Debate: The Death Penalty.

A truely controversial subject. Is it humane and ethical to euthanize America's most violent inmates? Should the death penalty be abolished in favor of counseling and life long prison sentences? The topic is set. Debate away.

Is it humane and ethical to euthanize America's most violent inmates?

yes.

Should the death penalty be abolished in favor of counseling and life long prison sentences?

no.

why? the term "most violent inmates" would most likely refer to a murderer or a mass murderer. but, the question isn't "is the death penalty humane and ethical?". it's "how inhumane and unethical should the death penalty be?". what's controversial about it? you kill someone, you get killed. pretty simple if you ask me.

Yes, but think about it..

Bill kills someone, he gets the death penalty. Then to put him to death, someone is actually technically killing him by injecting the lethal injection.

So in the end, someone is getting away with murder.

but it's justified because you're killing a killer. killers are bad.

No. That is just a dumb way to rationalize the situation. Technically, someone is doing the lethal injection, but they are ordered to do so. They didn't pre-meditate anything. They don't have malicious thoughts about brutally killing another (Let's hope not anyway). It is their job, and even though they may reluctantly do so, that is how they make a living. It's just an eye for an eye.

Yes, but then someone is killing and getting away with it. Right after someone else is killed for killing.

Your killing someone because they took someone or someones live/lives away and you're getting away with ending them.

You killing, just liek the other person.

With that mentality, dog pounds and vets should be shut down for being genocidal killing camps.

Im just tryin to make a good argument why ther should be no death penalty.

Also, if the death penalty was abolished, think of how many dangerous criminals would be filling up our prisions. People are executed because they are a threat to society, and have no hope of rehabilitation.

If I did pay taxes, I woudln't want my money going towards providing housing for some serial killer who raped and murdered 12 young girls.

Let the punishment fit the crime.

People have ONE life. You will never exist again. Once you die, you're dead until time itself ends. To allow someone to take this precious life of a human being without equal collateral would be unacceptable, in my eyes.

Good point, but it is still moraly wrong to take lives. Plus, the criminals are good for picking up trash and such. Let them do stuff like that for free.

But then again, the US has a lot more murderes than Canada. We dont have a death penalty cuzz are prisons aren't as full of killers and such.

I don't know if there will be much back for the other side of the argument. And if Tyrannicide keeps bringing up these *great* comebacks, it will be over before it started.

The murderers being in prison thing is kind of a moot point Sov, because our jails are packed constantly. Not that many people are given the DP, and it takes a long time.

not in texas.

Yea really, they stay in jail for like 20+ years before they even have a idea when they are gonna be put to death right?

Death Penalty should mean your killed within 1 year, not 20 years later or longer. Defeats the point.

As far as I know, there is a bill pending in Texas that will make it so that a death sentence for a crime with more than three eye witnesses will be carried out with no death row. (This "as far as I know" is derived from a joke, but I think [for no logical reason] that there is actual backing to it. Anyhow, I may look into it later, but I'm at work now, so too much internet is a bad thing.)

I do not oppose the death penalty. It may be morally wrong, but I'm all for eye-for-an-eye type punishment. I think that all punishment should be related to the crime. I actually like the idea that, in some countries, a thief gets his hand cut off. It's simply more fitting than sitting in jail for x amount of time.

Also, I'm very opposed to the idea of jail. I understand the need for punishment as a society. If there is no punishment, there will be no order, but imprisonment voilates my views to such a large extent. It takes away ones freedom. I know that there is no mandate that grants freedom to those who impose on the freedoms of others, but that's basically hypocrisy.

I'm all for caning somebody who litters. That's cool with me. Fines are okay too. However, I don't believe that someone sould lose a year of their life because of it. That's a portion of their life, a resource of immeasurable value, that was lost to slavery because of an infraction of behavioral policy. Within reason, anything other than prison sounds good to me.

So, yes. Let the state murder people who take the lives of innocents.

I do not oppose the death penalty. It may be morally wrong, but I'm all for eye-for-an-eye type punishment. I actually like the idea that, in some countries, a thief gets his hand cut off. I'm all for caning somebody who litters. That's cool with me. So, yes. Let the state murder people who take the lives of innocents.

Sounds like a not-so-severe Israel to me. Funny thing is, I agree.

What the!? Where the hell do you live to be getting a year in prison for littering? Around here, it's $500 max.

Anyway, I agree with everyone in this thread excluding Tyrannicide. One kills a person, the killer gets killed. It's way better than spending around 50 years in prison and then getting out on parole(sp?). If they kill again, who's fault is it for letting them out of prison? Eye for an eye as Titus has stated.

Well, considering most killers serve about 12 years, then get out for good behavior is appauling. I mean honestly, anyone can fake "good behavior". The worst part is generally when they get out, they kill someone else and repeat the process.

Thats what the old mesopatamia{sp} laws were. Still, in Canada we have no death penalty, and I agree with that. Maybe because im use to it and its what I believe along with a lot of the country.

I have rights to my beliefs aswell as the rest of you. If they murder 2 or more, give them the DP, 1 should be a life sentence.

Another thing that is dumb is how the defendants try to argue that there client is unstable in the mind and such. What do you have to say about that? they usually get off to like life because they are psychotic.

Well, I don't think you can put a number value as a constraint on giving the Death Penalty. I think it is the severity of the crime really. Of course, murder is murder is murder, and that is severe enough, but I'm talking about additives, like rape, mutilation, etc. along with murdering. That for sure deserves the DP.