Capital Punishment: Isn't it time to stop state sponsored murder?

[thetaxmancometh]

I am fine with states doing whatever they like, they were designed as "laboratories of democracy" so if a state doesn't want capital punishment... ok. I am all for capital punishment, myself.

[Lois]

Yep, your taxes at work.  The death penalty is very expensive, and the innocence project has proven may Innocent inhabit our death rows.

[thetaxmancometh]

Innocent people are in jail too, that is no reason to abolish jails. You can free someone from jail, unlike returning them to life from the death penalty, but you can't give them their XX years back.

Justice will always be imperfect but that is not an excuse not to enact justice.

[Lois]

You cannot give them their years back, true.  But at least they still have their life.  And when you discover your error, you can set them free. 

But when you kill someone, and then realize your error, what then?

[thetaxmancometh]

Or your tax dollars being paid to keep an innocent man locked up for life?

[MissBarbara]

Justice will always be imperfect but that is not an excuse not to enact justice.

But it is an incentive to make justice as perfect as possible.

And abolishing capital punishment is one way to achieve that.

[Elizabeth]

Justice will always be imperfect but that is not an excuse not to enact justice.

But it is an incentive to make justice as perfect as possible.

And abolishing capital punishment is one way to achieve that.

At 10 times the cost......

Love,
Liz

[MissBarbara]

Justice will always be imperfect but that is not an excuse not to enact justice.

But it is an incentive to make justice as perfect as possible.

And abolishing capital punishment is one way to achieve that.

At 10 times the cost......

Love,
Liz

No, at 10% the cost....

[thetaxmancometh]

How does abolishing the death penalty make justice more perfect? If someone commits a crime and is punished by what society deems appropriate.. that is justice. If someone commits no crime but is still punished then that is injustice.

Lets look at it a different way. You don't want the death penalty because it is final, there is no way to mitigate it. Your argument is that there is no way to give a person back their life, so we should remove that option from the table. How is that different from the argument that there is no way to give a person back their XX years, so we should remove the "jail" option from the table?

Death is final. Lost decades are final. Justice isn't perfect, never will be no matter how much we strive to make it perfect. Using the argument that justice isn't perfect so we shouldn't punish people is, in my mind, nonsensical.

[MissBarbara]

How does abolishing the death penalty make justice more perfect? If someone commits a crime and is punished by what society deems appropriate.. that is justice. If someone commits no crime but is still punished then that is injustice.

Lets look at it a different way. You don't want the death penalty because it is final, there is no way to mitigate it. Your argument is that there is no way to give a person back their life, so we should remove that option from the table. How is that different from the argument that there is no way to give a person back their XX years, so we should remove the "jail" option from the table?

Death is final. Lost decades are final. Justice isn't perfect, never will be no matter how much we strive to make it perfect. Using the argument that justice isn't perfect so we shouldn't punish people is, in my mind, nonsensical.

I think we agree more than we disagree here.

I would argue that justice -- real Justice -- is far more than "what society deems appropriate." Owning slaves was deemed societally appropriate, to use the most obvious (and extreme) example. In that light, judicial judgements, made by fallible human beings, and Justice will never perfectly align. My point was that, despite that inescapable fact, we should strive to make them align as perfectly as possible.

I never said we should take jail -- or any other judicial punishment -- "off the table." While you're right, you cannot "give a person back their XX years," the degree of difference between lost years and a lost life -- death, as you agreed, is final and irrevocable -- is incomparable. You state that I "don't want the death penalty because it is final, there is no way to mitigate it." That is correct. And that reason alone argues in favor of the U.S. abolishing capital punishment -- just as virtually every other developed nation on the planet has already done.

[thetaxmancometh]

First off, thank you for being able to discuss this rationally, a lot of people are unable.


I think you are confusing "moral" with "justice", but that is splitting hairs. Our definition of justice evolves with society, yes. I am an absolute moralist so I don't believe that what is absolutely right or wrong ever changes, but our understanding of it does. I certainly agree that we should strive towards making our legal system as fair and just as possible, as well as striving to make our punishments as moral and right as possible. We totally agree on that.

I never said you suggested we take jail off the table, I simply used that to show the flaw in your argument. Just because someone has been found to be innocent later of a crime is not a reason to abolish the punishment for that crime. It does not make logical sense whether the punishment specified is a death sentence or a prison sentence.

Other nations and individual states can do as they like, it isn't a factor that is likely to sway my opinion. Let me give you a hypothetical.... now this hypothetical will be as brutal as possible but if you can concede that death is ever a fair punishment then it is simply a matter of drawing the line.

Lets say a man plans out and kidnaps 10 children. He rapes, tortures, mutilates and murders all of them for the sole purpose of his enjoyment. Let us further assume that this is all caught on camera, that the man confesses, and that the man is found to be in full mental facilties (I.E. he knew his actions were wrong and had the ability to not act on them). Would it be more just to kill him or keep him in prison? What if he is severely claustrophobic and the very prison cell would be a constant torture?


 Ultimately it is a judgement call and I have heard excellent reasons to abolish the death penalty... but I find there to be overwhelming reasons for it. If a person knowingly and intentionally causes death, torture, ect. with premeditation then I believe that they have abdicated their right to live. I don't expect to convince anyone to change their mind, this is something that people decide in their hearts is right or wrong and only after that do they use reason to buttress their position. I am consistent... I believe in early term abortions, death penalty, and euthanasia.

[Elizabeth]

$31,300 per inmate per year of incarceration.
39 Billion spent per year.

Love,
Liz
   

[MissBarbara]

$31,300 per inmate per year of incarceration.
39 Billion spent per year.

Love,
Liz
   

Those figures are meaningless in a vacuum.

To prove your point you must demonstrate that the cost to execute a convict, including all of the appeals, is 1/10 that amount.

[Elizabeth]

$31,300 per inmate per year of incarceration.
39 Billion spent per year.

Love,
Liz
   

Those figures are meaningless in a vacuum.

To prove your point you must demonstrate that the cost to execute a convict, including all of the appeals, is 1/10 that amount.

Actually, I got the info from Google.
All I'm thinking is 39 Billion a year is a lot of money, unless of course your salary exceeds that amount, then 39 billion would be nothing.
Love,
Liz

[MissBarbara]

First off, thank you for being able to discuss this rationally, a lot of people are unable.

Fuck off, you ignorant asshole.  

I think you are confusing "moral" with "justice", but that is splitting hairs. Our definition of justice evolves with society, yes. I am an absolute moralist so I don't believe that what is absolutely right or wrong ever changes, but our understanding of it does. I certainly agree that we should strive towards making our legal system as fair and just as possible, as well as striving to make our punishments as moral and right as possible. We totally agree on that.

I never said you suggested we take jail off the table, I simply used that to show the flaw in your argument. Just because someone has been found to be innocent later of a crime is not a reason to abolish the punishment for that crime. It does not make logical sense whether the punishment specified is a death sentence or a prison sentence.

Other nations and individual states can do as they like, it isn't a factor that is likely to sway my opinion. Let me give you a hypothetical.... now this hypothetical will be as brutal as possible but if you can concede that death is ever a fair punishment then it is simply a matter of drawing the line.

Lets say a man plans out and kidnaps 10 children. He rapes, tortures, mutilates and murders all of them for the sole purpose of his enjoyment. Let us further assume that this is all caught on camera, that the man confesses, and that the man is found to be in full mental facilties (I.E. he knew his actions were wrong and had the ability to not act on them). Would it be more just to kill him or keep him in prison? What if he is severely claustrophobic and the very prison cell would be a constant torture?

Ultimately it is a judgement call and I have heard excellent reasons to abolish the death penalty... but I find there to be overwhelming reasons for it. If a person knowingly and intentionally causes death, torture, ect. with premeditation then I believe that they have abdicated their right to live. I don't expect to convince anyone to change their mind, this is something that people decide in their hearts is right or wrong and only after that do they use reason to buttress their position. I am consistent... I believe in early term abortions, death penalty, and euthanasia.

I don't think I'm confusing Morality and Justice. In fact, though I probably shouldn't say this for fear of undercutting my argument, I do not believe that capital punishment is per se immoral. But I believe it is unjust, for the reason I've stated, and for others as well (which I've stated elsewhere).

Whether or not it sways your argument, the actions of other nations -- the overwhelming majority of nations -- should, at the very least, lead the U.S. to stop and reconsider. And it should consider it in the light of the fact that our murder and aggravated assault rates are almost incomparably high compared with other industrialized nations.

I understand the point of your hypothetical. It's akin to the counter argument, "Would you still oppose capital punishment if it were your mother/sister/daughter/wife?" But both those hypotheticals are subjective, and justice, even justice, by your definition, that reflects current societal norms, should never be subjective. Subjective justice is not justice.

And yes, you are consistent.

[MissBarbara]

Actually, I got the info from Google.
All I'm thinking is 39 Billion a year is a lot of money, unless of course your salary exceeds that amount, then 39 billion would be nothing.
Love,
Liz

If Billy has 5 apples and Judy also has apples, who has the most apples?

But if Google says Judy has the most apples, then it MUST be true.

[phtlc]

First off, thank you for being able to discuss this rationally, a lot of people are unable.

Fuck off, you ignorant asshole.  

[/b]

Barb, I just love when you raise the intellectual bar like that. 

[MissBarbara]

First off, thank you for being able to discuss this rationally, a lot of people are unable.

Fuck off, you ignorant asshole.  

[/b]

Barb, I just love when you raise the intellectual bar like that. 

I see it as one of my primary duties here.

[thetaxmancometh]

Well if you are asking about "should you kill someone if they killed your family?", then you are asking a hypothetical that deals with emotion, not reason. Mine is different from that.

Why do you think that it should matter what other nation's believe? If your position is based on reasoned logical chains, as I personally strive for, then it doesn't matter if people disagree with you. Europe, for example, has a very different culture then America and they should view things differently then us in quite a few matters.

[Gina Marie]

Justice is, by definition, a product of morality and morality is subjective, as evidenced by the wildly different definitions of right and wrong people have.