Claudius

You brought up the subject in a previous thread. Not to hijack it, I thought we might discuss it here.

It seems a majority of people are against it. mainly for religious and moral reasons. I am against it for another reason. Let me explain:

1. Fact: nobody knows what happens after you die, to your soul or mind or whatever you want to call it. Some believe in heaven and hell, some dont. Fact is, no one knows.

2. Therefore, we do not know if death is a relief or a punishment.

3. Given these two FACTS, we cannot be sure that killing someone is actually a punishment! In other words, it may not be a punishment to kill someone.

In the light of these thoughts, why would you apply death penalty when you know what happens when you lock someone up till the end of his or her life? (crap food, bad health, sodomy, **** TV prgs if at all, etc)

Any thoughts, agreements / disagreements?

imatrukahs

I agree with you!,What about the Sept 11 incident..the hijackers positively thought it was good to die,and that they would go to a better place.

So i guess its down to religion....

I say life in prison is far worse than death...whatever...

Claudius

The Al Quaida thing is true. But my point was that even without religious convictions like these, it is impossible to know and therefore not a punishment for sure.

I am a little sad to see that as soon as the conversation gets deeper, only very few individuals such as yourself are able to express a sound opinion. No reply usually implies agreement...

Phill

Only one problem with what you guys are saying......What do you do instead?

Who are you really punsihing if it costs us £60,000 a year to keep them locked up, and as is the US prison system is vastly over crowded not unlike the UK's. They get free rent, food, and water and can even earn themselves cash in prison (leaglly)hell we even throw in free training for new skills.

I know people that deliberately get sent down because it easyier than living on the dole (Scum i know - different subject)although killing people should be a last resort sometimes i find it harder to justify keeping these people alive when we could be curing cancer or something equally usefull with the millions spent each year.......something needs to happen and quickly and i would not rule out the death sentance.

LA have a three crimes and a min 25 yr sentance policy, perhaps there should be three strikes and ya dead, that should cut down on overcrowding !!

Without thinking about this too much, things need to change cos the present system in the US and UK is at breaking point but what do you do, I personally are not happy with my tax's going up to look after then sudden increase in peadophiles (spelling !!) or simular (you get the point, i hope).

Thats my 2p's worth, but it just aint right !

Phill

Phill

Only one problem with what you guys are saying......What do you do instead?

Who are you really punsihing if it costs us £60,000 a year to keep them locked up, and as is the US prison system is vastly over crowded not unlike the UK's. They get free rent, food, and water and can even earn themselves cash in prison (leaglly)hell we even throw in free training for new skills.

I know people that deliberately get sent down because it easyier than living on the dole (Scum i know - different subject)although killing people should be a last resort sometimes i find it harder to justify keeping these people alive when we could be curing cancer or something equally usefull with the millions spent each year.......something needs to happen and quickly and i would not rule out the death sentance.

LA have a three crimes and a min 25 yr sentance policy, perhaps there should be three strikes and ya dead, that should cut down on overcrowding !!

Without thinking about this too much, things need to change cos the present system in the US and UK is at breaking point but what do you do, I personally are not happy with my tax's going up to look after then sudden increase in peadophiles (spelling !!) or similar (you get the point, i hope).

Thats my 2p's worth, but it just aint right !

Phill

Claudius

Phill,

If you want to discuss the budgeting of our penitentiaries, that's fine. But not directly related to the point here. We are not talking about the practical issues of the current system. Just trying to find out whether death penalty is a punishment or not, other than the few minutes of fear before the actual execution happens.

Phill

Fair comment.......

However he or she is still dead and not able to commit any crime again or generally be alive (gee brain), as such if you were to say your are stopping somebody from seeing there family, or eating a KFC then surely that is a punishment in it's purest sense, wheter they deserve better or less does not really com into it.

So in short yes, in my mind the death sentance is a punishment.

Cheers,

Phill

Claudius

Does anyone else have a deeper thought on why death is a punishment (if it is!) other than not being able to eat fried chicken?

NumptyScrub

For the death penalty:

It prevents the criminal re-offending
It serves as a warning to other criminals
It frees up a space in the prison

Against the death penalty:

There's no guarantee it is a punishment for the criminal concerned
It introduces a difficult to defend moral standpoint into the legal system
Criminals become more desperate to evade capture

The pro's are fairly self explanatory, as for the cons...

As Claudius proposes above, there is no way to be "scientifically" sure if killing someone is actually punishing them or not. To avoid this becoming a religious debate (unless that was its intent ), it would depend on the belief of the criminal as to whether what he had done would condemn him to hell, or guarantee his place in heaven (like the Al Quaeda).

Although the definition of crimes is loosely based on a "common moral definition", it is in the interests of the legal system to avoid morality issues wherever possible. Judges shy away from moral judgements wherever possible, in order to avoid lengthy lawsuits concerning how their own moral views (when used to sentence plaintiffs) may not be in the "common interest". So how are they meant to draw the line where killing another human for their acts is justified, and where it is not? Because someone will always argue that the defined line is too far one way or the other, and will use this argument *in court* to push their own point across. (btw, I am in no way associated with the legal profession, so I could be talking out of my a$$ here)

Lastly, if a criminal knows they will be killed for their crime if captured, they will be more likely to take drastic measures to avoid capture. If car theft is punishable by death, the car thief will kill to escape. What can he lose in the extra sentencing if he is eventually caught? For this reason, you would have to be extremely careful about what was "punishable" by death, just in order to protect the public and the law enforcement officials from desperate criminals.

Definitely a deep topic this, Claudius... still not sure whether you wanted a "is the death penalty justified" discussion, or a "is the death penalty morally/religiously right" one.

Derek

Claudius

You are welcome to express yourself freely!

I wanted your educated opinion on this interesting matter, that's all. No religious debate, since this is a matter of justice and common sense / thinking. If, however, you feel religion fits in here somehow, you are most welcome to explain how and why.

Thank you for overcoming the fried chicken issue!

[Edited by Claudius - 3/13/2002 7:10:24 PM]

drumsterphil

iTrader: (1)

Irrespective of a person's religious beliefs I would imagine that faced with their imminent death anybody would be terrified, even if only for a split second.

Whether a person's death leads to their arriving at some other-wordly place is in my opinion irrelevant. The death penalty should be used because on this plain of existence that person can no longer commit crime or re-offend.

That is why the death penalty should be used, along with trying to act as a deterrent for other people to commit crime.

This is all my opinion of course!
DP.

Claudius

I think you missed the point slightly. We are trying to find out if death penalty is actually a punishment, not if it will free the society from one particular criminal.

jasey

The woman in Houston who drowned her 5 kids was found guilty today and will be sentenced in the next few days. As the court decided she wasn't insane killing her would not, in my opinion, be punishment - if she's not insane she's going through hell ! If however she is insane ...

drumsterphil

iTrader: (1)

Claudius - you ask whether the Death Penalty is a punishment or not. Can I suggest that you are only looking at one side. Take this scenario -

Murderer believes that by dying he will go to heaven or whatever his equivalent is according to his philosophy/religion.

The victim's family, on the other hand, believe in An Eye For An Eye and that by being put to death punishment is wrought.

So from their point of view, the death penalty is punishment. What you meet or where you go when you die depends on your beliefs and it cannot be proved what happens to somebody when they die so each party takes comfort in their own view point.

DP.


DP.

Claudius

Absolutely.

But which point of view do you think is the right one?

That's the question!

You know what I suggested and you explained how the victim's families see it. What do YOU think?

drumsterphil

iTrader: (1)

If you read my first post you will see what I think -

"The death penalty should be used because on this plain of existence that person can no longer commit crime or re-offend"

No religious beliefs, call it society's redemption against a gross wrong-doing, an eye for an eye or whatever, I'm not a religious person so beliefs do not come into it. What the parties concerned feel is their business.

DP.

Claudius

FYI, we usually call it the "Law of Retaliation".

I am sorry if I couldnt state my idea clearly. What I meant is do you think it is actually a punishment, not do you think it is the right thing to do.

Nobody questions the fact that a dead criminal wont offend again. But is a dead criminal a punished one?

Phill

Claudius,
I feel that your question as drumsterphill said could have many possible inflections, moraly, legally, personally. And although the chicken comment lowered the tone it was meant to strip the question of the above inflections and look at it in it's most basic sense.


If you restrict somebody actions, ground your child for instance that is a punishment....so in the same sense any other inflection aside, the death penalty has to be considered a punishment as it strips us of our most basic human rights.

This thread has really opened up a can of worms but i have enjoyed reading it.

Cheers,

Phill

Geezer

Is death a punishment? Wow, that's a tough one! For most I would say yes, but you could also argue that the only real punishment is to deny someone they really struggle to do without. That is impractical to administer, so we lock em up as a catch all.

I would have to say though I, and most people I know would struggle to have an effective life if they were dead

Geezer

Claudius

Well, if you're dead you cant have fun with sheep anymore, that's for sure. Not down here anyway...

OK, back on topic. No one know what happens after you die, if it's good or bad, right? Sure, you wont be able to do what you do here, but what will you do afterwards? No one knows, so why would it necessarily be a punishment?

Phill

Claudius,
Most things in life have boundaries, hot and cold etc... sheep are over the mark ...... but seriously

Interesting really it's a bit Space (no really !!) as far humans understand something has to be somewhere in order to exisit, we live on planet Earth for example, but where is space ? a large part of our understanding of this world is based on assumptions.

As we cannot guess where space is, or what happens when you die we have to take assumption's, and i assume that death is a penalty IMHO.

Cheers,

Phill

Claudius

Well the problem is nobody here would kill you so you find out because you wouldnt be able to come back to enlighten us. Now since you assume it is a penalty, we need another candidate. Any volunteers?