Supreme Court vs Lethal Injection - Page 3

Kytro · 09-26-2007, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

I'm actually ok with revenge. I see nothing wrong with it in the case of someone murdering someone else. Especially when someone murders a child.

There is a good reason why it shouldn't be employed - it is based on the same mentality of tribal blood feuds.

JaJae · 09-26-2007, 12:29 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

It isn't just a punishment, though it is that. It is a punishment because the person has to live each day with the consequences of their actions.

Though I don't think they should be held for life unless there is a high chance of re offending.

How do we determine someone's chance of committing another crime? More than two-thirds of felons get re-arrested in their first few years out of prison alone.

Kytro · 09-26-2007, 01:50 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

How do we determine someone's chance of committing another crime? More than two-thirds of felons get re-arrested in their first few years out of prison alone.

That requires some study into what the primary causes of re offending are, and what methods of rehabilitation are the most effective for different types of people.

I'm willing to bet that if you can take someone out of prison and have them move into something productive they are going to be less likely to re offend.

JaJae · 09-26-2007, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

That requires some study into what the primary causes of re offending are, and what methods of rehabilitation are the most effective for different types of people.

I'm willing to bet that if you can take someone out of prison and have them move into something productive they are going to be less likely to re offend.

When we let people out on parole one of the requirements is they have to hold a job and check in with a parole officer. It doesn't work.

Kytro · 09-26-2007, 02:18 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

When we let people out on parole one of the requirements is they have to hold a job and check in with a parole officer. It doesn't work.

Primarily because it is poorly executed and the availability of work for ex cons is poor.

The entire justice system needs reform, not just one little bit. You cannot expect a simple requirement to be effective in isolation.

JaJae · 09-26-2007, 03:08 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Primarily because it is poorly executed and the availability of work for ex cons is poor.

The entire justice system needs reform, not just one little bit. You cannot expect a simple requirement to be effective in isolation.

There's a lot of reasons for the recidivism rate to be so high. We can't just blame it all on society and capitalism. The main reason the recidivism rate is so high is because criminals by definition are people who break the law.

Kytro · 09-26-2007, 03:55 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

There's a lot of reasons for the recidivism rate to be so high. We can't just blame it all on society and capitalism. The main reason the recidivism rate is so high is because criminals by definition are people who break the law.

It isn't capitalism that is really the problem, but social attitudes play an important part.

The biggest problem is the fundamental attribution error - assuming that people do something because of who they are rather than circumstance.

In this case it is assuming be break the law because they are criminally inclined rather than due to the circumstances they are in.

Obviously people need to take some personal responsibility but one shouldn't surprised when someone who goes to prison for a few years, lives with hardened criminals then is released and is given limited job opportunities re-offends.

Once a person has repaid society, and been appropriately rehabilitated they should return to a normal existence, in almost all cases

Diesel66 · 09-26-2007, 07:04 AM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

As I have grown up and had the ability to mull over the whole death penalty thing...I just don't see any valid reason behind it anymore. It's not a deterrent. It's not a cost savings situation. It serves as nothing but a mechanism for revenge...which is not what the justice system is supposed to do. We talk about "barbarian" countries...but we look like idiots doing it and continuing this practice.

Convicted murderers in prison can still kill (guards, other prisoners, visitiors or they can escape) and order murders/crimes(entire gangs are run by the leaders who are in lockdown).
Convicted murderers in the ground cannot.

So yes there is a purpose.

Stylerod · 09-26-2007, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

There is a good reason why it shouldn't be employed - it is based on the same mentality of tribal blood feuds.

It's not even close, unless tribal blood feuds have courts and appeals courts and public/private defenders.

Scrum · 09-26-2007, 10:31 AM

I'm all for capital punishment.

Some people commit crimes so horrible, that they only deserve death.

I do think there needs to be overwhelming evidence to get the death penalty in all cases though.

Joe_Cool · 09-26-2007, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I don't like the death penalty either for the same reasons. Also, the logical problem where it's irreversible.. if they are later proven innocent.. oops. With life in prison at least you can let them go.

Unless you can give them back the years you took away, and undo any damage done by spending years wrongfully imprisoned, then your argument is invalid.

Aside from that... Why don't they just give people a lethal dose of some barbituate like morphine or sodium pentobarb? They would fall asleep in a blissful haze and never wake up. Isn't that how we put down sick animals? I never understood why we didn't just do that.

Fuck all that. I'm shocked that people spend so much energy worrying over whether brutal murderers might feel a little bit of pain as they die. We should just shoot them and be done with it.

Joe_Cool · 09-26-2007, 03:00 PM

Also, how can the most common method of execution in the country be "cruel and UNUSUAL"? If it's what everybody uses, then it's by definition not unusual.

Joe_Cool · 09-26-2007, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by Scrum

I'm all for capital punishment.

Some people commit crimes so horrible, that they only deserve death.

I do think there needs to be overwhelming evidence to get the death penalty in all cases though.

I think death should be the penalty for ALL 1st degree murder. If you plan and carry out the taking of a life without just cause, you die. It should be just that simple.

Joe_Cool · 09-26-2007, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Primarily because it is poorly executed and the availability of work for ex cons is poor.

They should have thought of that before they committed their crimes, I guess.

The entire justice system needs reform, not just one little bit. You cannot expect a simple requirement to be effective in isolation.

I agree. We need to blind justice again. She seems to be getting her vision back.

phreak · 09-26-2007, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

sounds like a glamorous life... you're absolutely right... what would a big cheese not like?

NPR : Gangs Reach Out of Prison to Commit Crimes

Joe_Cool · 09-26-2007, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Hardly. 3 meals a day. Lifting weights. Watching TV. Playing basketball. Making people your "bitch". I'm thinking it's not the ultimate price. If it was murderers wouldn't fight so hard to not get the death penalty.

Exactly.

motivez · 09-26-2007, 03:36 PM

While they may not want to die, it's costing us more money to execute them and not lessening the amount of crime committed, since studies have shown that it's not a deterrent.

6SpeedTA95 · 09-26-2007, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

While they may not want to die, it's costing us more money to execute them and not lessening the amount of crime committed, since studies have shown that it's not a deterrent.

Those studies are flawed. A real study conducted on proper capital punishment would probably be completely different.

motivez · 09-26-2007, 03:43 PM

Any proof that they're flawed, or just your assertion?

And are you saying that it doesn't cost us more money, or that it isn't a deterrent?

6SpeedTA95 · 09-26-2007, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Any proof that they're flawed, or just your assertion?

And are you saying that it doesn't cost us more money, or that it isn't a deterrent?

Sorry about that...

Most of the studies say it *may* not be a deterrent, not that it isn't a deterrent. The problem is not with the studies so much as the way capital punishment is carried out in the US.

So there's almost always a disclaimer in the study byusing the word *may* but the way capital punishment and therefore the questions surrounding capital punishment are handled results in a bias in many of the studies.