The Death Penalty

[RGBVideo]

nm

[Cyclotron]

Your point? Do you care to add anything, say, explaining why it's wrong, or is that all?

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Agathon
I imagine he will find it hard to get parole (it was 25 to life, but that means 25 in NZ Law - life usually means a minimum of 12 years served or something like that - this was an extreme case).

There was some special circumstance such that he can be released but kept under permanent surveillance. A moot point really, the guy will be eligible for retirement once he gets out.

I wouldn't feel safe with him on the streets if he were 90. I know several old folks who are spry enough to knife me in the back if they wanted to.

Except it is. All the other semi-coherent arguments rely on metaphysical or religious fictions, or retributivism. None of these work, so we are left with deterrence.

Clearly people, within this thread even, have been pro-DP for other reasons, whether you find them valid or not.

The death penalty costs a lot more to administer than life in prison. The cost in lawyers' fees alone is astronomical. The death penalty is less efficient than imprisonment. That is the main reason for rejecting it.

In my mind, the main reasons for rejecting it are 1) the possiblity of executing innocent people and 2) the dubious moral status of execution to begin with (which I haven't brought up in this thread, because I know it's quite subjective). Cost analysis, to me, comes up a distant 3rd.

[Japher]

Saying the DP is wrong because the judicial system is messed up is a bad argument since the judicial system and the penal system are not the same thing.

I agree that it would be wrong to kill some one for a crime you aren't sure they committed. However, if you see some dude walk up and blow off some one elses head and says "I did it because they made me mad, and if I had to do it over I would", I'd kill that guy.

[SlowwHand]

"The death penalty costs a lot more to administer than life in prison. The cost in lawyers' fees alone is astronomical."

Back we go to the appeals process, even if unwarranted and unwanted.
Like a tennis match.

[RGBVideo]

Your point? Do you care to add anything, say, explaining why it's wrong, or is that all?

I thought you were curious enough to try to actually read other people's posts in the thread in order to learn if your argument is valid or not -- guess I was wrong. No point at all. Sorry, that was a mistake.

[ajbera]

I find it amusing that some folks think putting a person to sleep is cruel and inhumane, whereas sentencing him to spend the rest of his life in a hellhole where he'll be beaten and violently sodomized is the morally superior option.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by VJ
I thought you were curious enough to try to actually read other people's posts in the thread in order to learn if your argument is valid or not -- guess I was wrong. No point at all. Sorry, that was a mistake.

In this thread, yes. In the "last thread," whatever that might be - and considering there have probably been a hundred threads on this topic since I registered here - no thanks.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by ajbera
I find it amusing that some folks think putting a person to sleep is cruel and inhumane, whereas sentencing him to spend the rest of his life in a hellhole where he'll be beaten and violently sodomized is the morally superior option.

It's not as if those people approve violent sodomy and beatings. Defects in the prison system are a different can of worms.

[ajbera]

Which then leads us back to the question of what an acceptable punishment is. It's easy to say what we feel is not acceptable, but then what is the best way to punish a serial killer? Is locking them up in an environment where they'll be beaten and raped acceptable? If the beatings and rape are unacceptable, is merely being separated from society really a punishment? Is it a punishment that reflects the severity of the crime?

[Japher]

IMO, a serial killer has one of two problems;

a) they are mentally deranged and need psycological treatment. IMO, full recovery is possible, maybe not with todays treatments or technology, but eventually. In these cases, they will currently be receiving life sentences, but the issue then turns to psychomumbojumbo and not DP issues.

b) they are just jerks, who have no psychosis and will just keep doing it because they are creeps. In this case crime prevention is a good alternative to DP. You keep saying DP is a deterent, what about prevention of the crime? Ongoing public humiliation? 24 Automated Servalence, etc...? Expensive now, but not when 1984 rolls around and we have military control of the entire country. If some kid robs a bank and is running away cops should be able to open fire without saying anything... ppl will be less likely to try something if they think the gov will preempt them.

The best defense is a good offense.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by ajbera
Which then leads us back to the question of what an acceptable punishment is. It's easy to say what we feel is not acceptable, but then what is the best way to punish a serial killer? Is locking them up in an environment where they'll be beaten and raped acceptable? If the beatings and rape are unacceptable, is merely being separated from society really a punishment? Is it a punishment that reflects the severity of the crime?

Since serial killers cannot be rehabilitated, they must be removed from society. This can be done through killing them or through long term imprisonment. With this type of crime, I don't even think about what is an appropriate punishment - you can't find some fine or finite jail term that equates to the deeds of a mass murderer, and do amount of punishment will teach him that his actions were wrong and make a reformed felon out of him. Thus, his sentence must depend on the needs of society, which must be protected from him.

I don't think beatings and rape are things we should allow to happen in our prisons; even serial killers shouldn't be subjected to that. That said, the fact that prisons are not ideal is not in itself a reason to support the execution of these prisoners.

[ajbera]

Japher, that doesn't really answer my questions, but for your info, less than 10% of serial killers are legally insane, in that they were unaware of the illegality of their actions. The remainder are psychopaths/sociopaths/"sufferers" of anti-social personality disorder, call it what you will. Prevention is difficult because nobody is certain what causes sociopathy (I tend to think it's nature + nurture, in their case.)

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Cyclotron


Since serial killers cannot be rehabilitated, they must be removed from society. This can be done through killing them or through long term imprisonment. With this type of crime, I don't even think about what is an appropriate punishment - you can't find some fine or finite jail term that equates to the deeds of a mass murderer, and do amount of punishment will teach him that his actions were wrong and make a reformed felon out of him. Thus, his sentence must depend on the needs of society, which must be protected from him.

I don't think beatings and rape are things we should allow to happen in our prisons; even serial killers shouldn't be subjected to that. That said, the fact that prisons are not ideal is not in itself a reason to support the execution of these prisoners.

No, but it raises an interesting concept. If they must be removed from society, and prison is not a deterrent nor does it provide rehabilitation, then the only issue left is a moral one of which Agathon (and presumably others, though not necessarily yourself) derrides as an invalid justification for the death penalty.

[Cyclotron]

The point is taken, though I still maintain that at least life imprisonment gives us a better chance to give wrongfully accused people some of their life back. And I think Agathon would bring up the cost issue - though personally, I don't think the cost and ineffectiveness of the appeals process is a real indictment of the death penalty. With a reformed appeals process, execution could conceivably become the cheaper option.