Why all this moralising about the death penalty?

Evidence?



Evidence?



Lolwut? Imprisonment and stripping of freedom is largely based on revenge. Using this logic, any crime should not have any punishment at all, you lefty loon.



As you can see above, and like I said before - racist cultural bigotry, not intelligence, plays a key role in the minds of these anti-death penalty people. I only hope that we can support change in this country

Its well known that it doesn't deter or cost less. If you are going to have opinions, they should be informed.

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411625_md_death_penalty.pdf
http://www.ccfaj.org/documents/reports/dp/official/FINAL%20REPORT%20DEATH%20PENALTY.pdf

Good luck on reading those. There is stuff about cost in them somewhere, I used them in an essay, couldn't be arsed to fish it out.





Deterrence? Clearly not.

Not so 'lolwut' grow up. No, it isn't, imprisonment is based on keeping other people in society safe. It does a good job, there is no need for the death penalty. I'm not in fact a 'lefty' and you couldn't assume this from one of my personal opinions, political stance is varied and I don't put myself anywhere. Some of my views are left, some right. More than anything I'm pro-life and that accounts for my opinion more so than being a liberal. You need to learn to accept peoples opinions if you're going to get anywhere with this argument.

In what way would you be benefited by the death penalty?

Why do I get the feeling that those against the death penalty are middle class racists who turn their nose up at "barbarians" in the Middle East, Asia, Africa etc who still (thankfully) use the death penalty?

Oh wait - because it's true.

All I can see here is stuff about the USA. Stop **** licking - that's just one country of 50+ (hundreds?) that use the death penalty.

Well I'm sure I'll get shot down in flames for saying this, but why the hell does everyone get so morally het-up about the death penalty? Time and time again, when people argue against it, their main point boils down to the entirely subjective opinion that "killing people is wrong".

I don't have a problem with people presenting valid, well-thought through, practical arguments against the death penalty. I disagree with some of these, but if you think it costs too much, or it doesn't deter people, or we might accidentally murder an innocent, by all means argue along those lines.

But why take issue with the principle of killing a white supremacist who dragged a black along behind his truck until he died a horrendous death? There was a case in the US some time back where a group of guys carjacked a woman and her boyfriend for no reason, and did horrendous things to both of them. The woman, I recall, was raped repeatedly and very violently in three different orafices, sodomised with a chair-leg, had cleaning-fluid poured down her throat and rubbed on her wounds, and then was dumped into a bin to suffocate because of the plastic bag put round her head.

I appreciate that we shouldn't lower ourselves to the level of criminals for the sake of revenge, but what about for deterrence, or the protection of society? If you don't think the dp achieves either of these, then, as I said above, I have no problem with practical arguments. But why be concerned about the principle of killing people such as those who committed the crime in the above paragraph?

1. Only if you give them loads of chances to appeal

But that is logically incorrect

Apart from the fact it ISN'T true.

Capital punishment, at least in Europe, is finished.

1. Only if you give them loads of chances to appeal

2. True, which is why I am in favour of it, in principle

3. There's no solid evidence to support this

4. Very expensive (we only have limited resources, someone could be dying in a hospital due to not receiving the most advanced medical techniques available because of costs), plus is the 20 year old pretty boy in prison for selling cannabis (this guy would probably not be in a high security prison, but you get my point) safe from the crazed 35 year old serial rapist and muderer?

5. Life has not intrinsic value without the evidence of God, so why should the state not hae such authority?

6. It saves money (provided you don't give the criminal loads of appeals), plus it may act as a deterrent.

It's the one that resembles the UK the most,

I don't believe anyone should have any more authority than anyone else. No matter what position they are in.

It's true for many against the death penalty.

Middle class racists who turn their nose up at "barbarians" in the Middle East, Asia, Africa etc who still (thankfully) use the death penalty.

And what is wrong with that?
If you are going to kill someone, then surely they should have the right of appeal? Just as people who are sentenced to prison do? Plus of course, you have to have no doubt at all the person is guilty.

Unless a new piece of evidence comes up, then they should get 2 appeals maximum.

Not at all. The USA and UK experience vastly different types of crime.

3. Yes, but there is a lot of evidence to lean that way.
4. The people who are eligible for it would be the most dangerous, and they would already be held in high security, with or without death penalty.
5. Oh god, I'm not going into a philosophical argument, but I don't believe anyone should have any more authority than anyone else. No matter what position they are in.

LMFAO. Like I said.. just loonies who think they're better than other cultures.

Where did you pluck that figure from? Would you apply the same limit to those who are serving a custodial sentence? What if there are clear obvious reasons why the person should not be put to death (in the recent case - we have the fact there is significant doubt and 7 out of 9 key witnesses have changed their minds).

3. Let's see this evidence (a correlation between the two things with no demonstrated link is not evidence).

4. Like I said expensive.

5. Then why do you believe that the state should be able to incarcerate someone, but you cannot take a man against his will and hold him prisoner yourself?