- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
Caylee thread got me thinking. I am staunchly against the death penalty. It is a topic I actually studied quite a bit in undergrad and wrote a few academic papers on, and then I worked on it a bit in law school too-- although now I work in civil law. I find it an interesting topic though because unlike a lot of other hotly debated political items (like say-- abortion) it doesn't seem to fall as much along party lines. Sure MORE conservatives are pro death penalty than liberals... but I've found serious blurring of the lines and a lot of cross-over.
So, I'm curious about what the hive thinks, and why. This IS a thread for differing opinions and I'll respect both sides of the fence... but lets try to keep it civil.
I could (and have) write pages and pages on this but to try to be concise, the biggest reasons I do not believe in the death penalty are:
1) It costs more to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life
2) The inherent and irreversible risk of executing an innocent person (see: illinois)
3) There is absolutely no proof that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to violent crime
4) The death penalty is applied in wildly disproportionate way (when looking at both offender and victim)
5) In a completely personal way, causing the death of ANYONE feels wrong
6) I believe that living every day in a cage is worse than simply dying
i'll just quote Gandalf--
“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.”
Generally, no I do not believe in it. But there are a few exceptions where I think "wow, that person did something so incredibly, disgustingly, horrifically inhumane that I support their death". But these thoughts are few and far between, are almost always cases that involve children, and is not something I vocally support, even if the thought flits around for a moment or two.
ETA: Generally I believe that life behind bars is a more suitable punishment than death.
I am against it because of reason number 2 - this is just as horrible as the crime itself.
I'm against the death penalty. If a viciious, horrible rapist/child molester/murderer happened to die in a natural way, I certainly wouldn't cry over their death. But I don't think it's okay to institutionalize killing someone. It's not the government's place.
@Mrs Sarah McK: I agree, they should have to live out their years thinking about their crime(s).
I am going against the grain when One of your BEST friends and a great person gets shot it the back of the head 3 times for NO REASON a prison sentence just doesnt seem like enough....
@MsPanda: I really think that's what causes some line blurring. Objectively, killing seems wrong, but subjectively, it's hard not to want the swiftest, most complete vengence available.
@MsPanda: I agree with you (although I have never had to go through the violent loss of someone close to me - I'm sorry about your friend).
Some people, through their actions towards others, no longer deserve to live and breathe on this earth, getting to be visited by friends and loved ones while the people they've killed are forever gone and their loved ones never get to see or speak to them again.
I am against it. Personally, I feel like they should live a long horrible life. Like get solitary confinement for the rest of their life. I dunno, to me, it seems like death is an easy way out.
I am against it for those same reasons, plus the fact that race is such a huge factor in the way it is applied in the US. I just think the state's power to deprive a person of life should be as strictly limited as possible (legal wars, defense of self or others).
That said, I KNOW if someone I cared about was murdered, I would feel the same as MsPanda. I just don't think that those (entirely understandable, justified) emotions should be the basis for policy making. For instance, emotionally I think rapists should have their dicks cut off. Ethically, that is not an acceptable government policy.
I'm for it.
Some criminals are not rehabilitatable, there is no reason for them to continue to exist.
That being said, I think that more focus and emphasis needs to be put on criminal rehabilitation.
Also, if someone is given the death penalty, it should not be expensive. I believe it should be a quick couple of shots and be done.
Death is the easy way out for a many people, but you know, I'm ok with that . Many people get very comfortable in prison. They get institutionalized and are content being in prison, so even life in prison doesn't always work out to be the punishment that is deserved.
I think if there is any possible way the person might be innocent, then no, the death penalty is not the answer. But if the person is a dangerous repeat offender and there is irrefutable proof of their crimes? Why bother spending money feeding, clothing and housing someone who has taken multiple lives and shows absolutely no sign of remorse for what they have done? I don't find it inhumane to dispose of someone who has no humanity left in them. I also agree with Tunacupcakes that executions should not be so expensive.
I'm on the fence when it comes to the death penalty. While I do feel that people who commit heinous crimes deserve to die, I also think that in some cases death is the easy way out.
Hypothetically speaking lets say a man rapes and kills a child. From what I gather, child molestation and murder is rather frowned upon amongst fellow inmates. Should we give this man the death penalty so his "suffering" (i.e. prison life) ends or do we make him live out the rest of his days having to pay for what he did?
@CorgiTales: I am very surprised that you say it costs more to execute then to keep someone in prison for life. How is that possible???
I am for it. Some people shouldn't be allowed to live out there days in jail, where some are still able to live some semble of a free life. They are still able to deal drugs, call for killings, etc.
@MrsSl82be: It doesn't seem possible, but I believe the appeals process makes it more costly to execute.
@brittromance: That's another thing I have a huge problem with. People should not be allowed to have so many appeals, especially when it is obvious that they are guilty. You shouldn't be allowed to get even a second chance
@MrsSl82be: How can you say that, when there have been so many people exonerated on Death Row, some AFTER they've been put to death?!
I was mostly undecided until I watched the documentary After Innocence, it's about people who were exonerated years later by DNA evidence. Now I am against it, for the many uncertainties the film presented. I do understand and appreciate people's arguments for it, but I personally feel like the justice system isn't perfect and there always exists a risk of putting someone wrongly to death.
I'm for the death penalty. I think all violent crime offenders should be killed asap after conviction.
But, I live in an area where a few hundred criminals were just released because of a computer malfunction, and there is no effort to recapture them. Prison overpopulation in this area is a huge issue and the subject of releasing violent offenders because there isn't enough space is enough to make me sick.
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/state&id=8153049
Reduce 30,000 inmantes.... hmm.... kill them or let them go? Let's let them go! We don't need to protect innocent lives or children. Let's give the monsters their freedom...
I am for it, in extreme cases. It pisses me off that our tax dollars pay to keep these people alive in prison.
The way i look at it I will never see my freind again he was my best friend who never even got to meet my youngest wont be able to be my man of honor for my wedding and all of us are left suffering from that loss but the Person who did this to him is in jail getting 3 meals a day showers ect and visits from friends and family To me THAT IS NOT FAIR.
His mother lost her only son her only chance at grandchildren (after already loosing her husband to cancer)
I and so many other people lost a great friend
and There is a girl out there who still crys every day that her Fi was murdered.
BUT the scumbag that did this to him gets weekly visits from his girlfriend and family I thing that if death isnt fair look at the alternitive is that fair?
@mightywombat: If they are guilty, I agree. Yes, I understand quite a few people from years ago were exonerated, but that's because technology is so advanced now. What are the stats on people who are found guilty now??? How many of those people would actually be proved innocent?? I didn't say every single person should not be able to get an appeal, but when there is so much evidence that its no doubt, they should not be able to get an appeal.
@MaraBeth:What if a person is convicted though through a mountain of DNA evidence? That would truly seem beyond a reasonable doubt.
I feel I'm on the fence still but it should definitely only happen if there is irrefutable DNA evidence. But for those that think life in prison is worse than death then please explain why there are more appeals just because the sentence is death? I should think it's because death is worse right? That's why they allow more appeals and a second punishment hearing. Otherwise it would be the same for all punishments.
@MrsSl82be: That's not how it works, though. The only way the evidence has a chance to come out is through appeals. And it's not just about more sophisticated technology - it's also about evidence that emerges years later about cops, prosecutors, or witnesses who lied, withheld evidence, or otherwise misled to get the conviction.
The justice system is made up of very fallible humans, from the police to the jury. I believe in the principle that "better 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent suffer."
@Tunacupcakes: But who are we as a society to decide who can and can't be rehabilitated?? Thats one of my problems with the death penalty - i agree with you that there are probably people/criminals who can't be rehabilitated...how to we separate them from those who can be, and decide that they should be killed?
@MrsSl82be: As PPs have said, the appeals process costs several times what 20-30 years in prison would cost. Most people on death row have legal aid so that comes at taxpayer's expense (and thats another point - WHY do most people on death row have legal aid? Why aren't there more rich people waiting to be executed? Because they can pay a lawyer to find better loopholes in trial and get them off, or at least a reduced sentence, with the final result being that the death penaly is unequal in our class system), not to mention that most people on death row stay there for a long time, so the prison costs still exist.
Some people really don't deserve to live, but I don't believe people have the right to take away the life of another, under any circumstances.
I am against the death penalty for many of the reasons already discussed. I worked in a wrongful convictions clinic in law school and do death penalty appeals pro bono now that I practice. I've seen up close the problems and mistakes that occur within the justice system, despite the best efforts of those involved (most of the time). For better or for worse, the justice system is imperfect, and I believe the risk of executing the innocent is too great.
I've also seen how disparately the death penalty is applied between states. While some states do focus on using it for the worst of the worst, other states are willing to use it whenever possible. It seems unfair to me that someone who would never even be charged with a capital crime in one state could be put to death for the same crime in another. I believe that if we as a society are going to systematically kill people, we should at least have clear standards that should be met for doing so.
Anyway, no doubt this experience skews my perspective, but I am bothered when people say that the appeals process is too long or too expensive and advocate just killing convicted persons right away. The appeals process is a necessary part of the justice system. Most people have no idea how difficult it is correct mistakes made at trial or before, and most of them would never come to light if we didn't allow for appeals.
If jails and prisons actually contributed to society than I would be against it. Instead, paying for these criminals meals and social outings is outright rediculous. Criminals should be outside cutting grass with nail clippers and picking up garbage, something to contribute to society to pay for their bed that they should be thankful for having. I should not have to work my hardest to help these guys out in any way.
That being said, any man who has hurt a child in anyway should be castrated. I am a strong conservatist and believe that people should be responsible for their actions. If people don't want to get an education and a good job, well they should not be provided social assistance (of course their are exceptions). This is a whole other topic though.
If death penalty is going to prove justice and save people tax money then, yes, do it, but I know that it's not the case. The justice system needs to look at ways in which it can sustain itself while treating criminals the way they need to be treated.
The death penalty has not been shown to be an effective deterrent for the types of crime it punishes. THat alone makes me anti-death penalty! That and growing up in TX and hearing about all the people who have been exonerated after they are put to death *shiver*
@Lindsay05: Actually, the resources put towards appeals and the actual process of performing the death penalty are far more expensive than just keeping the prisoners alive.
@crayfish: Yeah that's why I said if it SAVED people tax money then I would be for it. 
I go both ways. I think if there is definitive proof that the person is guilty, then yes, they should get the death penalty. In circumstancual (is that a word?) cases, then no. With Casey Anthony, I think no even though I'm positive she killed her baby and I despise her to my core.
Another thing with her case, her parents have already lost a grandbaby they adored. I don't think they should have to see their daughter die as well.
I'm on the fence. Most of the time I am against it. It doesn't scare people from not committing crimes and again, how many innocent people have been put to death because of crooked cops, false testimonials, ect. Plus, it costs a lot of money to execute someone.
Then again, I am a rape survivor and I was brutally raped and stabbed and I wanted nothing more than for that cocksucker to to raped with a knife and then shot. But that's why emotional people can't make policies.
Though I do believe child molestors should be shot into space without helmets.
Part of the problem is that we can either have a death penalty process that successfully avoids executing innocent people OR one that is cheap. Achieving a reasonable level of certainty takes money and time. And even then, mistakes will happen. But basically, the kind of death penalty that I would support - one which never executes innocent people, and which does not cost more than life imprisonment - is probably impossible to achieve.
Definitely for it. And I would do away with the gazillion appeals too. If the execution was carried out immediately after the conviction, that would definitely be a deterrent to any future criminals. In Europe they have very little trouble with drunk driving and that is because if you are caught, you go straight to prison. No fines or bullshit community service. And you go for a long time too.
And if you got your hand cut off for stealing, there would a whole lot less burglary and armed robberies too. I'm not saying that we should be that barbaric, but if we would just be hard-core on these people for lesser crimes then there would rarely be a reason to execute. Just the threat of instant death would make a lot of people think twice.
And as far as wrongful convictions go, Vincent Bugliosi, the greatest prosecutor who ever lived said that by the time someone is brought to trial, the chance that they are guilty is about 99% (which why he felt compelled to switch from being a PD)
@PutABirdOnIt: I'd like to know how that 99% is skewed when it comes to race and affluence. I would agree that probably 99% of rich white men who ever make it to trial are guilty, but what about poor black or latino people? Are 99% of them really guitly, or were they in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong cop and the wrong legal aid lawyer (with the wrong overloaded case load) and the wrong judge??
And if death were immediate after conviction, what is the recourse for people who are exonerated after the fact? Their families get a "whoops, sorry, we fucked up" card from the state? I think the appeals process is lengthy and expensive but absolutely necessary - how could a judge, jury or executionner live with themselves if they killed an innocent man or woman?
You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| Brielle | 44 |
| ndreighton | 32 |
 vorpalette |
29 |
| caseyleigh10 | 26 |
| les105 | 24 |
| ellisrobertson | 24 |
| mypinkshoes | 23 |
| fishbone | 23 |
| lionskitty | 22 |
| SouthernGirl | 21 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| ShellVee | 8 |
| MsPanda | 7 |
| Mrs.Estep | 5 |
| ellisrobertson | 5 |
| Mrs.KMM | 3 |
| UpstateCait | 3 |
| allyfally | 3 |
| earrings | 2 |
| Potatoes | 2 |
| SouthernGirl | 2 |
