[deckard]

	Originally Posted by Phenom To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You didn't answer my question. What makes one punishment "better" (using your own words here) than another? Ultimately they serve the same purpose - to provide justice and remove the prisoner from society. I'm only referring to death row and life sentences btw.

Before you get too excited, this discussion will naturally devolve into a philosophical debate in semantics about - just what is death (?) and - neither of us know what's beyond death's door. So, to say that one exacts more justice can only be decided according to what we know of existence. And that is, while they're alive... we call the shots. When they're dead you may have arguably done them a favor. I'd venture to guess that a good portion of homicidal people also have suicidal ideations they'd like to see exacted on themselves. Whether conscious of it or not, their actions are destructive. To fight destruction with total annihilation seems counter productive to me. For both society and the criminal.

Of course again, I'm not against personal justice because the karmic debt is paid to the collector. Fair is fair.

[Weltschmerzer]

	Originally Posted by deckard To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Well, I don't know many people who identify with this visceral contempt for murderers the way a Nancy Grace does. Wasn't she a victim? I can't remember. The pool seems to satiate the victimized more than the level headed who see no closure in the act of continuing the cycle of death. Doubly, I believe a hard life is a better payment of debt.

I'm not arguing that it stems out of some rational argument. Let's not bring in Nancy Grace to a perfectly pleasant conversation, certainly not as a standard of normalcy for families of victims of crimes.

[deckard]

	Originally Posted by Weltschmerzer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm not arguing that it stems out of some rational argument. Let's not bring in Nancy Grace to a perfectly pleasant conversation, certainly not as a standard of normalcy for families of victims of crimes.

I see nothing wrong with Nancy Grace, except unbridled rage. Perhaps if she got the chance I proposed, I'd see even less wrong with her... as would she. Anger is anger and I definitely know anger my friend.

[ElstonGunn]

	Originally Posted by Phenom To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The "merits" of the death penalty (or anything) are subjective, and will never be agreed upon by everyone. There is no correct course of action in subjective matters.

There's no objective measure for whether or not it's worth it, but there are components of it that can be measured, which in turn factor into the decision. For example,
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
, California could save
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
related to prosecuting capital crimes if it switched to a non-death penalty system (other states would see cost savings as "low" as 50 percent), it's applied
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
are several times more likely to be prosecuted than any others, the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
leaves the decision to seek the death penalty up to the prosecutor and local politics, and states with capital punishment
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
than states without it, implying that it's not a deterrent to violent crime.

Given those deficiencies, I don't think there's any practical reason to favor executions-- or at the very least, there's no practical reason to favor executions as they're currently carried out. The only pro-death penalty positions that make sense to me are either a reformed system (which I'm open to hearing about, though still unlikely to support if I had to make a prediction), or a philosophical argument such as retribution.

[Weltschmerzer]

	Originally Posted by deckard To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I see nothing wrong with Nancy Grace, except unbridled rage. Perhaps if she got the chance I proposed, I'd see even less wrong with her... as would she. Anger is anger and I definitely know anger my friend.

For one thing, it would be nice if she had her therapy sessions on a therapist's couch, not before a national audience. And it would be even better if her protracted therapy didn't involve accusations against innocent people.

[deckard]

	Originally Posted by Weltschmerzer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	For one thing, it would be nice if she had her therapy sessions on a therapist's couch, not before a national audience. And it would be even better if her protracted therapy didn't involve accusations against innocent people.

Yes, that would be preferable. So maybe it's the ad execs who need their heads examined.

[Weltschmerzer]

	Originally Posted by deckard To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Yes, that would be preferable. So maybe it's the ad execs who need their heads examined.

I get their mindset; they see dollar signs. It's her motivation which bothers me.

[deckard]

	Originally Posted by Weltschmerzer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I get their mindset; they see dollar signs. It's her motivation which bothers me.

I get both their mindsets and it's an odd pairing. One of many.

Her motivation is to be heard, like any woman. *wait, what?* who said that? xD

It's looking like the future will hold a pop icon to explain every human failure - reductio ad absurdum. We won't even need to hold whole discussions.

Yes, but ... Oreilly, Hitler, Gaga, Rupert. And then it ends.

[SnakeMXIM]

	Originally Posted by Reserved To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The family would decide on the death penalty or how much time the criminal spends in prison.

So the types of punishment would be limited?

	Originally Posted by Reserved To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'd be surprised if someone actually regretted their decision, since they are dealing with the person that took the life of a loved one.

(italics added) This is exactly my point. People might decide something differently when they are experiencing the emotions that is likely at that time than they would normally do. Such a decision might go against their believes and thus might haunt them later on.

	Originally Posted by Reserved To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I was thinking each of the families could maybe come to some agreement.

Although it is possible, it is unlikely especially if different victims were 'treated' differently.

On a tangential, since the 'correct' punishment would be something that is viewed differently by different people, the option of having the family choose the punishment (out of a limited number of choices) may cause animosity within a tight-knit family structure.

[IotaNull]

	Originally Posted by Phenom To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	If we are going to go by your logic, and assume we are operating with "eye for an eye", then the severity of the punishment (between life-sentence and death penalty) should be the most lenient, or else it is simply about revenge. Right?

No, it's about deterring others aswell.

Prisoners aren't just removed from society and permanently placed in a vacuum. They can be released at any time should their innocence be proven, and they can still be of use to society.

---------- Post added 07-13-2011 at 01:34 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by Reserved To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I, for one, am not so forgiving so I would immediately declare the death penalty. Every case would have different outcomes so it would depend on the type of person and their final decision.

So what kind of lesson would this teach? "By all means do whatever you like as long as the person's immediate relatives (who are NOT a monolithic entity) are not violent"? And what, in turn, does this communicate to the average law-abiding citizen, if not "if you care at all about anything, you are required to be willing to kill to protect it"?

[Bluefire]

I wonder how many people who have committed a serious crime/s if given a choice would choose the death penalty over life in prison. I have not thought about this enough to really clarify if I am for or aginst, when I try and answer I see too many tangents. Collectively I think we need to question more what makes a serial killer/rapist etc in the the first place and work from prevention upwards but I appreciate we can't ignore the severity of the action to ensure protection of others.

[Seablue]

Originally Posted by Weltschmerzer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The death penalty isn't about the cost or damage to a society--otherwise, we'd mainly execute the incompetent. Punishments, especially in the case of the death penalty, are about the degree to which society is horrified by a perpetrator's actions, and the degree to which they couldn't see themselves acting similarly. White collar crimes almost never meet this standard. This is exactly why I've concluded that the death penalty is necessary. People feel an emotional reaction to certain human actions, and it creates a societal strain. Revenge, in the guise of justice, provides the best safety valve for this pressure; without it, over time, I believe we would see terrible reactions from a disgruntled society. It's not pretty, but it's necessary.

I've been thinking about this some more. What about other countries, in which death penalty doesn't exist anymore ? Is there any where you see the "terrible reactions from a disgruntled society" ? Or is it that it's not been forbidden for long enough to see the consequences ?

In my country (France) there definitely is discontentment against the judicial system, but it has nothing (not much ?) to do with this. To sum it up very quickly, people feel that they are punished more and more often and heavily for nothing (small infractions while driving) while real criminals go in prison and leave after doing a third of their sentence. On political forums, I have indeed seen some people in favor of the death penalty, but in majority, the complaint is that criminals should serve the whole sentence. Life imprisonment seems to be enough to be a "safety valve". (Then comes the matter or putting the prisoners to work to pay for what their life costs, but I don't know if that's such an issue when so much people outside don't have a job.)

[Weltschmerzer]

Originally Posted by Seablue To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I've been thinking about this some more. What about other countries, in which death penalty doesn't exist anymore ? Is there any where you see the "terrible reactions from a disgruntled society" ? Or is it that it's not been forbidden for long enough to see the consequences ? In my country (France) there definitely is discontentment against the judicial system, but it has nothing (not much ?) to do with this. To sum it up very quickly, people feel that they are punished more and more often and heavily for nothing (small infractions while driving) while real criminals go in prison and leave after doing a third of their sentence. On political forums, I have indeed seen some people in favor of the death penalty, but in majority, the complaint is that criminals should serve the whole sentence. Life imprisonment seems to be enough to be a "safety valve". (Then comes the matter or putting the prisoners to work to pay for what their life costs, but I don't know if that's such an issue when so much people outside don't have a job.)

To some degree, I think it's a trait that's unique in its intensity to the United States. I really should look into more of the international figures, though, because I'm not really satisfied with this explanation--although, it sure does seem like we're an especially bloodthirsty country. On a slightly related note, doesn't France have a much lower rate of violent crime than does America?

I'm also toying with the idea that religiosity plays a big role in the popularity of the death penalty. One of Nietzsche's observations with which I agreed noted the foundation of Christianity/Judeo-Christian morality on the suffering of "bad" people; the death penalty would be a good example of this. Because Europe is much more secular than the U.S., they would be less attached to the death penalty in this regard. Here, we need it to support our moral values.

In short, I'd have to look into it; right now, it's just an unverified theory upon which I've made up my mind concerning an issue about which I care very little.

[BlackMita]

Passive aggressive murder. If you want someone dead, you should do it yourself. Extreme cases (sociopaths overestimating what they can get away with) can't exist without state institutions; people in their communities would either shame them until they behave or commit suicide, else eventually kill them in self defense, since the person wouldn't have a prison system to hideout to and meet people with similar habits.

[SowZ]

	Originally Posted by deckard To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I see nothing wrong with Nancy Grace, except unbridled rage. Perhaps if she got the chance I proposed, I'd see even less wrong with her... as would she. Anger is anger and I definitely know anger my friend.

Nancy Grace is just so emotional and forms opinions so quickly I cannot take anything she thinks seriously.