What is the purpose of the death penalty?

Great Debates
141

I’m not trying to have a debate. I explained why society has implemented the death penalty. Done. Move on. I do happen to support society’s decision on that score, and no, I don’t care to debate it, since that’s not what this thread is about.

If you believe I am incorrect as to “What the purpose of the death penalty is” you can expect me to engage you specifically. If you believe the death penalty is abhorrent and you want to badger me into seeing things your way, I have better things to do. If you want to quibble about whether the death penalty achieves its purpose - again, I have better things to do.

142

If you maintain that one valid purpose of the death penalty is to deter crime, it is incumbent upon *you *to provide some numbers to indicate that it does, in fact, accomplish that purpose.

143

double post

144

You don’t have to do anything, CandidGamera, of course not. But the time you took to not advance your position could have also been spent to explain it; it’s Great Debates, after all, not In My Humble Opinion. And you know as well as I do, how your strategy can be read.

Still, do as you please.

145

Why? None of your “facts” had cites; why am I held to a higher standard?

146

I’m not debating its validity.

147

Do you really need me to direct you to a Wikipedia article on B.F. Skinner, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

148

You logic is an embarrassment to Skinner, and he is long dead. Let’s see if we can encapsulate it:

  1. Punishment discourages crime.
  2. The death penalty is a punishment.
  3. Murder is a crime.
  4. Ergo, the death penalty must discourage murder.

Do I need to link to the wikipedia page on logical fallacies?

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, and attribute your obtusity to mental defect; it isn’t deliberate, you just can’t help it.

149

It’s a proven fact that the death penelty does not reduce crime. The murder rate was higher in Canada before the death penelty was abolished.
The present murder rate in the USA is way higher than in Canada and the USA has the death penelty.
Lets say there was a situation where a criminal has commited a capital offence. Why would he not gun down any law enforcement officer trying to arrest him? He has nothing to lose. I think that capital punishment makes it more dangerous for the police because of that. The purpose of capital punishment is so clearly revenge that nothing else makes sense. When mistakes are made innocent people are executed. Personally I can’t live with that idea.

150

In that case, you’re posting in the wrong thread.

151

You, however, can help posting personal insults in Great Debates and you will refrain from doing so in the future.
[ /Moderating ]

152

Sorry, I responded to the “deliberately obtuse” dig, thinking we we in the Pit. Won’t happen again.

153

because the gimp that isnt the serial killer usually doesnt have a body count. Society protects those who are handicapped.

By killing in a non socially acceptable way, they have demonstrated they are broken and are actually a danger to society and need to be removed.

Now if the gimp sharpens her crutches and starts killing people, then you can kill her also.

I dont think anybody on the list would volunteer to be Kemps roomie [if he was still alive]

Maybe we need to put the louder of the bleeding hearts in a cell for a few months with our surviving serial killers … sort them out so that they stay with thekiller they most resemble the victim profile of to make it really festive.

154

I recommend you re-read the OP.

155

I certainly hope my “strategy” will be correctly “read” as “staying on topic and not hijacking the thread.”

156

Alright, then it’s up to you, silvermist: would it help you if the “pro death penalty” advocates explained their position further and/or answered some of the questions that were asked (and if so, what questions)?

Since you are the only one who knows what you meant when you asked the question, you decide what is on topic or not.