Should the death penalty's "appeals process" be scrapped?

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

You can never have too much due process.

Yes you can. We have people who's guilt is beyond dispute and they're on death row for decades. Only a small percentage of people on death row are innocent, but we have problems putting serial killers down.

I'm for due process, but it can be taken too far. People like Richard Ramirez should have been quickly executed.

The justice system shouldn’t be used as a tool for vengeance, that would be the definition of cruel and unusual.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Yes you can. We have people who's guilt is beyond dispute and they're on death row for decades. Only a small percentage of people on death row are innocent, but we have problems putting serial killers down.

I'm for due process, but it can be taken too far. People like Richard Ramirez should have been quickly executed.

The justice system shouldn’t be used as a tool for vengeance, that would be the definition of cruel and unusual.

Cruel and unusual means you cannot have someone impailed, burned alive, crucified, whipped to death, etc. It doesn't prevent punishments that are merely harsh, or at least it's not supposed to.

[The New California Republic]

The justice system shouldn’t be used as a tool for vengeance, that would be the definition of cruel and unusual.

Cruel and unusual means you cannot have someone impailed, burned alive, crucified, whipped to death, etc. It doesn't prevent punishments that are merely harsh, or at least it's not supposed to.

Wrong. Justice Brennan gave the following four things to define it:

• The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity", especially torture.
  
• A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion.
  
• A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society.
  
• A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary.

[Ifreann]

Abolish life sentences.

To be fair, in an ideal world yes. Life sentences make no damn sense, because without the appeals process, there isn't really any hope of getting it overturned.

Might as well just kill them. For all the difference it makes.

I'd rather not kill people. Seems rude.

---

Abolish life sentences.

Ya no. Life sentences should replace the death penalty

Nothing should replace the death penalty.

---

Abolish life sentences.

Would this mean that unrehabilitatable criminals would be let out on the streets after their sentences were up? In Brazil, the maximum penalty is 30 years, and some Brazilian serial killer said that he would go back to killing once his time was up

It would mean that we wouldn't have a carceral, punitive system at all. When someone does something wrong and hurts other people, our aim should not be to hurt that person in turn, it should be to help those involved, both victims and perpetrators. We should be trying to prevent future harm and undo or recover from past harms, not trying to inflict more harm.

---

Would this mean that unrehabilitatable criminals would be let out on the streets after their sentences were up? In Brazil, the maximum penalty is 30 years, and some Brazilian serial killer said that he would go back to killing once his time was up

But apparently some people believe that life in prison is inherently cruel and unusual.

It's not unusual, there are quite a few people serving life sentences, but it clearly is cruel. It wouldn't be done otherwise. But you should keep in mind that people who oppose life sentences do not necessarily believe that the violate the US Constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Cruel and unusual means you cannot have someone impailed, burned alive, crucified, whipped to death, etc. It doesn't prevent punishments that are merely harsh, or at least it's not supposed to.

Wrong. Justice Brennan gave the following four things to define it:

• The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity", especially torture.
  
• A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion.
  
• A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society.
  
• A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary.

To be honest most of those tenants don't really conflict with my perception of the amendment. I just have a tenancy to list the most extreme examples of abuse only. Regardless, that does not make the death penalty for murder unconstitutional. I'm not advocating torture nor a torturous death.

Capital punishment is harsh but not unconstitutional when given to murderers.

[Asle Leopolka]

1. The appeals process absolutely should not be scrapped; the advent of DNA evidence demonstrated just how essential it is.
2. The death penalty should not be scrapped. While I'm a firm believer in rehabilitation over punishment, I also acknowledge there's just no fixing some people and they should be put down.

[Necroghastia]

Wrong. Justice Brennan gave the following four things to define it:

• The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity", especially torture.
  
• A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion.
  
• A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society.
  
• A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary.

To be honest most of those tenants don't really conflict with my perception of the amendment. I just have a tenancy to list the most extreme examples of abuse only. Regardless, that does not make the death penalty for murder unconstitutional. I'm not advocating torture nor a torturous death.

Capital punishment is harsh but not unconstitutional when given to murderers.

I'd argue that, aside from the third bullet point, capital punishment easily meets those requirements. You are killing someone, which I would certainly call degrading to human dignity, both that of the convict and the executioner. It is arbitrary and patently unnecessary, as practically speaking the only thing it accomplishes is sating some vengeance-induced bloodlust.

[The Reformed American Republic]

To be honest most of those tenants don't really conflict with my perception of the amendment. I just have a tenancy to list the most extreme examples of abuse only. Regardless, that does not make the death penalty for murder unconstitutional. I'm not advocating torture nor a torturous death.

Capital punishment is harsh but not unconstitutional when given to murderers.

I'd argue that, aside from the third bullet point, capital punishment easily meets those requirements. You are killing someone, which I would certainly call degrading to human dignity, both that of the convict and the executioner. It is arbitrary and patently unnecessary, as practically speaking the only thing it accomplishes is sating some vengeance-induced bloodlust.

It is necessary as many criminals do pose a threat to society even when imprisoned. Ted Bundy was an escape artist and some people order hits in prison. I don't think it is degrading to human dignaty either. It's not like it's a public humiliation or spectical filled with torture. It's a scumbag facing punishment.

[The New California Republic]

I'd argue that, aside from the third bullet point, capital punishment easily meets those requirements. You are killing someone, which I would certainly call degrading to human dignity, both that of the convict and the executioner. It is arbitrary and patently unnecessary, as practically speaking the only thing it accomplishes is sating some vengeance-induced bloodlust.

It is necessary as many criminals do pose a threat to society even when imprisoned. Ted Bundy was an escape artist and some people order hits in prison. I don't think it is degrading to human dignaty either. It's not like it's a public humiliation or spectical filled with torture. It's a scumbag facing punishment.

That's a prison reform issue, not an argument for the death penalty. So no, it isn't necessary.

[The Reformed American Republic]

It is necessary as many criminals do pose a threat to society even when imprisoned. Ted Bundy was an escape artist and some people order hits in prison. I don't think it is degrading to human dignaty either. It's not like it's a public humiliation or spectical filled with torture. It's a scumbag facing punishment.

That's a prison reform issue, not an argument for the death penalty. So no, it isn't necessary.

Or we can kill the most dangerous murderers. You are free to not like the death penalty but it does not violate the eighth amendment. Our supreme court has visited the issue numerous times.

[Ifreann]

Wrong. Justice Brennan gave the following four things to define it:

• The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity", especially torture.
  
• A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion.
  
• A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society.
  
• A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary.

To be honest most of those tenants don't really conflict with my perception of the amendment. I just have a tenancy to list the most extreme examples of abuse only. Regardless, that does not make the death penalty for murder unconstitutional. I'm not advocating torture nor a torturous death.

Capital punishment is harsh but not unconstitutional when given to murderers.

You should still stop executing people, regardless of it being permitted by your constitution.

[Salandriagado]

Prison is bad, therefore the state should have far greater power to kill people it doesn't like. Strange, strange reasoning.

Does make sense for certain crimes. Prison rapists, for example - putting them to death would improve the conditions for other prisoners and make prisons more safe.

I don't see why those would differ from other rapes: applying the death penalty just leads to rape victims becoming rape+murder victims.

[The New California Republic]

That's a prison reform issue, not an argument for the death penalty. So no, it isn't necessary.

Or we can kill the most dangerous murderers. You are free to not like the death penalty but it does not violate the eighth amendment. Our supreme court has visited the issue numerous times.

Or we could not do that. And it actually did violate the Constitution until the various states squirmed out of it.

[Very High IQ]

It would mean that we wouldn't have a carceral, punitive system at all. When someone does something wrong and hurts other people, our aim should not be to hurt that person in turn, it should be to help those involved, both victims and perpetrators. We should be trying to prevent future harm and undo or recover from past harms, not trying to inflict more harm.

Is life imprisonment not the best method of preventing future harm in some cases? Some criminals should not be rehabilitated and reintroduced into society because of the risk that would cause

[Jedi Council]

The death penalty should just be scrapped.

[Ifreann]

It would mean that we wouldn't have a carceral, punitive system at all. When someone does something wrong and hurts other people, our aim should not be to hurt that person in turn, it should be to help those involved, both victims and perpetrators. We should be trying to prevent future harm and undo or recover from past harms, not trying to inflict more harm.

Is life imprisonment not the best method of preventing future harm in some cases?

No.

Some criminals should not be rehabilitated and reintroduced into society because of the risk that would cause

We should never, as a society, decide that there are some people that we will imprison until they die. If we must imprison people, and we should only do so if we absolutely must, they we should always aim to do so temporarily and for the minimum amount of time possible. Imprisoning people is harm, we should be avoiding it wherever possible. We should always be trying to help those people we must imprison to find a way to live freely without hurting other people. Maybe there will be some individuals who, despite a lifetime of effort, will never be able to live freely. Maybe we will try for decades to help them and fail. Personally I don't think that's remotely likely, I don't buy the idea that the perpetrators of certain especially heinous crimes can never be rehabilitated and can only ever be prevented from committing further heinous crimes by imprisoning them, but if there are such people then we shouldn't give up on them and sentence them to a lifetime in a cage without even trying to help them.

[Risottia]

Why not scrap the appeals process and tell the trial judge to get it right the first time?

Why not scrap trials and tell the police to get it right the first time? I'm sure it will just solve everything.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

To be honest most of those tenants don't really conflict with my perception of the amendment. I just have a tenancy to list the most extreme examples of abuse only.

Tenets, and tendency ... sorry, it just caught my eye.

[The Reformed American Republic]

To be honest most of those tenants don't really conflict with my perception of the amendment. I just have a tenancy to list the most extreme examples of abuse only.

Tenets, and tendency ... sorry, it just caught my eye.

That's what happens when I post on my phone and mistype something, only for the crappy spellcheck to make an incorrect assumption and change the word.

[State of Turelisa]

I think it's crueller to coup up a convicted murderer for the rest of his life in harsh and spartan conditions than to hang, gas, electrocute or kill him with a lethal poison. The long wait of years for execution in prison conditions is a misery which the convict's choice to delay the inevitable with appeals inflicts upon him. Therefore, as was the case when capital punishment was used in Britain,there should be one appeal to the head of the Justice Department, and within a fixed time, and its decision final.

[Necroghastia]

I think it's crueller to coup up a convicted murderer for the rest of his life in harsh and spartan conditions than to hang, gas, electrocute or kill him with a lethal poison. The long wait of years for execution in prison conditions is a misery which the convict's choice to delay the inevitable with appeals inflicts upon him. Therefore, as was the case when capital punishment was used in Britain,there should be one appeal to the head of the Justice Department, and within a fixed time, and its decision final.

And that's a very, very good way to get innocent people killed.

[Genivaria]

No but the death penalty should be scrapped.

[Purpelia]

Honestly I think you should just do what the OP said and make sure you got it right the first time. That is to say if you want to have a death penalty only ever apply it when there is evidence above and beyond the normal burden of proof for guilt to the point where it is literally proven without any doubt at all that the guy did it. Like say if you have a mass shooter caught on video shooting people and than the police grab him as he fumbles to reload or something. And you have it all on tape complete with the smoking gun in hand. Or like when you capture a child molester in the act complete with a cache of home videos. Stuff like that.

[Ifreann]

Honestly I think you should just do what the OP said and make sure you got it right the first time.

I don't know why people don't just decide not to make mistakes.

[The Rich Port]

Take away the possibility of not being murdered by the state on accident?

Sounds like a great idea. /sarcasm

I think it's crueller to coup up a convicted murderer for the rest of his life in harsh and spartan conditions than to hang, gas, electrocute or kill him with a lethal poison. The long wait of years for execution in prison conditions is a misery which the convict's choice to delay the inevitable with appeals inflicts upon him. Therefore, as was the case when capital punishment was used in Britain,there should be one appeal to the head of the Justice Department, and within a fixed time, and its decision final.

So how about we don't make prison so miserable instead of murdering people.

That's what rehabilitation is all about, after all.