the death penalty is more about vengeance than justice. If they’re going to happen the execution should be swift, public and if there were credible eyewitnesses to the crime, brutal!.
I think it’s appropriate in some cases, when a crime is disgusting and extremely selfish.
These are what I would approve it for.
-Murder for non idealogical reasons, or not for revenge, or also if the murder is cruel.
-Volent pedophilia, including kidnapping and rape or coercion.
-Political corruption or grand scams that hurt many people.
-Propaganda or profiting off destroying democratic institutions. Conspiracy against the public like fiat currencies.
-Sensless animal cruelty.
-promoting religion for power reasons while being a hypocrite.
-Extreme child neglect, like doing drugs while pregnant.
-Dissolving as a politician or advocating for the dissolution of basic human rights like privacy.
-High treason, as is a head of state or a chair of the house working with foreigners to subvert your political autonomy.
-Putting people in prison who are known to be innocent.
These are what I consider to be extremely serious crimes. Probably a few more I can add on there. Most of these as you can see mostly target people with power, the rest are just for cruelty and extreme selfishness at the expense of others which causes mass corruption.
I do not trust the justice system what so ever. Nor the nation state that gave birth to this abomination.
No to the death sentence.
Yes. No one knows what happens when you die, no one truly knows if someone is guilty, no judicial system is perfect etc etc. Too much risk for the reward of killing someone (with a 10 ish percent of being innocent)
I’m all against death penalty in any form, except perhaps for some fascist leaderships. There are those who deserve to dance the Spandau ballet.
I think even one innocent person being executed makes it all not worth it. Though that may be clouded by the facts, it doesn’t deter crime and it costs more than life imprisonment.
In a perfect world, I think the death penalty could have a deterrence effect for white collar crime. I’d support the death penalty in that case. The line I draw where the death penalty is deserved is when someone systematically makes the world a worse place. Even serial killers don’t reach that threshold for me.
There’s no world where we can do that without ever executing an innocent person though. So I am firmly against the death penalty.
