Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
The Death Penalty (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Wrigley
- Start date
I'd say it acts as a hell of a deterrent. Show me one murderer who has been executed who has ever committed a murder again. And I don't need no stinkin' studies to know that.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
If the death penalty is actually the morally appropriate punishments we shouldn't be concerned about cost. Whether those cost are the dollars to the tax payers or putting victims and their families through a decade and a half of revisiting the crime. A rush to judgment - no matter how much it appears to be a slam dunk is never morally appropriate even if we gets lucky with the results most all of the time.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
It does save money.
It's the court system that is expensive, and that's an entirely different argument.
timschochet
Footballguy
Regarding the money issue- it's always going to cost more money to execute, and this is how it should be. I'm opposed to the death penalty, but if we're going to have it, there should be every appeal available to the criminal, no matter how long they last. If we're going to do this, it has to be done right.
timschochet
Footballguy
Datonn, regarding "closure" for the victim's family, BFS touched on a key point- is the "closure" regarding the murder, or is the "closure" regarding the endless appeal process? I say it's the latter, and if you eliminate the death penalty, there will be no question of closure, because there will be no uncertainty to begin with.
timschochet
Footballguy
Strike's argument, that the death penalty is necessary in order to keep murderers from killing other prisoners, is completely new to me, and I've been following this issue for years. I find it a bizarre justification.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
I have heard it at least since the '70s, I believe I first heard it from this guy on local TV.
Strike's argument, that the death penalty is necessary in order to keep murderers from killing other prisoners, is completely new to me, and I've been following this issue for years. I find it a bizarre justification.
While it is uncomfortable for me as a Christian to use Jesus as an example of a murderer who killed after being executed as that is counter to my own beliefs, I believe that Jesus and early christianity is the perfect example of the failure of the death penalty to stop and deter behavior. From a Roman perspective the "silencing of Jesus" created a revolution that would not have happened without the "deterrence" of capital punishment.
Koya
Footballguy
Your response doesn't exactly add to the dialogue. Just going to discount my points and/or avoid them?
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
Would we be rushing to judgment on the Colorado Movie Theater Killer.....or any other killer who were seen committing the crime. Those murderers should be brought out back and put to death immediately. Why even bring those to court. The defense should simply say "my client is guilty and deserves the death penalty your honor...the defense rests".
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
Here comes the part where they say that eye witness testimony is not 100% therefore it is useless.
timschochet
Footballguy
But they could have been insane when they committed those crimes. Should a mentally ill person be put to death?
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
Yes if he is going to go around and kill people. What would be the point/benefit of keeping a mentally ill killer amongst us?
lod01
Footballguy
TheIronSheik
SUPER ELITE UPPER TIER
Johnnymac
Footballguy
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Several people have answered yes to my question about mental illness. My answer is no. But then, my answer would be no even without mental illness. I believe in redemption.
Ditka Butkus
Footballguy
You truly believe these psycho killers can redeem themselves...?timschochet said:
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
#### YES.timschochet said:
timschochet
Footballguy
Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good. I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:I thought you were an atheist.
Homer J Simpson
I don't push
Huh. Hundreds of years of legal precedents getting tossed aside as casually as rating a Who's Hottest pic.
I'm impressed.
I'm impressed.
Fennis
Footballguy
set up a poleHuh. Hundreds of years of legal precedents getting tossed aside as casually as rating a Who's Hottest pic.
I'm impressed.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/36/df/e6/36dfe614121f22025565c95ea40d2f81.jpg
Sure there is. And those reasons have been covered extensively in this and other threads.Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good.I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:
Jayrod
Footballguy
Just a joke, Ace.Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good.I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:
Are you getting dumber by the day or something? Not only did you get all Francis like on my joke, you are simply just making crap up and stating it as fact.
timschochet
Footballguy
What did I make up?Just a joke, Ace.Are you getting dumber by the day or something? Not only did you get all Francis like on my joke, you are simply just making crap up and stating it as fact.Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good.I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:
Jayrod
Footballguy
The last sentence.What did I make up?Just a joke, Ace.Are you getting dumber by the day or something? Not only did you get all Francis like on my joke, you are simply just making crap up and stating it as fact.Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good.I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Assuming by "mentally ill" we mean someone incapable of grasping what they are doing and by definition that makes them "innocent", then no I do not support the execution of innocent people. (Though to be fair I'm not sure I have ever been made upset by any such cases.)timschochet said:
However, I think those that all said "Yes" would reject that someone that murdered someone else could be "innocent". I also think a few high profile cases results in a belief that this is routinely a winning defense.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
BFS showing off his critical thinking skills.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
You know I'm pretty certain that a very real part of who I am will not lose any sleep if and when either of these guys are executed. I'll probably even sleep a little better.Ditka Butkus said:
However, I'd never be OK with completely surrendering our values that it should be hard, it should be expensive for the state to take away a person's life. Government should always be burdened with hoops to jump through that makes government's operations inefficient, and there is no way taking a like would be a more efficient exception ,
timschochet
Footballguy
That there is no purpose in putting them to death? That is obviously an opinion on my part, not a statement of fact.The last sentence.What did I make up?Just a joke, Ace.Are you getting dumber by the day or something? Not only did you get all Francis like on my joke, you are simply just making crap up and stating it as fact.Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good.I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:
lod01
Footballguy
You would change your mind real fast if your options were an 'x'% tax on your earnings to house them or 0% tax on your earnings if they are put to death. Someone has to pay to keep these losers alive. It should be those that think they should be kept alive.That there is no purpose in putting them to death? That is obviously an opinion on my part, not a statement of fact.The last sentence.What did I make up?Just a joke, Ace.Are you getting dumber by the day or something? Not only did you get all Francis like on my joke, you are simply just making crap up and stating it as fact.Does redemption require God or an afterlife? I don't think so. I believe in the principle, without the details that you believe in. People can change from evil to good.I have read about murderers, some on death row, who have regretted their lives and become decent people, doing good work in prison. Most of them should never be let out of prison. But there is no purpose in putting them to death, either.timschochet said:
If somebody who's already serving a life sentence commits murder, what should his punishment be? Is there some other situation where the death penalty is more appropriate than in that one?timschochet said:
It's not bizarre to test whether the death penalty might ever be appropriate by considering the strongest case for it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Based on the past few pages of this thread we should reward prisoners who kill other prisoners. Maybe give them a share of the savings for tax payers.
In any case I'm pretty certain that the "strongest case" for the death penalty isn't prisoners killing prisoners.
Putting them to death requires a tax of a lot more than zero percent. Here's a more realistic conundrum for you.
Suppose your options were an x% tax on your earnings to punish them or a 0% tax on your earnings to let them go scot-free. Someone has to pay to keep those losers from going scot-free. It should be those that think they should be punished.
Good argument? (No, it's not.)
who said anything about prisoners killing prisoners? how about prisoners killing guards?
Todd Andrews
Footballguy
Of course the death penalty is wrong in theory and in practice. It is unevenly applied and racially imbalanced. It is huge government intrusion into civil liberty--what greater right is there to cede to the government than the right to live? So-called "conservatives" whine about how the government cant do anything right and then give that same government the power of life and death over them in a flawed procedural system of manmade laws run by flawed politicians (DA's and judges). And we really cant seem to do it without killing innocent citizens, which is horrifying.
On the other hand, I understand the simplistic emotional primitive tribal need to punish the outcasts who violate the tribal norms, and I am very pro-killing in general, so personally I dont worry about it too much. Sooner or later, it will be undeniably shown that we are blatantly and obviously executing innocent people and there will be a huge reaction against the death penalty.
On the other hand, I understand the simplistic emotional primitive tribal need to punish the outcasts who violate the tribal norms, and I am very pro-killing in general, so personally I dont worry about it too much. Sooner or later, it will be undeniably shown that we are blatantly and obviously executing innocent people and there will be a huge reaction against the death penalty.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Your imbalance, like the incorrect "cost" argument, is about the courts. Not about the Death penalty.
We dont do away with all imprisonment because the sentences are all unequally applied.
Todd Andrews
Footballguy
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
That doesn't change a thing.
The Death penalty is proper. In theory or practice.
Expecting anything to be "perfect" as a needed outcome to remain in use is idiocy.
The COURTS are unequal. Fix that.
The death penalty and imprisonment, while unequal and imperfect, save countless more innocent lives then they ever ruin.
Last edited by a moderator:
Just curious: would your take change at all if the criminal in question not only had a mountain of evidence supporting their guilty conviction, but also admitted to the crime?
What's entirely wrong is having to spend an average of around $500,000 per inmate on death row, JUST TO FEED/CLOTHE/SHELTER them the nearly 16 years it takes from sentencing to the carrying-out of said sentence. I don't even want to think about all of the additional legal/judicial and other peripheral fees associated with their trial and all their appeals. Seriously. If some one takes another person's life, knowingly and willingly takes another person's life, and there is no shadow of a doubt related to their guilt? Why spend $500,000+ waiting to carry-out their sentence, when a bullet costs less than $5 (probably less than $1.50)?
Todd Andrews
Footballguy
What? The death penalty is "proper"? I am not sure what you are talking about. The government killing its own citizens is not "proper", although it can certainly be argued it is necessary at times. I didnt say anything needed to be "perfect", I just pointed out what a lame and flawed system the death penalty in practice is here. I am sorry that bugs you. You seem very emotionally invested in the primitive tribal notion of eye for an eye punishment that the death penalty represents. Interesting that the death penalty is the only archaic arbitrary leftover of those primitive times, when all other criminal punishments in our system are either incarceration or financial penalties.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
So do away with the police.
So do away with public paid doctors and nurses and hospitals.
So do away with teachers and school buses.
And so on and so on.
Because all of those things make mistakes and cost people their lives.
But the turn around is that they save/benefit WAY more people. Like the death penalty and imprisonment... even though they to make mistakes (the court does) which cost people their lives.
lod01
Footballguy
Actually, (as long as it is a fellow inmate and not a normal human like the guards) that inmate should have his sentence reduced. Say from life to 98 years. He's done the country a service. $ has been saved. He kills again in prison it drops to 97 years. Odds are he will never go free as he will himself be killed before he gets to zero.
It's a new program called 'thinning the herd.'
Todd Andrews
Footballguy
You seem to have gotten confused. I dont really care if primitive thinking tribalists want to kill the mentally ill and murderers. So keep at it. I was just pointing out that it is bad in practice and theory. Which it is, and none of your strange absolutist analogies about getting rid of core government services because they make fatal mistakes changes that.
The death penalty doesnt save or benefit "WAY more people." It is more expensive than lifetime incarceration, kills innocent people, and degrades all of us: our society, culture and government. But like I said, I am fine with killing in general, so I am ok if you guys want to keep it around to stimulate your lower brains.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
It neither primitive nor tribal.
Its funny you have to use and repeat such a ludicrous statement to begin your posts.
Its funny you have to use and repeat such a ludicrous statement to begin your posts.
Similar threads
