• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Death Penalty - for or against

death penalty

  • Total voters
    85
I think the poll choices are too simplistic..it's not always that black & white.

I think that paedophiles should be executed, quickly, but just eradicated - if they've been proven to have acted upon their sick impulses.
I know you could argue they're just mentally insane and that it's not their fault - they could've been abused as a child and in some sick way they've been brought up to htink it's acceptable in this society BUT they should just leave, humane bolt to the head, like cattle not even a bullet.

No other crimes really I find bad enough to warrant an execution but this is just awful, anything to do with raping children is jus tthe worst of the worst and I honestly believe should be ridden of this earth.
 
if i had it my way i'd draw and quarter anyone wearing pants sagging below their undies
but then again it would be wrong of me to judge something i don't like or understand
even if it offends me as much as it does
 
There are definitely some people who probably don't deserve to live, and whom no one would shed a tear for if put to death. But the government doesn't exactly have a track record for getting things right. Look at how thoroughly they botch so many other programs and laws?

I don't want the government in charge of killing people. Overzealous judges and prosecutors then have too much authority to influence who lives and who dies.

Also, state sponsored killing shows society that murder is a way to solve a problem with people that have committed crimes. Is this really the message we want to send?

Just because some people's crimes are so heinous as to deserve death doesn't mean the state should kill them.
 
As much as I feel that some people out there just need killing (to quote Bill Maher), I think we owe more to the ideals of Western civilization than lex talionis.
 
Respectable junkie said:
Im against the death penalty in any circumstances. How can you punish murder with murder?
Locking someone up for life with only bread and water is a much better punishment even if it is more costly.
Click to expand...

Most people see the death penalty as some form of righteous justice. I simply support it for the fact that it gets these pain-in-the-ass people out of the way. I could give a shit less if they learn a lesson I just don't want to have to deal with them for the rest of their lives.
 
State decides what is right and what is wrong by telling us what we must do or not do, what is legal, etc. So why does it give itself the right of killing another human being?

The principle of locking up someone in jail is to keep them away from the population -- where they are a nuisance -- and ultimately, though it seldom happens: redemption. Every one has the right to live, including murderers. Of course, they have broken other people's right, but that gives no reason, as a society, to act like them. Locking them up for the rest of their life will avoid them from doing other crimes.

And I do believe someone has the power to change. What about a troubled kid, let's say a teenager or someone in is early 20s, judged has an adult, sentenced to death for gang-related murders and who, during his time in the death row, as he grows up, realises what the fuck he has done.

Plus, many death-sentenced people, eg. serial killers, have mental illness. Puting them in a mental institute prison would allow researches that may lead to great discoveries.

We can't give some humans the right to kill while continuously proclaiming that killing is a horrible thing that should never be done.
 
My position on the death penalty is a bit convoluted but I will try to express it. I find nothing ethically objectionable about putting to death those that have committed atrocities against others. Yet, I disagree with the state performing that function.

For example if a dozen people got stranded on a desert island and had to live in a society with no government and no laws, they would not allow one to terrorize the others, they would either kill the person outright or bound him to some drift wood and send him to sea (which would in all likely hood end in his death.). They would not bound him to a tree and feed him 3 meals a day, and allow for an hour of exercise.

What I disagree with is when the state is in charge of the death penalty where there are issues of racial disparities, a margin for error, and the whole fucked up prison industrial complex our country has in general and how much of a three ring circus death row and the appeal process really is.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top