I Pit The Death Penalty ...

And the lynching mob that blindly screams death death death at every tragic news story involving a blameable victim. However evil they consider killing, this same evil is in one sentence considered the greatest good, the best response to such tragedy. Murderers are Evil. The Evil should be Murdered.

How on earth do you believe this will make the situation any better. I mean, the man isn’t even your typical evil psychopath, or he would simply not have cared about his wife and family finding out.

Nobody even knows the story behind this - maybe the woman blackmailed him, demanded him to do things for her, support her, or whatever, or else she would tell his family. Maybe this had been going on for a long time, and the man got completely tangled up in a mess of emotions till he finally snapped. Maybe the woman had good reasons to do so, too, single mom, tough making it through the week, no friends, little welfare, bad job, lonely, whatever.

Thousands of different possibilities, and all the mob screams is for ways to make it even worse. Instead, why not simply teach people to deal with emotions, to accept imperfections, allow for mistakes, and to deal with problems before they get completely out of hand? Yes, you can blame society for such failures. And a society that suggests death is sometimes the best solution, especially if it makes you feel better, imho sets a bad example.

Pro-Lifers, the State of Texas, those in favor of the Death Penalty, Mr. Blue Sky and FinnAgain, consider yourself pitted. I’m sure you’re not going to be impressed at all, but it’s probably as close to the real meaning of justice as you’re ever going to get.

yes this rant is partly inspired by some lame idiot in the Netherlands suggesting we should reintroduce the death penalty, just because he things it might win him some votes

First off, I agree with the much of your rant–I’m anti-death penalty, and I don’t like the “let them eat rats in jail and then execute them” mob-mentality at all.

That said…

Not necessarily true at all–he doesn’t necessarily care about his families opinion because the opinion itself matters, he could be more concerned about the consequences of them holding a negative opinion about it (for example, he may depend on them for money that they’d withhold if he cheated).

Of course, none of that excuses or justifies murder. Ever. We should still empathize with him, and try to rehabilitate, etc., but that empathy shouldn’t be contigent on his actions being justified.

With ya 100% here. :slight_smile:

You do know that being pro-life doesn’t imply that one is pro-DP, right? The Catholic church springs to mind…

Oh, and as a Texan, go stick your head in a steer. :stuck_out_tongue:

Yup. Death penalty is beautifully hypocritical.

But then again, the whole idea of a locked cage penal system is medieval. Incarceration is not HELPful except that it seperates the bad people who are sloppy enough to get caught from the rest of us who run free. It would take very little effort to create self-governing, self-sustaining penal colonies. Such institutions would be a society unto themselves–which may indeed have their own death penalty-but which would also need to trade with the outside world in order to function. As a microsociety, each individual would better understand his role in the social order, that each member is important, and that if everyone benefits, the individual benefits in equal measure to his efforts.

Of course, I am an idiot.

Ok, fair enough you have a point there. I thought it unlikely that there would be extremely intelligent, talented psychopaths that can actually maintain a family and then are stupid enough to cheat, and yet fail to keep up his amazing performance in the 7th month of the pregnancy, but I didn’t think that they could actually be the ones that are maintained by the family.

Of course. Agree 101%.

Yes I do, just wondering how many combine these two “interesting” positions, especially since both of these bear on the tragedy at hand.

Whoops … I meant the State of Texas, as in “The State of Texas vs [Insert Name]” - I meant to clarify, but just adding “those in favor of” doesn’t quite achieve that, I realise. :wink:

What are you going on about? Is there a link?

I’m very much pro-death penalty, by the way.

Sets a bad example for whom?

Humanity in general.

I’m against the death penalty.

That said. The OP sucks. It’s this kind of crap that actually hurts the cause of the poster.

Lets see…

You seem to be taking the side of some evil psycopath. The post has that whining, justify any actions tone to it that is horribly annoying. There isn’t any link so we don’t even know what you are talking about.

Care to try again?

I am a pro-lifer, which is precisely why I oppose the death penalty. I believe human life is sacred, and it’s generally wrong for the state to kill someone in cold blood.

Hey, isn’t one Australia enough for our tiny planet? :wink:

What a bunch of bleeding heart bullshit. It’s not about punishment, it’s not about deterrence. The DP is all about responsibility. Society has certain responsibilities to all of it’s members, education, the ability to make a living, etc…, but all members of society have the responsibility to live within it’s framework, including the obligation not to harm other members of society. In a case like the one being discussed (link), the guy has confessed to murdering a 7 month pregnant woman and her 7 year old son. We don’t owe this fuck head ANYTHING. He’s proven he can not live within the constraints of society, so we have every right to take him out of it as painlessly as possible. Thank God he’s in Texas where they’ll do the right thing.

Well that is OK, but the argument only stands up if there is evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent. I am not convinced it is. I am sure that we could throw statistics around, but my instinct is anyone crazy enough to commit a truly horrible murder (that is, one likely to attract the death penalty) is probably not going to be thinking about the consequences. If they are, the distinction between life imprisonment and death is probably not large enough to sway a decision either way. So, to my way of thinking, the death penalty is about revenge. Again, if society decides revenge is OK, so be it. The real possibility of the state killing an innocent person (it has happened before, it will happen again) is enough for me to reject the death penalty, however.

Good point. Makes me wish I had said “It’s not about deterence”. :stuck_out_tongue: :smiley:

::Bangs head against wall and slinks away whistling::


I’m partially with Weirddave. I don’t think the DP is about deterrence, and I find the idea of societal retribution or revenge to be reprehensible.

But a society has a responsibility and an obligation as a body to isolate and remove destructive elements. Murder, defined roughly as an individual’s willful and deliberate taking of another’s life, is destructive to society. Therefore, murderers need to be isolated from society. Fuck justifications, I’m sure there are plenty of them. Murderers need to be removed from society.

Now, I don’t think execution is the way to do it. But it can be effective to that end.

Why is it that you people can’t get it through your head that murdering a child who has done nothing to anyone and gets no due process is light years apart from a guy who has murdered a person and is sentenced to death after a trial? At least a murderer gets a chance to defend himself first.

There is no comparison between the two.

By this logic we should set all of the kidnappers free.

Actually, the DP is more preventative than deterrent (there is a difference), in that even in the cases where forethought could be applied to both the crime and the punishment, to prevent one person from committing the same crime to another member of society is the goal. Locking someone up does NOT prevent them from committing another murder, for instance, it just changes the situations in which the likelihood exists.

The way I see it, there are people in our society that need to die. Some of the more famous serial killers are among them, as are pederasts/pedophiles, spree and thrill killers, repeat sexual predators and certian violent sociopaths. There is no question, the process needs work, but I think abolishment is a mistake, because it DOES, at least IMO, act as a deterrent, (as well as a preventative).

We’ll never know who picked up that gun, only to put it back in the drawer, because the thought of the needle spooked him.

And actually, if you want to solve the majority of criminal problems in our society, do three things…

  1. Decriminalize and regulate Marijuana, and OVERcriminalize harder drugs. There isn’t a potential medical usage for crack or heroin. Yes, it will effect the poor, no, I don’t care.

  2. Return to the penal system. Correction does not work.

  3. Truth in sentencing. No 1-for-1 here, The issued penalty for a crime is say, 5 years in the joint. The criminal spends the WHOLE FIVE YEARS. Period. While working to sustain the place we’ve sent him (or her).

And why is it that “you people” can’t get it through your head that many people do not equate abortion with “murdering a child?”

Come on, Doors, you know better than that.

The death penalty may or may not deter, but it sure as hell cures recidivism…

The murder victims were a pregnant woman and her 7 year old son.