The Death Sentence.

clarissa:

You're saying the punishment should fit the crime? If murder should result in the murderer's own death then it follows logically that the sentencer should also receive the death penalty, as they have also basically committed a murder. Maybe that's a 'just murder', maybe they're doing it for the good of the people, the safety of the people, (and, also, the revenge of the people), but it's still murder. It's just legal murder. But how is that morally better?

It's not, of course, morally better. But I never said it was.
It is, however, smarter than locking these people up. Do you have any idea how lenient prisons can be? And for some, prison isn't a punishment. They show no remorse and therefore pose a threat to society. Surely the murder of these people isn't going to hurt society? Keeping them alive would do more harm than killing them would.

Starr:

It's not, of course, morally better. But I never said it was.
It is, however, smarter than locking these people up. Do you have any idea how lenient prisons can be? And for some, prison isn't a punishment. They show no remorse and therefore pose a threat to society. Surely the murder of these people isn't going to hurt society? Keeping them alive would do more harm than killing them would.

What chance does a corpse have of being remorseful? I see your point that you think criminals should show regret but do you demand it instantly? Is there a time limit? If you don't show remorse by a certain time, would your sentence get upgraded to execution? Remorse isn't always immediate; it comes with time. Life sentences give the opportunity for prisoners to come to terms with whatever they've done; experience remorse; and change their lives. The death penalty doesn't; all you get is revenge and one less life, which you agree is precious. Do you think all life is equally precious? As for the leniency of prisons, all I have to say is that I agree with you there: with certain crimes, imprisonment should be more of a punishment and a longer one.



Sorry if that came across as aggressive, I got a bit carried away.

clarissa:

What chance does a corpse have of being remorseful? I see your point that you think criminals should show regret but do you demand it instantly? Is there a time limit? If you don't show remorse by a certain time, would your sentence get upgraded to execution? Remorse isn't always immediate; it comes with time. Life sentences give the opportunity for prisoners to come to terms with whatever they've done; experience remorse; and change their lives. The death penalty doesn't; all you get is revenge and one less life, which you agree is precious. Do you think all life is equally precious? As for the leniency of prisons, all I have to say is that I agree with you there: with certain crimes, imprisonment should be more of a punishment and a longer one.



Sorry if that came across as aggressive, I got a bit carried away.

Hey no problem, that's the point of a good old debate =]
But like I said, prison isn't a punishment to some people, ever.
I'm not saying "Show instant remorse for what you did, you bad terrible person" but I do think if a person can be unhinged enough to go out and murder and rape and then be proud of what they did, they aren't going to contribute much to society except fear and crime. Those sort of people seriously need help or the death penalty. And personally I feel the latter is better because it isn't a waste of tax payers money and it gets rid of maniacs who could harm other people.

Starr:

Hey no problem, that's the point of a good old debate =]
But like I said, prison isn't a punishment to some people, ever.
I'm not saying "Show instant remorse for what you did, you bad terrible person" but I do think if a person can be unhinged enough to go out and murder and rape and then be proud of what they did, they aren't going to contribute much to society except fear and crime. Those sort of people seriously need help or the death penalty. And personally I feel the latter is better because it isn't a waste of tax payers money and it gets rid of maniacs who could harm other people.

You can't put a price on life, no matter how it has been led. So killing 'maniacs' gets rid of a prolem at reasonably low cost (although some people would argue that capital punishment is actually more expensive than running prisons; I have no statistics for that) but isn't that sort of shutting a door on a problem without trying to solve it? Death is a very final, irreversible, possibly termporary solution. Exterminating people who pose a threat isn't exterminating the problem of why they've committed heinous crimes and how they managed it. It's just my opinion that tax payers' money is better spent on reformation than extermination. I'd go with help before the death penalty, although I recognise this preference is coming from a non-victim rather than an experienced sufferer of maniacal criminals; I'd probably feel quite differently if some nutter had killed someone I loved. But there we go, it's all I've got to go on at the moment (luckily.)

clarissa:

You can't put a price on life, no matter how it has been led. So killing 'maniacs' gets rid of a prolem at reasonably low cost (although some people would argue that capital punishment is actually more expensive than running prisons; I have no statistics for that) but isn't that sort of shutting a door on a problem without trying to solve it? Death is a very final, irreversible, possibly termporary solution. Exterminating people who pose a threat isn't exterminating the problem of why they've committed heinous crimes and how they managed it. It's just my opinion that tax payers' money is better spent on reformation than extermination. I'd go with help before the death penalty, although I recognise this preference is coming from a non-victim rather than an experienced sufferer of maniacal criminals; I'd probably feel quite differently if some nutter had killed someone I loved. But there we go, it's all I've got to go on at the moment (luckily.)

Helping them would be the best thing you could do, but there are some people who just don't want to be helped. They need to want to be helped or else it's basically like forcing your beliefs onto a person. If they refuse everything you try to do, why not kill them. They've been offered a second chance and threw it back in your face, so they obviously don't want another shot at making something of their lives.

I don't believe in the death penalty
yes I know people do horrible things to others but if we sentence them to death then its just an easy way out, if you just kill them then yes that evil person is gone but they won't have to think about it every day and regret it because if they have to sit in prison for the rest of thier life then I garrantee they will regret it eventually. I know that alot of criminals are proud of what they did but they won't be so proud if they have to sit in a cell for the rest of thier life.(I lost my train of thought so thats all I got right now)

im against. i think staying in jail for life is worse than dying. when they kill them, yeah they're dead. boo hoo. but when they stay in jail, they will be miserable and can actually think about what they have done and how it effected so many people.

totally against it. murderers are usually put on deathr ow and it hink wen you take their life ur just as bad as them, stayin in prison ur whole life is worse.

i found this out the other day nd hv 2 ask, why do they sterlise the lethal injection?

just_another_emo_kid:

why do they sterlise the lethal injection?

Hypodermic needles are sterilized during the manufacturing process, and thus shipped in a sterile package.

When a physician procures new needles, including the physician who administers the lethal drugs of execution, the only needles he can get are sterile needles.

The process of lethal injection begins with the inmate being led into the execution chamber and strapped onto the execution table. Then the arm is swabbed with alcohol to sterilize and also to force blood vessels closer to the skin’s surface to make it easier to insert the IV. Next an intavenous catheter is inserted into each arm, one as the primary IV and one as a bacakup in case the other one fails. Lethal injection must include the use of three drugs. The first drug injected into the body is sodium thiopental, otherwise called sodium pentothal, which renders the inmate unconscious so that he or she feels no pain. The second drug injected is pancuronium bromide which stops all muscle movement besides the heart. The third and final drug injected is potassium chloride, which causes the heart to stop beating. The three drugs cannot be mixed outside of the body because that would cause them to become solid. It usually takes from as little as seven minutes to almost 45 minutes from the time that the first drug is administered to the time that the inmate is declared dead.

Doctors are not allowed to participate in lethal injections because of medical ethics. A doctor must be at the execution only to declare the inmate dead. The absence of a doctor to perform the actual injection can cause problems. If an inexperienced person were to incorrectly inject any of the drugs it would be very painful, and would cause a delay in order to find a vein that was usable.

I'm against it.
Not just because it's murdering a human being for something they did that was probably murder.
Because I think they should spend the rest of their lives locked up...
thinking about what they had done.
Because the death sentence is murder.
And if a citizen can't kill another citizen,
then,
Nobody else has the right to kill anybody.
Right?
It's all comes down to this.
It IS murder.

I agree with MissAphexMurder,
No one has the right to take away a human beings life
besides I would want the person to be in jail for the rest of his life because
he will rot there
and he will rot in hell
so...the person is in more pain if you just let
them rot in a jail cell the rest of there human life

please dont judge me for my opinion I have a right to state my opinion I think if the person did something bad like kill a child or something for example for no reason , I think the death sentence should be legal depending on what they did.

,

Some of you might be against it and might attack me for my opinion but let me turn it around if someone did something to a member of your family if they killed a member of your family or friend you'd turn around and say you'd want the death penalty on that person.I'm not against it at all I think a person should get the death penalty again depending on what they did.

Sometimes the death penalty isnt fair sometimes it is.

I don't think you can let people with emotional attachment decide the fate of someone who has wronged them. I also don't think you can take the risk of being wrong when someone's life is on the line.

I'm for it, but only if they killed.

Thats my way of looking at life.

Eye for an Eye, Tooth for a Tooth.


=/

I've said it before and I'll say it again: An eye for an eye will leave everyone blind.

i think it depends on what they did and why they did it. and if they killed someone it should depend on how many people he or she killed if it was family or not or whatever. well i think i am more against it because they have a family who loves them and friends and stuff... but i mean if they killed their family then they don't have anyone to go back to and that should be punishment enough, but yeah. i think i am more against it.

You can't fight murder with murder.

I think that killing a person found guilty of any crime is really a easy way out. that person should have to live with what they did every single day. even though you might not think they are not worthy of another day of earth, i know if someone close to me was killed by someone i would wnat to know that person is suffering for what they did.

Secondly i understand that it is us that pays for them to stay in the jails, and i don't think that is fair. what i also think is unfair is that some prisons treat the criminals being housed there are treated like they are in a motel. They get good accommodation, pay tv, etc. they dont deserve this. they should be given some nice metal bars, a nice cold concrete floor and basic food and water three times a day. enough for them to live on and no extras. and definantely no getting out early for good behaviour.

The law shold be changed so once you commit a crime such as kill someone you stay in prison for ever, you burgle five houses you stay in prison forever. if you commit a crime you don't deserve to be living like the good innocent people in the society.