The Death Penalty is a Good Thing

[Clinton Huxley]

So 50 years in gaol is worse than being murdered by the state. What about 25?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yes we do. But thats what the law was invented for. To police irrationality with reason and fairness. not to kill people for vengeance.

And it's irrational to allow a killer more chances to kill. There's no vengeance in this, it's the best way to handle some criminals.

As I've already stated, my murderers are in a high security prison, chained to power generating bikes. yah boo sucks.

And the guy in Indiana, who stated quite calmly that he escaped solely for the purpose of killing another child? He was very smug, they'd already done their worse, he was immune from any further punishment. He, in effect, received no punishment for dismembering a child over the course of three days.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So 50 years in gaol is worse than being murdered by the state. What about 25?

Some people have begged to be executed rather than face life in prison. Utah had one such case, IIRC.

[PsychoSerenity]

Yes we do. But thats what the law was invented for. To police irrationality with reason and fairness. not to kill people for vengeance.

And it's irrational to allow a killer more chances to kill. There's no vengeance in this, it's the best way to handle some criminals.

I'd agree that back in history, or in more primitive cultures, there have been times where the best thing people could do was bring a quick end to the life of someone that would otherwise have killed others - but we should be long past that by now.

[Clinton Huxley]

So 50 years in gaol is worse than being murdered by the state. What about 25?

Some people have begged to be executed rather than face life in prison. Utah had one such case, IIRC.

Not a sound foundation for a legal system...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yes we do. But thats what the law was invented for. To police irrationality with reason and fairness. not to kill people for vengeance.

And it's irrational to allow a killer more chances to kill. There's no vengeance in this, it's the best way to handle some criminals.

I'd agree that back in history, or in more primitive cultures, there have been times where the best thing people could do was bring a quick end to the life of someone that would otherwise have killed others - but we should be long past that by now.

Why? I see we're avoiding the question of "Why can't a society remove a dangerous person if that's the rational thing to do?"

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So 50 years in gaol is worse than being murdered by the state. What about 25?

Some people have begged to be executed rather than face life in prison. Utah had one such case, IIRC.

Not a sound foundation for a legal system...

Thanks for you opinion on that.

[Clinton Huxley]

The death penalty is the preserve of corrupt, totalitarian states and corrupt, priest-ridden states. It fails.

Your proof of this? That it is only the realm of the above? That a sane society can't remove a killer from their midst?

Of first world "western" countries, only Japan retains the death penalty sling with the US, so far as I know. Seems very popular in the Muslim world.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The death penalty is the preserve of corrupt, totalitarian states and corrupt, priest-ridden states. It fails.

Your proof of this? That it is only the realm of the above? That a sane society can't remove a killer from their midst?

Of first world "western" countries, only Japan retains the death penalty sling with the US, so far as I know. Seems very popular in the Muslim world.

You shown that public opinion is in favor of incarceration, not that execution is irrational.

[JOZeldenrust]

Recidivism is prevalent.

Of the 108,580 persons released from prisons in 11 States in 1983, representing more than half of all released State prisoners that year, an estimated 62.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.8% were reconvicted, and 41.4% returned to prison or jail. Before their release from prison, the prisoners had been arrested and charged with an average of more than 12 offenses each; nearly two-thirds had been arrested at least once in the past for a violent offense; and two-thirds had previously been in jail or prison. By yearend 1986 those prisoners who were rearrested averaged an additional 4.8 new charges. An estimated 22.7% of all prisoners were rearrested for a violent offense within 3 years of their release. These findings were based on a sample of more than 16,000 released prisoners, representing all those released from prison in 11 States during 1983. The 11 States in the sample included California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, and Texas. These States accounted for more than 57% of all State prisoners released in the Nation during the year. The amount of time served in prison did not systematically increase a prisoner's likelihood of rearrest. However, those prisoners who had served the longest, more than 5 years in prison, had lower rates of rearrest than other offenders during the followup period.

Well, the American penal system is a mess. From what I've seen of state prisons, they're often places where various groups compete for power, and where there's a vibrant informal economy. I don't know about other countries, but that sort of stuff doesn't happen in Dutch prisons. Informal economies reward behaviour that we would call criminal: resolving conflicts by means of force or manipulation. Add to that the stigma of being an ex-con and corruption in the parole system, and it's easy to see why recidivism is rampant.

Released prisoners were often rearrested for the same type of crime for which they had served time in prison. Within 3 years, 31.9% of released burglars were rearrested for burglary; 24.8% of drug offenders were rearrested for a drug offense; and 19.6% of robbers were rearrested for robbery.

Released rapists were 10.5 times more likely than nonrapists to be rearrested for rape, and released murderers were about 5 times more likely than other offenders to be rearrested for homicide.

Nearly all rapists have personality disorders, just like quite a few murderers. Locking them up isn't going to change that. Compulsory therapy might. It'd also be nice to have the recidivsm percentages, instead of comparisons to the rest of the population. If 0.01% of ex-cons commit rape after they get out, and 0.105% of convicted rapists rape again after they get out, that factor 10.5 really isn't that big a deal.

That's not an argument for the death penalty. Just some stats on recidivism. Murderers are more likely to commit another murder than the general population at large, or other kinds of criminals. They are 5 times more likely to be rearrested for another homicide than other folks.

I would like a comparison to people convicted of other serious violent crimes. Most murders are quite violent affairs, and I would expect most murderers are violent people who lead violent lives before they killed someone. Recidivism might not be due to the fact that they killed someone, but it might instead be their generally violent lives that make them more likely to kill in the first place.

I think we all agree that some behaviour is unacceptable, because it causes great suffering, but I don't think the objective of punishment should be to maximze suffering on the part of the convict. The suffering inflicted is a means to an end, which is to deter potential wrongdoers. I know a lot of people feel that punishment should also provide retribution on behalf of society, but I think that's an irrational notion. Inflicting harm on an individual does not reduce the suffering of other individuals. The other objective of punishment, reform of the wrongdoer, isn't furthered by causing suffering to the wrongdoer. It's furthered by teaching the wrongdoer to function in a consensus-based society.

We aren't born with the abstracted moral code needed to function in a society under rule of law, where conflicts of interest are resolved through bartering and mutual consent. It's something we learn from the people around us as we grow up. Not everyone grows up surrounded by people who function in our society. Generally, they develop a moral code suited for informal economies: they acknowledge the need for ethical treatment of the people in their group, but don't extend that to people in general. Such groups of people are verywhere: gangs, organized crime etc. They all act according to a moral code within the context of their group, but rely on force or deception in their dealings with people outside of the group.

Teaching wrongdoers what they stand to gain by acting in an ethical manner towards all people, and how they can go about it, is a much better way to reduce recidivism.

Why not let the person being killed/incarcerated be the judge of which method is more humane?

Interesting, but I would wonder how to deal with the mentally ill. Which may raise the question; would wanting to die be considered mentally ill?

Like we deal with the mentally ill on a wide variety of subjects: we remove their right to make such choices. It happens all the time. And no, I don't think wanting to die, in and of itself, is a mental illness. It's a symptom of a variety of mental illnesses, but some completely sane people want to die too, like some elderly people who feel they have no prospect of a fullfilling life anymore.

That's like George Bush asking the Iraqi's how he should invade them.

No it isn't. The Iraqi people weren't convicted murderers, and they weren't being punished. They suffered because the US perceived a threat - an imaginary threat at that - and decided to remove that threat forcefully. The suffering of the Iraqi people was collateral.

I would also like to add that I am shocked and disgusted that so many of the users on this forum relish the idea of killing people, even if they are violent criminals. Posts like these

I volunteered to flip the switch once. The guy needed it.

are why I think some people on this forum are vile scum. Gawd, Gawdzilla, Don't Panic, Kristie, your views and attitude disgust me.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

JOZ, I have killed a lot of people, some of whom might not have deserved it (there was little time for checking). That guy, I have never lost sleep over him. His mother refused to collect his body.

[Clinton Huxley]

No, I've demonstrated that the civilised parts of the world have moved beyond biblically inspired punishments. IMO the death penalty coarsens those societies that practice it, has not been demonstrated to be a deterrent, inevitably suffers from racial bias and carries the risk of perpetrating irreversible miscarriages of justice.

[stripes4]

No, I've demonstrated that the civilised parts of the world have moved beyond biblically inspired punishments. IMO the death penalty coarsens those societies that practice it, has not been demonstrated to be a deterrent, inevitably suffers from racial bias and carries the risk of perpetrating irreversible miscarriages of justice.

Yes. that's what I meant too.

[JOZeldenrust]

JOZ, I have killed a lot of people, some of whom might not have deserved it (there was little time for checking). That guy, I have never lost sleep over him. His mother refused to collect his body.

Doesn't change that you seem to take pleasure in it, just as you often glorify violence, and in my book that makes you vile scum.

I inderstand that sometimes violence is justified or even necessary, but it's never desirable.

[sandinista]

The death penalty is the preserve of corrupt, totalitarian states and corrupt, priest-ridden states. It fails.

yep. No doubt.