are you in for or against the death penalty

There are many horrible ways to die. And personally, I'm generally very big on vendetta. But my disposition is, don't worry about what type of punishment some corrupt justice system is going to dish out to you. Worry about me having my way with you.

Having the system impersonally do what I should have done is completely unsatisfying. In fact, it's offensive. It's an admission of failure, actually. You created a monster, society. Now, after you fucked up and failed me and the animal in question, you want to bury your mistakes? No.

If the system has you behind bars, and you can't hurt anyone else, I'll consider that a consolation prize. I'll live with it. The best case scenario would be that there never was a "you". That's rational. I'll let it go at that point, even though I would have handled it differently.

Btw I'm all for the right to choose. I say, abort every fetus that's unwanted by the host organism. We don't need anymore unloved and unwanted monsters roaming streets. It's bad enough that the parents did anything as trivial as fuck in the first place. But then, for me to have to shit it up is adding insult to injury. But then these "right to life" simpletons want to cry , "Ooooh, life is too precious!" Bullshit. If life was so fucking precious, why the hell are so many people shitting all over one another? Please. *smfh

If the system wants people to have faith in "justice", it needs to do better. The system, killing anyone who's not an immanent threat to someone else after-the-fact, is absurd. They're a day late and a dollar short, and they aren't giving me any satisfaction. I'd rather feed the asshole to the alligators. At least they'd make practical use of the bastard in question, as long as he or she was fit for alligator consumption.

But, hey. That's me. And that's revenge. That's how I feel. It may not be pretty, but neither is putting someone in a chair and frying them. You cross me, and you're potentially in a dance with the devil. But at least I'm not sugar-coating my sadism with self-righteous bullshit.

I don't see any difference between killing as an act of revenge, and the murder which provokes it. Both are wrong.

Murder occupies a different position in the law and human behaviour from other crimes, such as theft, because you cannot replace a life; and because most people value life more than they value their jewellery or their car. The death penalty as a deterrent to others clearly does not work; the justice system is imperfect because murderers can be released on technicalities or even avoid a trial for lack of evidence. Leaving aside manslaughter and crimes of passion, the men (and it is mostly men) who kill in gruesme and sadistic fashion and make grandiose claims for their inspiration, are often the ones who want to be remembered for their crimes, once they have been caught. The greatest punishment for these people is to be ignored; Charles Manson lost his liberty, but his notoriety has fed him for five decades, I think there should have been a ban on any news about him, photos, interviews and so on -the living death of his image would have been enough, why would anyone want to remember him? In the UK, also in the 1960s, a man called Ian Brady kidnapped several children and photographed them before raping them and murdering them, and burying their bodies on the Moors, one of the boys has never been found. We regularly hear the story of his crimes, mainly thanks to the Murdoch press which keeps this man in the public consciousness -and that is exactly what Brady wants, to protect his status as 'the most evil man in Britain'. Justice is about punishment, not revenge; what hurts the murderer most may sometimes be the most just punishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

I don't see any difference between killing as an act of revenge, and the murder which provokes it. Both are wrong.

Murder occupies a different position in the law and human behaviour from other crimes, such as theft, because you cannot replace a life; and because most people value life more than they value their jewellery or their car. The death penalty as a deterrent to others clearly does not work; the justice system is imperfect because murderers can be released on technicalities or even avoid a trial for lack of evidence. Leaving aside manslaughter and crimes of passion, the men (and it is mostly men) who kill in gruesme and sadistic fashion and make grandiose claims for their inspiration, are often the ones who want to be remembered for their crimes, once they have been caught. The greatest punishment for these people is to be ignored; Charles Manson lost his liberty, but his notoriety has fed him for five decades, I think there should have been a ban on any news about him, photos, interviews and so on -the living death of his image would have been enough, why would anyone want to remember him? In the UK, also in the 1960s, a man called Ian Brady kidnapped several children and photographed them before raping them and murdering them, and burying their bodies on the Moors, one of the boys has never been found. We regularly hear the story of his crimes, mainly thanks to the Murdoch press which keeps this man in the public consciousness -and that is exactly what Brady wants, to protect his status as 'the most evil man in Britain'. Justice is about punishment, not revenge; what hurts the murderer most may sometimes be the most just punishment.

---

If you kill someone's loved one, or violate someone, that's a risk. I don't guarantee myself to be level-headed. No one can, under a worst case scenario.

Therefore, I expect the system to be. That's their job. But the system has NO BUSINESS killing anyone.

Quote:

---

...most people value life more than they value their jewellery or their car.

---

This simply isn't true. Run a poll here at HA. I think you'll find most people are willing defend their material possessions with lethal force. I'm not one of them, and you may not be one of them, but by and large people are willing to kill to keep what material goods they own. They value their own lives above jewellery or cars, but not the life of the would be thief. Conversely, many thieves carry weapons and are willing to kill rather than get caught. The fact is, humans talk a good game but their actions reveal the true value they place upon human life.

At the risk of being redundant (I've think I said as much before in this thread) justice derives from the word "just" which is to make even. Justice is simply State usurpation of revenge. It is an attempt to satisfy the survivor's (of the murder victim) need to "get even" and simultaneously shoulder the responsibility for that revenge so that the survivor avoids becoming the next target in a potentially infinite chain of tit for tat murders.

I sympathize with Nicole's POV and sometimes think that the loved ones of the murder victim should be the ones who pull the lever and execute the murderer. But that would circumvent the whole function behind having the State do it.

I have nothing against capital punishment for murder, except the unfortunate fact that jurors cannot be trusted to follow a logical argument without being derailed by flim-flam and bigotry. The finality of death is more certain than any judge or jury can be about the guilt or innocence of the accused. For that reason alone, I usually align myself against the death penalty. Were I certain of the accused's guilt, and my certitude was intellectually honest and mathematically airtight, I might pull that lever myself.

Too many people get railroaded, and too many people just want a hanging.

By the same token, too many people walk because people judges and juries are potential chumps.

My problem with the death penalty actually begins there. I don't have mercy necessarily. I just don't believe the state should play god. Look at all the white collar crimes that go on while we pour tax money into the war on drugs. The system needs to do some major housekeeping, to say the very least.

Truthfully, many people on death row WANT to die. Aileen Wuornos did. John Hughes feels the same way right now. But for my money, that's too easy. And I can't think of anything much worse than waking up in a cage for the rest of your life, knowing society has collectively disowned you. All forms of execution are too quick. And there's no torture like mental torture. I would suggest physical torture, but who the hell's going to do that? What sane, well-adjusted person? The answer is "none". Only another violent criminal is up to that task. Child molesters don't fare well behind bars. Too many criminals love their kids. Cops don't do well behind bars. Too many criminals simply won't allow them to.

People in jail and/or prison want OUT; either through the door, or through death.

But again, do you know how many people are on death row who are innocent? I don't, but I'm sure there are some. How many women who were raped thought "all the black guys in the line up looked the same"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicole Dupre

Truthfully, many people on death row WANT to die. Aileen Wuornos did. John Hughes feels the same way right now. But for my money, that's too easy. And I can't think of anything much worse than waking up in a cage for the rest of your life, knowing society has collectively disowned you. All forms of execution are too quick. And there's no torture like mental torture. I would suggest physical torture, but who the hell's going to do that? What sane, well-adjusted person? The answer is "none". Only another violent criminal is up to that task. Child molesters don't fare well behind bars. Too many criminals love their kids. Cops don't do well behind bars. Too many criminals simply won't allow them to.

People in jail and/or prison want OUT; either through the door, or through death.

But again, do you know how many people are on death row who are innocent? I don't, but I'm sure there are some. How many women who were raped thought "all the black guys in the line up looked the same"?

---

Your last paragraph sums it up for me, Nicole. If just one innocent person is put to death in error by the state, the entire argument in favour of the death penalty falls way. And the files are full of cases exactly like that.

I'm opposed to the death penalty on any grounds, as it happens, but that's the logical and moral clincher for me, if I'm forced to reach for an argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicole Dupre

Truthfully, many people on death row WANT to die. Aileen Wuornos did. John Hughes feels the same way right now. But for my money, that's too easy. And I can't think of anything much worse than waking up in a cage for the rest of your life, knowing society has collectively disowned you. All forms of execution are too quick. And there's no torture like mental torture. I would suggest physical torture, but who the hell's going to do that? What sane, well-adjusted person? The answer is "none". Only another violent criminal is up to that task. Child molesters don't fare well behind bars. Too many criminals love their kids. Cops don't do well behind bars. Too many criminals simply won't allow them to.

People in jail and/or prison want OUT; either through the door, or through death.

But again, do you know how many people are on death row who are innocent? I don't, but I'm sure there are some. How many women who were raped thought "all the black guys in the line up looked the same"?

---

Forced Labour, 16 hours a day beats death row in my book... Make them do some good for humanity, clean up those reactors in japan, mine uranium,...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmarZ

Forced Labour, 16 hours a day beats death row in my book... Make them do some good for humanity, clean up those reactors in japan, mine uranium,...

---

That works for me.

In Australia if a dog bites or harms someone it is put down .The same go's for people,in fact a dog is the better creature because if a dog bites it's only going by it's instinct.A human knows exactly why they do these evil crimes