Death Penalty In America: Justice or Revenge?

[Big Jim P]

It's not killing for killing's sake. It's about the crime fitting the punishment. You take somebody's life and arguably your forfeit your own. Just as if you commit any crime you receive a punishment to match it.

So we should kill the executioner and the executioner's executioner. After all, they've taken a life or even several lives and therefore have lost the right to their own, have they not?

Your argument is based on the erroneous assumption that a: all killing is murder and/ob b: all killing is unjustified.

[Ohioan Territory]

I want the death penalty used more, there's no use in paying taxes to keep deranged murderers on multiple life sentences alive inside of a prison. They don't deserve to live, anyway. People like, for example, Charles Manson, and Ariel Castro (not a murderer, but still an extremely sick individual that shouldn't even be given the chance to reintegrate into society). I guess it's justice, but it's not exactly what I'd call "revenge" unless a close person to the victim (or the victim him/herself) does the execution.

Oh, and this whole "death row" shit and people taking years upon years to be executed... yeah, no. One bullet is fine. I don't see why this needs to be "humane" when we're talking about putting down insensitive animals. Of course, it wouldn't be okay to execute someone until they're undoubtedly guilty, too.

You do realize getting rid of the appeals process undermines due process?

Is that why it takes so long? Well, damn. Please excuse my ignorance, I didn't know that, honestly.

[Big Jim P]

I staunchly oppose the death penalty anywhere and for any crime. As far as I am concerned, it's nothing more than state-sanctioned bloody vengeance, and that is not what justice is about.

Justice would be the would-be victim killing their assailant in self defense.

[Arcipelago]

The death penalty should be abolished because what happens if they got the wrong guy. Also I don't like the idea of the government being able to order someone's death.

[Kernen]

I staunchly oppose the death penalty anywhere and for any crime. As far as I am concerned, it's nothing more than state-sanctioned bloody vengeance, and that is not what justice is about.

Justice would be the would-be victim killing their assailant in self defense.

So very rarely does justice occur naturally, though. Barring the unfortunately unlikely event that the would-be victim defends themselves, the only reason for killing is vengeance. Prisons are more than able to separate violent criminals from society, and the death penalty is a greater drain on resources than life imprisonment.

I'm all for abolition of capital punishment. Execution eradicates any opportunity for a successful appeal. One of the only things I liked about Game of Thrones was the idea Ned Stark had about those passing a death sentence being willing to carry it out. If we cannot remove capital punishment, the judges that pass sentencing and the juries that bring such a verdict should at least be present for the execution.

[Socialist Nordia]

Death penalty often screws up badly.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ ... s-innocent
That's 1/25 people who get death penalty that are innocent.

[Unified Governments]

I think it should be retained for certain cases in the military, for treason under exceptional circumstances, and crimes against humanity, and for those who specifically enter a guilty plea requesting it, but not as a general punishment.

Kind of agree with this. My main gripe with the death penalty is the possibility of an innocent person being executed. Innocent people who are jailed can be released and have their record cleansed. You can't really release a dead person from... Well... Being dead. Unless of course you're Jesus or something.

I think it should be reserved for only the most extreme circumstances.

[Jordkloden]

It costs entirely too much. (Cost being in money that is)

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

I staunchly oppose the death penalty anywhere and for any crime. As far as I am concerned, it's nothing more than state-sanctioned bloody vengeance, and that is not what justice is about.

Justice would be the would-be victim killing their assailant in self defense.

See, to me, or legal system should not be about revenge. A convict murdered someone. That is an awful thing to do, but they do not deserve to die because of that. We are unable to judge what a person can become in the future. And, while murderers are dangers to society who should be kept away from society until they no longer are threats, it is not the job of the courts to sentence them to retribution. Prison should aim to rehabilitate those sent to it, and the highest sentenced allowed for in American law should be Life with the Opportunity for Parole.

[Jordkloden]

I think it should be retained for certain cases in the military, for treason under exceptional circumstances, and crimes against humanity, and for those who specifically enter a guilty plea requesting it, but not as a general punishment.

Agree entirely.

[Liriena]

I staunchly oppose the death penalty anywhere and for any crime. As far as I am concerned, it's nothing more than state-sanctioned bloody vengeance, and that is not what justice is about.

Justice would be the would-be victim killing their assailant in self defense.

If there were no other choice? Yeah.

Killing the person once they've already been captured, convicted and imprisoned serves no purpose, other than indulging in the lust for violent revenge of people who were not the victims. All you get from that is a corpse and a fleeting, morally hypocritical sense of satisfaction from the butchery of a defenseless person. A vicarious desire for revenge is not a sentiment that the state should pander to.

Also, as someone who is leaning away from statism for various reasons, I would not feel comfortable handing any state the power to kill the imprisoned, specially when false convictions are very much still a thing.

[Rusozak]

How about not justice or revenge, but easing the burden on society by eliminating serial killer whackjobs that would rather spend the rest of their days in a cell, feeding off of the resources of the society they've caused nothing but harm to without giving back. You think you'll ever be able to let them all back into society safely? Nevermind punishment, executions save decades of mental anguish for inmates and decades of economic drain on the society that has to feed and medicate them.

[Ifreann]

How about not justice or revenge, but easing the burden on society by eliminating serial killer whackjobs that would rather spend the rest of their days in a cell, feeding off of the resources of the society they've caused nothing but harm to without giving back. You think you'll ever be able to let them all back into society safely? Nevermind punishment, executions save decades of mental anguish for inmates and decades of economic drain on the society that has to feed and medicate them.

Executions actually cost more than keeping someone in prison. The economic thing to do would be to abolish the death penalty.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

How about not justice or revenge, but easing the burden on society by eliminating serial killer whackjobs that would rather spend the rest of their days in a cell, feeding off of the resources of the society they've caused nothing but harm to without giving back.

A lot of people executed aren't "Serial Killer Wackjobs." Believe it or not, we actually haven't had more than a 1000 of those in the years since 1977. Anyway, as the fact sheet provided, which I imagine you didn't bother to read, demonstrates, executing someone actually costs society more than imprisoning them does. So no, its not about 'saving resources.'

You think you'll ever be able to let them all back into society safely?

Not all of the 1437 people executed since 1977 were 'Serial Killer Wackjobs.' Quite a lot of them were people who committed murder during a robbery or some other such crime that does not amount to being a serial killer by any stretch. Wrong? Yes. But a lot of them probably could have been reformed and paroled.

Nevermind punishment, executions save decades of mental anguish for inmates

Reform the prison system. I already think that the way prisoners at ADX Florence (Federal Supermax Prison) and other such facilities are horrible. I believe prison should be about rehabilitation.

Now tell me, killing someone suffering from depression, or, at the very least, allowing them to kill themselves, would save them from 'years of mental anguish.' Clearly by your stated logic, that should be legal. Yet that is not how American Law works. Instead, we focus on treating the illness. Crime is no different. We should focus on rehabilitating criminals, not arbitrarily taking their lives. Now, if you support euthanasia for depression victims, then fine - at least you are ideologically consistent. Otherwise you are just being massively hypocritical.

and decades of economic drain on the society that has to feed and medicate them.

As stated above in this post, in the OP, and in the fact sheet which I bet you neglected to read, executions cost society more than imprisonment currently does.

[The Princes of the Universe]

Execution has never been about anything but revenge. There's never been a lick of justice in it. Furthermore, since the US in particular has a sizeable contingent that wants to call it a Christian nation, UMN's point is perfect.

[Vedilia]

Revenge by proxy.
Because resurrection is impossible unless God is your father, apparently, so in order to feel better the killer must die. It's also threat elimination by proxy.

[The first Galactic Republic]

Sending people to prison in general is kind of about revenge. Bernie Madoff isn't in jail to be rehabilitated.

[The Emerald Legion]

Firstly we should abolish the entire prison system as it currently stands. Assigning people x number of years to do nothing when their crime was minor is ridiculous and disruptive.

Either the person is a danger to society, in which case they should be destroyed. Or they aren't in which case, fines and removal of privileges of citizenship should be sufficient.

Detainment should never be a punishment. Merely a measure taken while a trial is held and the facts of the matter determined.

[Vedilia]

Firstly we should abolish the entire prison system as it currently stands. Assigning people x number of years to do nothing when their crime was minor is ridiculous and disruptive.

Either the person is a danger to society, in which case they should be destroyed. Or they aren't in which case, fines and removal of privileges of citizenship should be sufficient.

Detainment should never be a punishment. Merely a measure taken while a trial is held and the facts of the matter determined.

*slow clap*

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Sending people to prison in general is kind of about revenge. Bernie Madoff isn't in jail to be rehabilitated.

But see, I believe prison should be about rehabilitation, which is why I believe all sentences should have the eligibility for parole.

[Jolet]

Death Penalty Info Center Factsheet - My Source

Currently, 31 States in America, as well as the US Federal Government and the United States Military, have Capital Punishment as a criminal penalty in their penal codes. Since 1976, 1'437 convicts have been executed in this country, and there are currently 2943 convicts currently sitting on Death Row, awaiting their sentence. The question on whether the Death Penalty has any place in our modern legal system has been a hotly debated question. My answer to this question is a resounding no - the Death Penalty has no place in the American Legal system.

Firstly, there is the issue of innocence. Our legal system is not perfect, people have been wrongly convicted, and their convictions only overturned years later. These people, despite losing years of their lives, still were able to be released. The problem could be fixed in their cases. When an innocent citizen is executed, there is no turning back. They are dead and we cannot bring them back.

Secondly, statistics show that the application of the Death Penalty has racist overtones. Of the 1437 prisoners executed since 1976, 34.6% have been black - a disproportionate number when compared to the percent African Americans represent in this country. This number is not the result of past transgressions, either. 43% of current Death Row inmates are African American. Far more Black-on-White murderers are sentenced to death than White-on-Black murderers are. Furthermore, studies in several states show that juries are far more likely to sentence a black defendant to death than a white one.

Another issue is cost. In Texas, the average death penalty case cost the state $2.3 Million. Imprisoning the same prisoner for 40 years would cost a third of that. While some would argue that this added cost is worth the deterrence, the death penalty actually provides no real deterrant to murderers. 80% of executions take place south of the Mason-Dixon line, and yet that region has a markedly higher murder rate than the Northern US. It simply isn't economical.

Lastly, I do not believe that it is just for the State to take the life of someone for a crime. We are not accurate judges of a person's future. Prison systems should be about reform and rehabilitation, not punishment and retributiom. While many murderers are threats to society, keeping them in prison keeps them separated from the general population, and keeps us safe. Considering this, the death penalty is wholly unnecessary. If the parent of a murder victim murdered the killer of their child after they had been sentenced to death, we would call that person a murderer. Why is it acceptable for the hand of the state to act as a proxy for revenge? To me, the answer, simply, is "It's not."

So, my opinions are clear on this. I have to ask you, the thoughtful members of NationStates, what do you have to say? Do you support the Death Penalty and think it belongs in modern America, or do you want to see it abolished?

I think that to a certain degree, we are too scared of the death penalty. It exists for a reason- there are those in society that simply cannot function within society anymore, and their debt to society is one that they can never simply fulfill with life imprisonment. Death is the only recourse in that regard.

I am very much for the death penalty. There are a lot of very nasty people on death row, and in my opinion calling them people does the term a disservice. They are animals, and should be put down like dogs. A bullet through the head is probably the quickest and most painless way to do it- and considerably cheaper than a special drug cocktail that makes them feel like they're falling asleep. In theory. Maybe. But a bullet tearing through someone's head faster than the speed of sound is probably going to be a measure more instantaneous, and fast enough that the subject won't feel anything before their demise. The only reason we don't do things like that is because it's messy and it makes us uncomfortable to think of it.

In my mind, it's not about retribution or revenge but justice- if you have committed a crime heinous enough to end up on death row, you must have earned your punishment. Now, misjudgment does occur- the justice system isn't perfect, to say the very least- but where is the justice in rehabilitating anybody who walks in the door? How is it just to take someone who has killed or raped or assaulted over and over again or in such horrific ways that they would otherwise be locked up and then seek to "fix" them, maybe? I don't think that's justice.

Here's a statistic for you. 90% of violent rapes are committed by repeat offenders. That's a staggeringly high number, and that's because they know that they can get away with it again. I am for capital punishment for rapists- animals who cannot control their own impulses deserve to be put down like the feral beasts they are. We mishandle rape on a regular basis- and then, just to add insult to injury, we release rapists back into the population so that they can go and commit violent crime again and again. That doesn't make much sense, if you ask me.

The bottom line is that the death penalty exists to make a statement, but right now the way that we do things regarding that is rather poor and needs work.

[Llamalandia]

As a Christian, I believe the "state has the power to wield the sword". Regardless of how we may feel personally, we must respect the government's decision on the matter. We can try to abolish through peaceful and democratic means, though.

Also, a criminal sentenced to death isn't immediately executed, so they still have time to repent. Don't ministers come and visit them before they are executed? The thief of the cross was sentenced to death on a cross and still repented.

The death penalty can still be used as part of God's plan, like the crucifixion of Jesus or as a test of a person's faith when the governmet threatens to persecute them for their faith.

Didn't the U.S. abolish the death penalty in the past but later brought it back?

Yeah 'repenting' isn't relevant to the actual discussion considering we're talking about law here.

Well to be fair the law may take in to account acknowledgement of guilt, apology, trying to make amends to the family/society in sentencing for instance. Plus there is always executive clemency that may in part be informed by a prisoners repentance. Just sayin ...

[Western Dakota]

My personal view on the death penalty is that it should only be carried out if the person is still a serious threat to the lives of others while in prison. For example, a mob boss or someone along those lines who has been proven to be undeniably guilty of a serious violent crime (such as murder or tortue), who uses their influence to direct serious crimes from in prison (such as having others attempt to kill people who testified against him/her).

[Christian Democrats]

Well, capital punishment is just. It's morally fair to kill a person who has illegally and unjustly deprived another of his life. That said, I'm more of a fan of rehabilitative justice than of retributive justice. Thus, I believe each state should vote to abolish the death penalty.

Secondly, statistics show that the application of the Death Penalty has racist overtones. Of the 1437 prisoners executed since 1976, 34.6% have been black - a disproportionate number when compared to the percent African Americans represent in this country.

In the United States, 52.4% of murderers are blacks. I'm not seeing the racism.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expanded-homicide-data

[Llamalandia]

How about not justice or revenge, but easing the burden on society by eliminating serial killer whackjobs that would rather spend the rest of their days in a cell, feeding off of the resources of the society they've caused nothing but harm to without giving back.

A lot of people executed aren't "Serial Killer Wackjobs." Believe it or not, we actually haven't had more than a 1000 of those in the years since 1977. Anyway, as the fact sheet provided, which I imagine you didn't bother to read, demonstrates, executing someone actually costs society more than imprisoning them does. So no, its not about 'saving resources.'

You think you'll ever be able to let them all back into society safely?

Not all of the 1437 people executed since 1977 were 'Serial Killer Wackjobs.' Quite a lot of them were people who committed murder during a robbery or some other such crime that does not amount to being a serial killer by any stretch. Wrong? Yes. But a lot of them probably could have been reformed and paroled.

Nevermind punishment, executions save decades of mental anguish for inmates

Reform the prison system. I already think that the way prisoners at ADX Florence (Federal Supermax Prison) and other such facilities are horrible. I believe prison should be about rehabilitation.

Now tell me, killing someone suffering from depression, or, at the very least, allowing them to kill themselves, would save them from 'years of mental anguish.' Clearly by your stated logic, that should be legal. Yet that is not how American Law works. Instead, we focus on treating the illness. Crime is no different. We should focus on rehabilitating criminals, not arbitrarily taking their lives. Now, if you support euthanasia for depression victims, then fine - at least you are ideologically consistent. Otherwise you are just being massively hypocritical.

and decades of economic drain on the society that has to feed and medicate them.

As stated above in this post, in the OP, and in the fact sheet which I bet you neglected to read, executions cost society more than imprisonment currently does.

Actually crime and mental illness are different and should be treated differently (admittedly there is some overlap in part, because we wait for untreated mentally ill people to commit crimes and then use the prison system as crude delivery vehicle for mental health service). People choose to commit crimes, they don't choose to be clinically depressed or schizophrenic or bipolar or whatever (I suppose one could argue deliberately avoiding refusing treat,ent is equivalent to "choosing to be mentally ill" but that seems like a stretch). Hence we treat one group and punish the other.