Keep in mind that this only makes crimes punishable by the death penalty not necessarilly make it have to be punished by death.
I would think the death penalty should be eligible for:
First-Degree Murder
Treason
Espionage
Desertion During Wartime
Could you clarify your distinction? I still don’t get it.
I mean that the crimes’ only possible punishment isn’t the death penalty especially if there are mitigating circumstances of one variety or the other.
Rape? Certain forms of child abuse?
none
Repeated physical / sexual abuse of animals or people.
Joe
Agreed.
I think anyone who commits those acts deserves death, but I do not trust our legal system to dish out penalties rightly or fairly.
None.
None.
Desertion? Are you Ned Stark?
Stupidity? 
Seriously though? For the most part none, except for genocide. (Like during the Nuremberg Trials.) And even then it would have to be particularly heinous. So only really in theory.
Aren’t those already eligible?
I know. I was talking about one’s personal views. However this doesn’t mean that I’m satisfied with the current penal code-its stupid, illogical, and hypocritical. All people convicted of simply possessing drugs should be immediately released for starters.
Panda poaching.
I’m pretty sure that’s one of the 3457 offences punishable by death in the PRC.
I always hear people say this. Why? Why don’t you trust the legal system?
After all the appeals these people get - after years, sometimes decades on death row - I think they are treated plenty fair.
Sometimes I hear people say, “if even ONE person is ever wrongly executed, the whole system is evil.” Why? I’d say if only one person is wrongly executed, out of thousands, I’d say the system actually works pretty damn well. These people, by the way, never seem to give a damn about the thousands of people murdered by criminals, so I think their moral compass is a little fucked up.
:rolleyes: Ah, the good old “if you don’t support the death penalty you’re pro-crime” bit.
One? What if more than half those convicted weren’t guilty?
Sure, those appeals worked, how many don’t? And at what cost? The death penalty isn’t punishment, it’s vengeance and unethical.
I don’t see how taking the life of a man who has taken the life of another is unethical.
And killing people who are innocent? That is after all what Implicit was talking about.
No, he directly said it was “vengeful” which implies he just doesn’t mean those who might be wrongly convicted.