Should the Death Penalty be abolished

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
All over the place? No, I have a coherent nuanced position. My first post stated that as currently constructed I would abolish the death penalty (kills to many innocents, costs to much, and takes to long to kill the guilty), that said I do believe in the death penalty, and would support it if competently manage.

Only liberals could take a good idea (which they disagree with) then enact it so badly that their incompetence is their justification for not enacting said idea..
First you say no as it currently is, then you say kill them get it over with. Yeah all over the place.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,732
Agreed, but as currently enacted it still costs more. Better to be canceled than the status quo, but better than both would be some damn judicial and penal (ha) reform.
I have already said that I think the process should be faster and cheaper to get them to the death chair. Argue it from another angle, or we just are agreeing.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,732
Yes what other purpose is there. The comments in here have reinforced that opinion.
Deterrence, restitution, moral regard, immoral control, etc.
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
I don't believe I mentioned revenge. Done properly it is just the most expeditious route to eliminate those who have invalidated their right to live in and be over from society.
You have not, although your kill them and be done with it comment makes me wonder .
 
Last edited:

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
I have already said that I think the process should be faster and cheaper to get them to the death chair. Argue it from another angle, or we just are agreeing.
The only difference I can see in our positions is I do believe a significant % of those convicted of crimes are innocent, so if I am killing people and leaving no room for recourse, then I want as strict of a line as possible. And I am fine with some borderline cases being given life in prison. I mean even eliminating the borderline cases, we would still be executing more with the more efficient process, which we both think should be enacted.
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
First you say no as it currently is, then you say kill them get it over with. Yeah all over the place.
That is only all over the place if you can't step back and look at the whole picture.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,732
The only difference I can see in our positions is I do believe a significant % of those convicted of crimes are innocent, so if I am killing people and leaving no room for recourse, then I want as strict of a line as possible. And I am fine with some borderline cases being given life in prison. I mean even eliminating the borderline cases, we would still be executing more with the more efficient process, which we both think should be enacted.
I would like to see the percentages of the innocent people executed versus guilty.
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
Deterrence, restitution, moral regard, immoral control, etc.
Restitution how? There is no proof it is deterrence to a crime or will control the immoral. Moral regard for the victim, how does capital punishment accomplish that where as life in prison does not?
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,732
Restitution how? There is no proof it is deterrence to a crime or will control the immoral. Moral regard for the victim, how does capital punishment accomplish that where as life in prison does not?
Do you have proof that it isn't a deterrent? I would stack my chips on it being a much better deterrent than not.

Death is a much better deterrent than having your way paid the rest of your life instead of having to earn it... kinda like the life most of them were living before they killed someone.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,732
Well, that is hard. When people are known innocent, thy are rarely executed.
I meant the ones that were killed that turned out innocent. I would like to see that.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,732

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
A dozen over the history of the death penalty? I would say we don't need 12 innocent deaths to predicate justification of further appeals.
No, since 1973, which puts it at 1% of the time we are pretty sure we got it wrong, and 10% of the time we almost get it wrong
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
Do you have proof that it isn't a deterrent? I would stack my chips on it being a much better deterrent than not.

Death is a much better deterrent than having your way paid the rest of your life instead of having to earn it... kinda like the life most of them were living before they killed someone.
Make them earn it. Put them to work. I have no issue with that.

Since 1993 states without the death penalty have fewer murders
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
I do not advocate more alles, I argue for a striver burden if proof. I agree with 1 appeal
 
Top Bottom