• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

Death Penalty

Should death penalties be in practice?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 3 7.1%

  • No.

    Votes: 29 69.0%

  • Yes, but under certain conditions.

    Votes: 10 23.8%
  • Total voters
    42
Superbird

Superbird

Fire emblem is great
Partially for a school project.

What are your thoughts on death penalties? Do you support them? Why?

I think that death penalties should be exercised. But conditionally. If the case has been done fairly, and everyone is positive the guilty party is guilty of murder, especially multiple murders, then they should be executed. After all, who is paying for them if they stick around. I don't know everyone, but I do know that many people do not like paying taxes. Which would be lowered if high-profile cases would be dealt with immediately.

Additionally, if this thread belongs in Serious Business instead, feel free to move it. I just thought it was more appropriate here.
 
Did you know it actually costs more to execute someone, because of all the appeal legal fees, than to imprison them for life?

Also: so long as there is any possibility that the convicted is innocent - and there always is! - capital punishment should be abolished. People on death row have been released on appeal following the introduction of DNA evidence, so clearly it can happen.

Of course, I think the death penalty constitutes inhumane punishment no matter how guilty the accused party.

Might wanna read this thread?
Click to expand...

Nah, that was slightly different. Anyway, better to start a fresh thread than continue that one, which was more about the "ten guilty/one innocent" thing.
 
...About the other thread, did not know that existed. Probably because the last post was in April. And that will probably change my opinion.
 
opaltiger said:
Did you know it actually costs more to execute someone, because of all the appeal legal fees, than to imprison them for life?

Also: so long as there is any possibility that the convicted is innocent - and there always is! - capital punishment should be abolished. People on death row have been released on appeal following the introduction of DNA evidence, so clearly it can happen.

Of course, I think the death penalty constitutes inhumane punishment no matter how guilty the accused party.



Nah, that was slightly different. Anyway, better to start a fresh thread than continue that one, which was more about the "ten guilty/one innocent" thing.
Click to expand...
i agree pretty much 100%.
 
If the case has been done fairly, and everyone is positive the guilty party is guilty of murder, especially multiple murders, then they should be executed.
Click to expand...

this happens and innocent people still get convicted, so :|

I'm against the death penalty because it's inhumane, and what kind of double-standard is that, to kill people who kill people? not to mention it obviously doesn't make much of a deterrant to people who do commit crimes.
 
I have big, brightly-coloured stickers all over my room that say "END THE DEATH PENALTY" (the Amnesty International society at uni always has loads, so I pilfer them from time to time).

So yes, I would be against the death penalty. For the reasons laid out by everyone else; there's not a single convincing argument for it.
 
sreservoir said:
I support in concept, oppose in practice. it works a lot better in theory.
Click to expand...

This. For me the death penalty is less about punishment and more about removing someone from society permanently to remove the risk for other people.

But this brings up a whole 'nother host of problems. Could this person be rehabilitated? Even if not, would they commit another crime again? Would the life sentence work in its place? And which is more appropriate, annihilating them from society or giving them the best punishment? To tell the truth, I don't really have a strong opinion on this like other people because it's one of those moral issues where I find it really hard to come to an answer I can completely believe in. :/ So I don't know. I voted the third option, though...
 
Reworded the poll question because it was dumb. Believe in the death penalty? I couldn't help but read it in that "do you believe in the tooth fairy" context.

But should it? No, I don't think so. I think the money spent on killing people should be spent on rehabilitation/research instead. Like, figuring out what conditions made the person the way they are and finding a way to apply that information to preventing it in the future, in the case of those really crazy types. I think that would be much more beneficial to society.

edit: that and it's really, really hypocritical. That's kind of a "duhh" thing but some people don't seem to realize it. You kill somebody? That's bad. We kill you? That's okay. Because we're the government.
 
Last edited:
If you say "yes, under certain conditions", what are those conditions? In what circumstances can you see capital punishment as a viable part of the justice system?
 
I feel that the problem of crime in general could be reduced if high schools had field-trips to prison to see what your life could end up like if you make those choices. I also think that putting people in prison is quite- if not more- effective at keeping bad people away from modern society and sending a message not to do crime.

Summary:Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
 
I personally believe that the death penalty should be illegal.

That being said though, I would probably give the more dangerous offenders (murderers, arsonists... anything with a life sentence, basically) the choice between jail time or euthanasia. If they want to die, it's their choice.
 
I think that it is a waste to spend money on creating/finding chemicals to inject into peoples heads like in the book "The Giver" by Louis Lawrey and that we should rather use the money to do research on why they are loony and want to kill. However if they have escaped from jail several times and can't be helped in any way and kepp killing, then maybe should be dealt with (killed) (man I am gonna get shot for that one).
 
Guess who's the yes vote.

I refuse to argue anymore but just I agree with this.

Also, name is Lois Lowry. Girl, not guy.
 
Innocent people die frequent enough to make it a fairly obvious no.

Also, it takes a lot of time and money before anyone actually dies.
 
I'm against it obviously. There is really no reason to exercise capital punishment at all - it costs more, innocent people end up dying, it doesn't actually deter crime, and it's pointlessly cruel in comparison to life without parole. There's also a whole bunch of stuff about how blacks are more likely to receive the death penalty than whites by a huge margin (I had to do a paper on this subject too).

That said, I don't think it's the biggest issue in the world.
 
sreservoir said:
condition is "in an ideal world".
Click to expand...

*giggles helplessly at idea of the death penalty existing in an ideal world*

I'm sorry. I understand people supporting in it in principle but not practice, but since that is - and always will be - purely theoretical, surely it would be better to support something like rehabilitation, which is also more effective in theory than practice, but doesn't require more human deaths?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom