Capital Punishment

[metatron]

And unfortunatly, "life in prison" usually means 7 to 12 years.

Where do you get that stat?

[...]

You didn't answer the question.

 

[Eukaryote]

If we overall believe that the decrease in robber suffering is greater then the increase of victim suffering (ie. overall suffering goes down but suffering of innocents goes up), then you would say that we should do it?

No, that would be a bad idea. However severity of punishment should only be increased if you have good reasons to believe that doing so will reduce crime.

 

[dutchfire]

A murderer in prison doesn't represent "no threat". True killers continue to kill, even while incarcerated. They murder other inmates, guards, prison personel, visitors, and occasionally they escape and murder civilians on the outside.

I don't dividing the world into murderers and non-murderers is very useful. I think most murders are committed by people who have never murdered before.

 

[dutchfire]

I've always found this argument to be a little strange. Why is it definitely not okay to execute innocents, whereas imprisoning them possibly for the the rest of their lives is merely regrettable?

Because if someone has been imprisoned and then you find out he was innocent, at least you can release him again?

 

[Borachio]

And people can adjust to a life in prison.

There was some guy who was wrongfully imprisoned for 30 or 40 years, and eventually let out when his innocence was proved. He said he wouldn't have missed his experience for anything.

You can't adjust if you're dead. (I believe)

 

[sophie]

I'm opposed to capital punishment because I believe the purpose of prison should be rehabilitation and not punishment.

Also I think the treatment of the mentally ill, particularly within our prison system is nothing short of abominable. Quite possibly the worst injustice occuring in our nation today.

 

[Crezth]

I love it when "libertarians" support giving the state more killing power over its citizenry.

 

[Eukaryote]

I'm opposed to capital punishment because I believe the purpose of prison should be rehabilitation and not punishment.

Also I think the treatment of the mentally ill, particularly within our prison system is nothing short of abominable. Quite possibly the worst injustice occuring in our nation today.

You don't think our society's apathy toward the billion ultra-poor is a bigger deal? After all, there's far more people living in extreme poverty than in American prisons and ignoring differences in the numbers of people could be classified as scope insensitivity.

 

[Tahuti]

I love it when "libertarians" support giving the state more killing power over its citizenry.

Who said that the state is the only institution capable of carrying out the death penalty?

 

[Crezth]

Who said that the state is the only institution capable of carrying out the death penalty?

It's the only institution legally entitled to carry out the death penalty, essentially by definition. What's your point?

 

[Bootstoots]

I oppose the death penalty, but it's not even near the top of the issues I see with the US criminal justice system. If a compromise were reached whereby the death penalty were retained but reforms were made that dropped the incarceration rate in the US by a factor of 3, I'd be all in favor of that outcome.

 

[GhostWriter16]

One difference between the liberal and conservative mind, is that a liberal would prefer to see a hundred guilty go free rather than let just one innocent be punished, while a conservative would allow for the occasional innocent to be locked up to prevent one hundred guilty out on the streets to destroy the lives of one hundred other innocents. That is, you worry about the rights of the accused, while I'm concerned with the pain and suffering of the victims.

Naturally, reasonable people may disagree.

A murderer in prison doesn't represent "no threat". True killers continue to kill, even while incarcerated. They murder other inmates, guards, prison personel, visitors, and occasionally they escape and murder civilians on the outside.

And unfortunatly, "life in prison" usually means 7 to 12 years. They often get out again.

Our discussion might explore what constitutes adequate punishment for murder. We should define our terms. I would advocate execution for First Degree Murder, and especially mutiple murder, deliberate, unjustified and cruel. No lesser crime.

That the justice system cannot ascertain absolute, metaphysical guilt should not prevent us from punishing the reasonably guilty. I think we agree that the guilty should be punished - just how far do we go?

I think we should limit discussion to domestic crime, talk of international terrorists and martyrdom takes us down the road to extremism.

I just wanted to point out the use of terms like "Liberal" and "Conservative" in this context is stupid. CelticEmpire is at least broadly a libertarian, not a liberal. You'd probably call me a "Liberal" for being concerned about the possibility of innocent people being executed. Ron Paul is probably a liberal by your goofy definitions as well.

"liberal" and "conservative" are just buzzwords.

And statistics will show you wrong.

Why do you object to the possibility of parole?

I don't object to it for everything, and I want our incarceration rate much, much lower. But murderers and (Real, not statuatory) rapists should never ever be free to walk among the populace. Whether you want to kill them, lock them up, or send them to some island colony somewhere with just criminals, I don't care, but they should never get the opportunity to hurt innocent people again.

I'm opposed to capital punishment because I believe the purpose of prison should be rehabilitation and not punishment.

Also I think the treatment of the mentally ill, particularly within our prison system is nothing short of abominable. Quite possibly the worst injustice occuring in our nation today.

Both purposes are wrong, which is why I generally do not like prison as a punishment. The point of criminal justice should be to compensate the victim. In the case of murder, the closest equivalent to the life of the murdered is the life of the killer, whether the family wishes to have him killed, enslaved, exiled, imprisoned, or pretty much anything else short of torture (Which should never be accepted for any reason.)

I love it when "libertarians" support giving the state more killing power over its citizenry.

I love it when "Anarchists" support the state far more than "ordinary libertarians" do.

Libertarianism is based philosophically in the non-aggression principle and property rights. From there it takes a number of different forms depending on the particular libertarian and how he interprets the philosophy. In my opinion, the best interpretations philosophically allow for the death penatly, but I'm still uncomfortable for it in practice.

I'm all for exiling them all to some island, with the common-law concept of outlawing used if they return.

I oppose the death penalty, but it's not even near the top of the issues I see with the US criminal justice system. If a compromise were reached whereby the death penalty were retained but reforms were made that dropped the incarceration rate in the US by a factor of 3, I'd be all in favor of that outcome.

I suspect that even 1/3rd of the incarceration rate we have is still too much. After all of the drug users, drug dealers (Except those who deal to minors), those who violate "Gun laws", vigilantes (As in, people who kill people that should be killed but are protected by "law"), libelers, slanderers, tax evaders, actual military heroes (Guys like Manning, Assange, exc.) prostitues, people who frequent prostitutes, and probably some other victimless "crimes" that don't immediately come to mind, you're going to have WAY less than 1/3rd.

Do THAT for me and you can do whatever you want with the death penalty.

 

[sophie]

Both purposes are wrong, which is why I generally do not like prison as a punishment. The point of criminal justice should be to compensate the victim. In the case of murder, the closest equivalent to the life of the murdered is the life of the killer, whether the family wishes to have him killed, enslaved, exiled, imprisoned, or pretty much anything else short of torture (Which should never be accepted for any reason.)

Link to video.

 

[GhostWriter16]

@Owen- Well, yes. Saying "Prison should be about rehabilition" is literally saying that since somebody stole someone else's right to life, they should be rewarded by getting help, paid for by the taxpayer.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly. If prison is your option, they should be forced to work first to pay for their own stay and then to pay back the family of the victim(s). Taxpayers should not pay ONE CENT for their sustenance.

 

[sophie]

@Owen- Well, yes. Saying "Prison should be about rehabilition" is literally saying that since somebody stole someone else's right to life, they should be rewarded by getting help, paid for by the taxpayer.

I disagree with that wholeheartedly. If prison is your option, they should be forced to work first to pay for their own stay and then to pay back the family of the victim(s). Taxpayers should not pay ONE CENT for their sustenance.

It's nice to just simply whitewash something into a black-white dichotomy like that but crime and imprisonment are much murkier than that. The easiest and most (in)visible example would be the fact that a substantial amount of the inmates at prison are afflicted with mental illnesses, many of which drove them to commit the crime in the first place, and often because the health system in this country is incapable of giving them the help they absolutely need. Thrown in a prison expected to treat them like every other criminal, these mental illnesses are often exacerbated by the prison system. If these inmates manage to hold it together for long enough to be released (a large amount of them see their terms extended because of violent behavior...again caused by not receiving the medical and psychological help they need to function), they often go out and fall into the same problems they fell into before. It's a major problem and it's not getting any better. These people commit these often violent crimes because the state is either unwilling or unable to provide the aid they so desperately need. The result is increased crime. Rehabilitating inmates rather than treating them like second-class citizens would, in my opinion go a long way towards cutting down on repeat offenders and finding an out to the vicious cycle of endemic poverty and the crime associated with it.

You can opine however you want, but your unequivocal posturings, particularly the way in which you assert your opinions as fact are both tedious and disingenuous.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I could possibly agree with you if it was a criminal we actually wanted to let out, but why should someone who kills someone get a second chance? The person they killed never will, justice demands that they don't either, to me. And rehabilitating someone that's never going to be released seems pretty obviously silly. I take it you're also against the life sentence?

 

[KMRblue1027]

Let's create a hypothetical here. Say some guy name Dave has undiagnosed type I bipolar disorder due to being home schooled (most childhood mental illnesses are recognized by the school systems first). Type I bipolar is the one characterized by full blown manic episodes, which if you don't know are periods of complete irrationality, practically a disconnect from the real world, many people like myself don't even remember their anything from when they were manic.
So during one of the episodes he kills his neighbor Joe who was also a good friend. Should he be given a life sentence or worse the death penalty because he killed his friend? Hell no. But because of our current system most people don't get the proper medication that they need, and this stuff happens, all the time.

 

[sophie]

Let's create a hypothetical here. Say some guy name Dave has undiagnosed type I bipolar disorder due to being home schooled (most childhood mental illnesses are recognized by the school systems first). Type I bipolar is the one characterized by full blown manic episodes, which if you don't know are periods of complete irrationality, practically a disconnect from the real world, many people like myself don't even remember their anything from when they were manic.
So during one of the episodes he kills his neighbor Joe who was also a good friend. Should he be given a life sentence or worse the death penalty because he killed his friend? Hell no. But because of our current system most people don't get the proper medication that they need, and this stuff happens, all the time.

This is a bit of an extreme example. The thing I'm talking about is if Dave assaults Joe and gets put in prison. The prison system has a tendency to exacerbate mental illnesses so he starts fluctuating wildly. The most upsetting examples to me are paranoid schizophrenics, who often have trouble submitting to authority. They don't respect the security officers, are unruly, and don't abide by the rules. They quickly find themselves stuck in solitary or finding their 2-year stint extended to a 5-year one due to insubordination. Dave, essentially has become a lifer because he doesn't receive the sort of care or medication he needs. Another common issue is that many schizophrenics have a difficult time getting and holding a job so they can't afford the care they need, and many of them don't trust the prescription they're on anyway so they don't take it in the first place. This is leaving aside the massive social stigma which persists in America about social/psychological illnesses (there still persists the notion of "why don't you just stop being crazy/irrational/you have to know what you're doing is non-normal so just get yourself right"), many people with psychological illnesses find themselves alienated or ostracized from society. Many of our nation's endemic homeless have gotten that way due to untreated psychological illnesses.

I'm not saying it's a jail's responsibility to treat or assist the psychologically ill. But at present there exists no recourse for the psychologically ill who find themselves trapped in the vicious circle that is our prison system today, and so often many slip through the cracks and wind up in the lap of the prison system, one both both unwilling and unable to help them.

 

[KMRblue1027]

Oh I definitely agree with you but I just went with the extreme end because the thread is about capital punishment after all.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Let's create a hypothetical here. Say some guy name Dave has undiagnosed type I bipolar disorder due to being home schooled (most childhood mental illnesses are recognized by the school systems first). Type I bipolar is the one characterized by full blown manic episodes, which if you don't know are periods of complete irrationality, practically a disconnect from the real world, many people like myself don't even remember their anything from when they were manic.
So during one of the episodes he kills his neighbor Joe who was also a good friend. Should he be given a life sentence or worse the death penalty because he killed his friend? Hell no. But because of our current system most people don't get the proper medication that they need, and this stuff happens, all the time.

Of course he should be executed, if his guilt is not in question. Joe is no longer alive. Its not fair, you say? Is it fair that Joe is never able to live again?