It's time to bring the death penalty back!

[SirJosephPorter]

There are two very good reasons to execute criminals.
1- There is zero possibility of repeat offenders.

If you are so worried about repeat offenders, then why do you limit death penalty only to murderers? By your logic, we must execute all the criminals, whether charged with murder or stealing a loaf of bread. That is the only way to ensure that there are no repeat offenders.

If you release a convicted rapist, robber, swindler etc. after he has served his sentence, there is always the possibility that he will offend again. So why restrict death penalty only to murderers, why not apply it to all the criminals?

The argument doesn’t make sense.

2- Taxpayers do not have to support them.
The real problem is our soft on crime liberal joke of a justice system that gives criminals more rights than victims.

But taxpayers do have to support them. It is much more expensive to execute a murderer than to give him life without parole, as is the experience of USA.

 

[Risus]

If you are so worried about repeat offenders, then why do you limit death penalty only to murderers? By your logic, we must execute all the criminals, whether charged with murder or stealing a loaf of bread. That is the only way to ensure that there are no repeat offenders.

If you release a convicted rapist, robber, swindler etc. after he has served his sentence, there is always the possibility that he will offend again. So why restrict death penalty only to murderers, why not apply it to all the criminals?

The argument doesn’t make sense.




But taxpayers do have to support them. It is much more expensive to execute a murderer than to give him life without parole, as is the experience of USA.

Get your head out of the sand. We are talking about human life here. Kill once, you're executed. You can't repeat. Understand?

Don't know where you get your facts, but an executioner's wage is not that much. Costs a fortune to keep a low life murderer in prison. I don't want the money I donate to the government every year to go towards that.

 

[L Gilbert]

Rights and freedoms that are no longer extended to a victim of murder:.......

I wasn't aware that murder victims needed rights. lol

Seriously, I think you made a good post as the victims of murder are more than just the murdered persons. The families and friends and society in general are also the victims.

 

[L Gilbert]

If you are so worried about repeat offenders, then why do you limit death penalty only to murderers? By your logic, we must execute all the criminals, whether charged with murder or stealing a loaf of bread. That is the only way to ensure that there are no repeat offenders.

If you release a convicted rapist, robber, swindler etc. after he has served his sentence, there is always the possibility that he will offend again. So why restrict death penalty only to murderers, why not apply it to all the criminals?

The argument doesn’t make sense.

Not to you, I suppose, but then again you tend to take someone's general comment and exaggerate it and then apply it to a lot of extraneous aspects.

But taxpayers do have to support them. It is much more expensive to execute a murderer than to give him life without parole, as is the experience of USA.

Again, that would depend upon how long the perp lives and how young they were when convicted. You've demonstrated one of the logic problems with relying solely on statistics.

 

[L Gilbert]

Get your head out of the sand. We are talking about human life here. Kill once, you're executed. You can't repeat. Understand?

Don't know where you get your facts, but an executioner's wage is not that much. Costs a fortune to keep a low life murderer in prison. I don't want the money I donate to the government every year to go towards that.

It also costs a fortune for courts to go through various levels of appeals and such things.

 

[TenPenny]

I wasn't aware that murder victims needed rights. lol

Seriously, I think you made a good post as the victims of murder are more than just the murdered persons. The families and friends and society in general are also the victims.

And I'm still wondering what rights they are denied, that are given to criminals.

But I know that won't go anywhere, because a criminal has no more rights than any other living citizen.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Don't know where you get your facts, but an executioner's wage is not that much. Costs a fortune to keep a low life murderer in prison. I don't want the money I donate to the government every year to go towards that.

I get my facts straight from USA Risus, the only developed country where death penalty is legal (except Japan). In USA it is clearly evident that on the average, a prisoner on death row costs much more than one given life without parole.

I don’t want to do your work for you, but it will be easy enough to Google for web articles to that effect. So no, cost is not an argument in favor of death penalty. Death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole. Unless one practices death penalty in the style of Taliban, who held it as a public entertainment event (in football fields), presumably with tickets being sold to watch the death penalty (and the whole family making a picnic out of it).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Get your head out of the sand. We are talking about human life here. Kill once, you're executed. You can't repeat. Understand?

No we are not. Your argument was that death penalty is desirable because it leaves no possibility of repeat offender. Then the question is, if death penalty is so good, why not extend it to all the crimes? Don’t you wish that there should be no repeat offenders in the case of rape, robbery, assault and battery etc.?

And we are not talking of human life; we are talking of there being no repeat offenders. I don’t see how human life is relevant to the argument here. How is taking of one human life (murder) is corrected by taking of another human life (death penalty)? It is the Old Testament justice all over again, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.


Just as cost is not a valid argument in favor of death penalty, claiming that there will be no repeat offenders is not a valid argument either.

 

[L Gilbert]

And I'm still wondering what rights they are denied, that are given to criminals.

But I know that won't go anywhere, because a criminal has no more rights than any other living citizen.

As I mentioned earlier, in fact they have at least one less right than regular citizens.

 

[TenPenny]

Get your head out of the sand. We are talking about human life here. Kill once, you're executed. You can't repeat. Understand?

Again, according to the U.S. Dept. of Justice and other studies done since 1994,

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]sex offenders commit another crime, of any kind, at a average rate of just thirteen percent, while [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]those convicted of property theft reoffend (steal again) at an average of 75%. [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]People convicted of drunk driving will reoffend at a rate of 51%, while [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]a convicted murderer will reoffend at a rate of 41%. [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]Ex-convicts with a non-sex offense charge are 87% more likely to commit a sex offense than a convicted sex offender in therapy is. [/FONT]

So, we'd be better off making drunk driving and theft a capital offense.

 

[L Gilbert]

I get my facts straight from USA Risus, the only developed country where death penalty is legal (except Japan).

I get my facts straight from USA Risus, the only developed country where death penalty is legal (except Japan)...........

I suppose that may depend upon your definition of "developed" but I would hardly call Egypt, Taiwan, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, UAE, undeveloped.

In USA it is clearly evident that on the average, a prisoner on death row costs much more than one given life without parole.

I don’t want to do your work for you, but it will be easy enough to Google for web articles to that effect. So no, cost is not an argument in favor of death penalty. Death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole. Unless one practices death penalty in the style of Taliban, who held it as a public entertainment event (in football fields), presumably with tickets being sold to watch the death penalty (and the whole family making a picnic out of it).

lmao You don't hardly do any work for yourself.

 

[taxslave]

SJP: You are wrong about death sentence being more expensive than parole or life without parole. The stats are manipulated by those opposed to the death penalty. One bullet right after sentencing costs less than fifty cents and a rope can be reused which is even cheaper. It is only because of the mainly taxpayer financed endless appeal process given those sentenced to death that makes it so expensive.
Most petty theft /B&E are drug related and that is a medical problem being dealt with in the wrong manner by our joke of a justice system. When these are removed there is a far lower repeat rate.
Being one of the people that gets to clean up the mess I could be persuaded that drunk drivers be executed as well if they kill someone.

 

[countryboy]

And I'm still wondering what rights they are denied, that are given to criminals.

But I know that won't go anywhere, because a criminal has no more rights than any other living citizen.

But isn't a murder victim a dead citizen?

 

[L Gilbert]

SJP: You are wrong about death sentence being more expensive than parole or life without parole. The stats are manipulated by those opposed to the death penalty. One bullet right after sentencing costs less than fifty cents and a rope can be reused which is even cheaper. It is only because of the mainly taxpayer financed endless appeal process given those sentenced to death that makes it so expensive.
Most petty theft /B&E are drug related and that is a medical problem being dealt with in the wrong manner by our joke of a justice system. When these are removed there is a far lower repeat rate.
Being one of the people that gets to clean up the mess I could be persuaded that drunk drivers be executed as well if they kill someone.

Pretty much, yep.

 

[L Gilbert]

But isn't a murder victim a dead citizen?

Not necessarily. The victims of murder also include friends, family, and the society of which the deceased were a part of.

 

[countryboy]

Not necessarily. The victims of murder also include friends, family, and the society of which the deceased were a part of.

Yes, you're right. I was thinking of the more immediate and direct victim - the dead one. The one that no longer has any rights.

But I agree..the list of victims can be long.

 

[Risus]

Again, according to the U.S. Dept. of Justice and other studies done since 1994,

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]sex offenders commit another crime, of any kind, at a average rate of just thirteen percent, while [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]those convicted of property theft reoffend (steal again) at an average of 75%. [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]People convicted of drunk driving will reoffend at a rate of 51%, while [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]a convicted murderer will reoffend at a rate of 41%. [/FONT]

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]Ex-convicts with a non-sex offense charge are 87% more likely to commit a sex offense than a convicted sex offender in therapy is. [/FONT]

So, we'd be better off making drunk driving and theft a capital offense.

I agree that drunk driving SHOULD be a capitol offense. There is NO excuse for it.

 

[Risus]

Not necessarily. The victims of murder also include friends, family, and the society of which the deceased were a part of.

Exactly.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SJP: You are wrong about death sentence being more expensive than parole or life without parole. The stats are manipulated by those opposed to the death penalty. One bullet right after sentencing costs less than fifty cents and a rope can be reused which is even cheaper. It is only because of the mainly taxpayer financed endless appeal process given those sentenced to death that makes it so expensive.

But here you are talking about how things should be according to you (that there be no appeal, as soon as a murderer is sentenced, bang, he is shot dead and that is it), not how things actually are.

Actually things are very much as I mentioned, nobody has cooked up any statistics. When they calculated all the costs associated with the death penalty, cost of housing the prisoner, cost of running the courts, cost of public prosecutor, public defender, judges’ salaries, cost of associate personnel, they found that it costs much more to execute a criminal than it does to give him life without parole (where there are no endless appeals).

So essentially what you are advocating is not US style of death penalty, but something much more barbaric, much more primitive, something on the style of what was practiced by Taliban or Saddam Hussein or similar dictators. What essentially you are advocating is that as soon as somebody is sentenced to death; let us shoot him dead, no appeals, no delays, no expenses.

Well, good luck with that. I don’t think even the most extreme; most right wing politician will go for something like that.

 

[petros]

Should we return to not paying taxes being a mortal offence too?