Death Penalty In America: Justice or Revenge?

[Luziyca]

To be honest, I am not sure anymore.

On one hand, I feel that the death penalty is unjust, and that it should be abolished out of hope that they can be reintegrated back into society. Combined with an enormous cost of appeals (and consequently a lengthy stay in death row), and the risk that someone innocent could be executed, and it would only be a while later do we realize "oops, we executed the wrong dude," but we can't do much to reverse the outcome.

Yet, at the same time, when I read about horrifying crimes, like a 16-year old murdering a six-week old infant, or a drunk driver murdering a young family, I feel that those people are beyond hope, and they can never be reintegrated into society. Thus, part of me supports restoring the death penalty in Canada, and sentencing those people to death.

[Conserative Morality]

People are just that in the aggregate.

Sum, more than, parts, whole of, etc.

Disabled people can function in society unlike a serial killer or some other type of murderer.

According to what definition? Many murderers live otherwise ordinary lives. "Can function in society" is not a boolean value.

In this case, it is the control system that is broken and poses a danger to those around them. To rephrase the example, why leave killbot™® alive? What good does it do us? If they are unable to be rehabilitated and will always pose a danger, what is the harm in disposing of the problem entirely?

Nothing to do with utilitarian conceptions of "What harm does it do?". It has everything to do with the moral standards we set for ourselves. We do not treat them as the faceless, disposable objects to be snuffed out as it pleases our fancies that they treat their victims because we are better than them (or at least try to be).

[Spiffier]

Outdated. It makes sense when you don't have a massive, well funded prison system that can accommodate plenty of people for life, but if you do have such a system, then the death penalty is just blood lust; sure, there are plenty of people who deserve it, but there is no one who has the right to inflict it.

[Elwher]

My own feelings towards the death penalty is that it is a necessary evil. Some people don't have the stomach for doing what they really want to do, so they keep people in giant storage facilities so they can alleviate their own guilt. In reality, some people are broken beyond repair. There are those who I would also consider less than human for certain actions they have taken. These people deserve the death penalty. That is not to say that I don't agree that the system should be geared towards rehabilitation or it does not need to be reformed. Regardless, the fact remains that some people on God's green earth need killing. There is no way to fix or otherwise heal them. Keeping them a 6' x 8' cell for the rest of their lives so you can sleep with a clean conscious is the problem. Like most things in the modern age, they want the result, but they don't want the cost that comes with it.

Exactly why do we need to kill someone who is already in prison and can most likely be prevented from ever harming anyone for the rest of their life?

Because even being in prison, they can still cause harm to other prisoners and guards. In the grave, they cannot.

[Spiffier]

Exactly why do we need to kill someone who is already in prison and can most likely be prevented from ever harming anyone for the rest of their life?

Because even being in prison, they can still cause harm to other prisoners and guards. In the grave, they cannot.

Prisoners who are dangerous to inmates and guards are put in isolation.

[The East Marches]

According to what definition? Many murderers live otherwise ordinary lives. "Can function in society" is not a boolean value.

The definition of: Can you control your impulse or desire to kill people and store them in a refrigerator/freezer? Things of that nature. The type people we are talking about are better characterized in the type of Ted Bundy.

Nothing to do with utilitarian conceptions of "What harm does it do?". It has everything to do with the moral standards we set for ourselves. We do not treat them as the faceless, disposable objects to be snuffed out as it pleases our fancies that they treat their victims because we are better than them (or at least try to be).

It has nothing to do with pleasing our fancies. Pleasing your fancy is your desire to be seen somehow as "honorable" when that kind of thing is totally irrelevant to the matter at hand. The difference here is about dangers and costs. If somebody is an unredeemable killer with no chance of fixing? Why bother keeping them in a jail? Its a waste of resources, assets and money.

This of course, assumes we have a legal system that does its job in terms of fair and speedy trial among other things. Which is currently not the case for reasons unrelated to the current topic.

[Elwher]

Because even being in prison, they can still cause harm to other prisoners and guards. In the grave, they cannot.

Prisoners who are dangerous to inmates and guards are put in isolation.

And recent court decisions are rapidly eroding the ability of the DOC to do that as well.

[Elwher]

Ah, forgot about those two.

But as to the rest of your post, yes, removing the ability to file appeals, especially in a case where a life is on the line, is a violation of due process. Firstly, appeals rarely if ever are entertained by the same court twice. It would require new information coming to light, if new information comes to light and you deny the right of appeal, that's a violation of due process. If no new information has come to light, an appeal can be summarily dismissed by the court for a variety of reasons. Secondly, while most death penalty convictions are automatically granted an appeal to the highest state court, those can only be followed by appeals to other, higher courts. If an appeal is denied that's the end of it. There are no appeals we can take out of the system without trampling all over due process.

I was not referring to the ability to bring the same issue up again, you are correct in saying that is usually impossible. What I was refering to is the scenario where there are multiple appealable issues at trial. In most, if not all, jurisdictions an attorney can file an appeal on one of the issues, improperly admitted evidence for example, and take that issue all the way through the process. If that fails, he can then start over with an issue of prosecutorial misconduct and take that one through the same courts, etc. Under the proposed change, an attorney would have to file all his appeals in one case, This would not remove any level of the appeals process, but would streamline the process; thereby reducing both the time and expense.

[Salandriagado]

So we need to kill people who can't be rehabilitated because I would feel better if we didn't? That makes no sense at all.

The majority of those claiming to oppose the death penalty say they do for moral reasons. Whats the difference between a concrete coffin and a real one in the end? What is the opposition to the death penalty from in your case?

Mistakes happen. One of these things is reversible. The other isn't.

What's the difference between a metaphorical societal coffin in which we all work and live and are constrained by and a real one in the end?

A: Innumerable factors.

They keep life prisoners in isolation here in Illinois. They may as well be dead. Kept alone is a box with only an hour's worth of exercise a day. You're seriously going to tell me that is the same as societal rules? Why not just execute them? Its virtually the same thing. They aren't getting any rehabilitation nor are they living. They exist in box.

Edit: By life, I mean the really bad ones because we don't have the death penalty anymore.

That is a problem, and should also be fixed. The death penalty is not a fix for that problem.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

The majority of those claiming to oppose the death penalty say they do for moral reasons. Whats the difference between a concrete coffin and a real one in the end? What is the opposition to the death penalty from in your case?

Mistakes happen. One of these things is reversible. The other isn't.

They keep life prisoners in isolation here in Illinois. They may as well be dead. Kept alone is a box with only an hour's worth of exercise a day. You're seriously going to tell me that is the same as societal rules? Why not just execute them? Its virtually the same thing. They aren't getting any rehabilitation nor are they living. They exist in box.

Edit: By life, I mean the really bad ones because we don't have the death penalty anymore.

That is a problem, and should also be fixed. The death penalty is not a fix for that problem.

Yep. Pretty much this.

[The East Marches]

Mistakes happen. One of these things is reversible. The other isn't.



That is a problem, and should also be fixed. The death penalty is not a fix for that problem.

Yep. Pretty much this.

You've missed the entire point I was making. There are some that can rehabilitated but the Ted Bundy's or other unrepentant serial killers can not. Why should society keep them around? Its cut and dry on their guilt.

[Salandriagado]

Yep. Pretty much this.

You've missed the entire point I was making. There are some that can rehabilitated but the Ted Bundy's or other unrepentant serial killers can not. Why should society keep them around? Its cut and dry on their guilt.

Who says they can't be rehabilitated?

[Uxupox]

Rapists and murders. That's about it.

[The East Marches]

You've missed the entire point I was making. There are some that can rehabilitated but the Ted Bundy's or other unrepentant serial killers can not. Why should society keep them around? Its cut and dry on their guilt.

Who says they can't be rehabilitated?

You may not have read about this or experienced it first hand but there are some people who are so irredeemably warped that only a bullet will stop their madness. I hope you don't run into this first hand, instead I urge you to read up. There are some individuals with conditions that are not curable. Psychopathy being one of those. They used to make a distinction between the two but that has blurred as of late. Regardless, these people are broken beyond repair.

[Pope Joan]

Do you enjoy killing innocent people? I suggest that yes you do, since that is what so often happens in this so-called "justice" system.

Police, prosecutor, judge and jury are often all wrong. Dead wrong.

Yes, even when there has been a confession. Here are real lives saved from wrongful convictions by just one program in just one state:

http://www.uis.edu/illinoisinnocenceproject/exonorees/

How is your state doing with real procedural efforts to protect the innocent? Just fill your state name into this box: http://www.innocenceproject.org/policy/illinois/

You can find many more examples of innocent lives saved from wrongful conviction by checking the programs on this list:

http://innocencenetwork.org/members/

[San Marlindo]

I think it's meaningless whether capital punishment is enforced or not.

There's a handful of developing countries that abolished the death penalty on paper to get kudos from the UN while carrying out hundreds of extrajudicial killings off the books.

And there's a handful of other countries that technically still have the death penalty on the books but haven't used it in decades.

I grew up being taught by the government of my country that capital punishment was necessary and indeed a moral duty of the state. My friends and family on the whole think it should only be used in cases of spree killers or national traitors (as in, during wartime). I worked for an organization that actively campaigned against the death penalty. I currently live in a country where it's been abolished.

So having been exposed to all sides of the argument I'm now thoroughly indifferent for the two reasons already cited above. Abolishing or legalizing capital punishment in and of itself accomplishes nothing. It's who's running the system and what they do with it that matters.

[Dixie Florida]

For the death penalty, I can't stand the idea of having my tax dollars go to keeping rapist's and murderer's alive in prison, or trying to "rehabilitate them" to befoul society with their mere presence. IMO once you've decided to unjustifiably end the life of another person , or ruin some poor man/women's life by raping them, tie em to a log and send the pig into gator territory for all I care.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The Death Penalty...

Ok, I've always been on the fence where this topic is concerned. Probably because I am trying to put myself in the position of both the family of the victim and the family of the felon. I can see the feeling of anger and retribution being present in those who lost a loved one. And I can see the feelings of pain and loss and shame that can be present in those who love and care for the felon. In all honesty, I don't know how I would feel if I were in either position (felon's family or victim's family).