Is the death penalty barbaric?
Is the death penalty barbaric?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Is the death penalty barbaric?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Yes.
Why? Would honestly like to read your perspective.
Because death is the only thing in existence for a human that is both irreversible and non-compensatable. Any normal sentence is not.
a vast majority getting sent to execution already took a human life or multiple. Life sentence isn't any better than the death sentence anyways even if they do get out on parole they will never be able to live normally again.
What if it is an agreed upon suitable punishment?
You wouldn't think it to be a deterrant?
Like, a person killed 9 people on a train the other day in Paris. He doesn't deserve the punishment of death?
I would say life in prison is inhumane, it still robs you of your life and is prolonged.
Yes but can be compensated and terminated if the decision was wrong. You can't do that with a death sentence, this is what I mean by irreversible.
What about with overwhelming evidence though?
>What about with overwhelming evidence
No such thing. Also even if we 100% knew, what then? A person is more useful alive than dead, unless it's an active threat. But that's not a sentence, that's just combat
They aren't useful in a cell. You have never met a full on murderous sociopath before. They can't be trusted outside of that cell. Some are in for killing people in PUBLIC with dozens of witnesses.
They are a drain to resources and letting them rot in a cage is inhumane.
>UGH the usefulness of assassins, war criminals, and mass murderer childrapists
>>UGH the usefulness of assassins, war criminals, and mass murderer childrapists
Yes.
Over the years there are undoubtedly a large number of innocent people with life sentences in prison who have died and will die in prison after spending the majority of their life there. Some wrongfully convicted can be exonerated but the fact is that for many their lives were effectively irreversibly taken from them without compensation. That doesn't mean life sentences should be abolished. Special care is also taken for those suffering the death penalty to ensure their guilt compared to other crimes.
>lets just have innocent people rot in prison for their whole lives in the off chance we release one or two of them later
Yup, that sure sounds better, There are things worse than death and spending forever in a prison where you have zero freedom definitely sounds worse to me. Though the execution methods we have these days are pretty shit too. Amazing how we consider hanging or firing squads barbaric now, but chemicals with a pretty high rate of failure are okay.
I find prisons highly barbaric but they dont have the aesthetic of violence so normies are more okay with thinking it exists than with thinking violent punishments exist, and That is what is important to them, not the actual experience and consequences of prison.
Id abolish prisons if I could. Death penalty when the crime is severe, cutting of a hand for theft, public beating for stuff that only nets you <2 years in prison, etc. I doubt people get better by being stuck in a cage with a bunch of other low tier people, they might actually improve with a swift physical lesson.
I love how retards like simply ignore the reversibility aspect because it doesn't fit into their brainlet worldview
You can't reverse the 40 years spent in prison. A pitiful monetary payout does not compensate you for your lost years.
>You can't reverse the 40 years spent in prison. A pitiful monetary payout does not compensate you for your lost years.
It doesn't compensate fully, but getting a Milly and being free for the remainder of your life compensates you better than being dead you absolute mongoloid
You won't care about being compensated when you're dead.
I guess then you shouldn't have a problem offing yourself right now
I would now that I'm alive, but I wouldn't have a problem with it after I'm dead.
So what?
>be in prison from 20-55
>hahaha at least it's not the death sentence, that is irreversable
>unlike aging
what did this retard mean by this?
>Blatantly ignore the incompensable part
Disingenuous retard
>money can somehow make up for lost years of life
delusional
by that logic you can just compensate the family of wrongfully executed people
or barring that their neighbor
or their neighbors neighbor
>by that logic you can just compensate the family
Not the same person retard.
Money obviously can't compensate it fully, but it can at least compensate parts of it. Unlike a death penalty for obvious reasons.
just compensate the neighbor of the diseased
fucking retard
You can't even begin to compensate a dead body.
Sure you can. 100% unironically I'd rather just be shot than stuck in jail my whole life even if wrongfully convicted. If I get found innocent after the fact either just give the compensation money to my best friend or build my as big a pyramid for my grave as the money can afford
You literally can't pay a dead body. It's a physical impossibility.
Yes.
Barbarians have very clear and obvious social morals and weigh things in very explicit terms.
only really s()y types could trick themselves into believing life is something which can be traded away and forgotten like a trinket, and not something which demands vengeance and justice.
Not particularly imo if it's done painlessly. Life in an American prison is worse.
>Life in an American prison is worse.
they should just give prisoners the choice of suicide. bored of your life sentence? good, here is a cyanide pill.
No fuck that. Some scum are absolutely indifferent about dying. You're just giving them the liberty of escaping the consequences of their actions. If the offender is sentenced to crumble mentally in isolation then so be it.
This post is more barbaric to me than a humane execution.
There is no "humane execution". People who such language are even lower than historical barbarians. At least they had no illusions about humane killing.
Your post doesnt even make sense. Apply some logos before typing.
Go be a nagger somewhere else.
Hanging isn't humane. It causes psychological torment. All death penalties do. I can't wait for your next retarded cope. It's be more respectable now if you just said killing degenerates with disregards for humane treatment was based (I agree).
Sorry i didnt comprehend your post quick but i'll be the slave to no one as long as i live.
Retarded take. A humane execution is obviously one where the deed is done as quickly as possible.
Hanging is humane. Drawn & Quartered is inhumane simple as.
No such thing as giving merciful death sir.
We were not talking about mercy. To have mercy one must first have a punishment.
If one must carry out a punishment then to take pleasure in enacting it painfully is cruelty.
Im not talking about taking pleasure into giving death anon, thats cruel by nature.
No. Use of resources to house, feed, clean, clothe could go to a poor child. Not in good conscious to exile them to just offend in another land.
This. The world does not have infinite resources. If you take innocent life, then your life is forfeit in my opinion. Still think it should be decided by jury. If someone deserves to die, people know.
I don't understand why mass shooters, and spree killers even make it out of sentencing to get an appeal. They are on tape, sometimes with like a hundred other witnesses, killing multiple people. Why not hang them immediately after trial?
No, it'd lessen the load on the prison system if there was little regulation on it.
No. Everyone uses it, in one way or another.
What is barbaric is openly recognizing it.
Yes because it's clearly influenced by bias.
Getting stuck in some cell for the rest of your life getting raped in the ass by Tyrone everyday is arguably more barbaric
>The death penalty carries the inherent risk of executing an innocent person. Since 1973, at least 190 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated.
https://www.voanews.com/a/usa_more-innocent-people-previously-known-came-close-being-executed-us-study-finds/6202259.html
So 190 people out of 1561 were innocent... that's about an 88% success rate of killing scum. Not that bad.
A 12% rate of killing innocents is retardedly high.
Assuming the 12% is legit that is pretty bad to be honest. Makes you wonder how accurate it is on less severe crimes. I would assume it's worse since the consequence of a wrongful conviction are smaller so jury and lawyers feel less pressure to get it right. Though I guess in our system a lawyers job isn't to figure out the truth..
Anyone opposed to the death penalty is telling you that if they raped your daughter, they wouldn't want to be killed. Think about that for a moment and realize you can't trust such "people".
>Giving the rapist of your daughter the easy way out.
Exactly, think about that for a moment and realize you can't trust such "people".
That's why we believe in Hell and kill people rather than risk torturing an innocent to death. Retard.
>That's why we believe in Hell and kill people rather than risk torturing an innocent to death.
>Christian
>Kill people and not turn the other cheek
Except I'm no christian. Now let your two neurons continue that fight to the death to determine which of them is the dumbest.
>Except I'm no christian
Brings up hell
Pathetic bait.
'The easy way out' is a term used exclusively by massively pussies. death is the ultimate punishment there isn't a scale of easy to hard when it comes to justice.
What happens if they didn’t rape my daughter?
What happens if my daughter doesn’t want her rapist killed?
That doesn't mean they don't think child rape is heinous enough to deserve death, just that the government shouldn't have that power.
Yes because it's redundant.
Yes and No.
Many crimes deserve to be punished by death.
But you can't let something as incompetent and stupid as the state to decide on this manner. Look up all of the prisoners condemned to death who later turned out to be innocent.
No but we should probably only do it for open and shut cases where the perpetrator is caught red handed. Also a lot of the "innocent" people that you hear about that got exonerated on deaths door are career criminals that have done nothing but terrorize people most of their lives but yeah I guess during that one robbery they did in fact not shoot the cashier.....it was the other guy.
>barbaric
Imagine using some Gayreek frame of reference unless you are, in fact, a hairy brown swarthoid. The idea of just and unjust punishment is nonsense. Rehabilitation is nonsense. Satisfying yourself with revenge is the only honest motivation for punishment.
How is it less barbaric (whatever you mean by that) to lock someone in a box for 25 years? The only question you should be asking is:
'would doing this to the offender bring me satisfaction?'
I'm against the death penalty but not because it's barbaric. We know that our justice system isn't perfect, and wrongful convictions do sometimes happen. With the death penalty there's a chance you're executing an innocent person, without it they might one day be able to prove their innocence.
No.
You don't keep serial killers alive.
What?
You think society will always be stable and they'll never get out of prison?
Suppose there's a revolution and somebody frees them?
It's not barbaric because all the civilized nations of the world have historically used capital punishment
yes
killing anyone under the guise of justice is spiritually abhorrent
Yes but only because it is fallible.
Yes, but not that it matters. The risk of the death penalty rests on the integrity of the justice system and the socius its body of law governs. Prohibition of capital punishment naturally comes into force where people do not trust their or their institutions' discernment. It's a libertarian safeguard put into place where the risk of a corrupt justice system is considered at large to be more likely to threaten social function than individual evils. When the social fabric disintegrates for one reason or another and distrust is no longer leveled against the state but against fellow man the reverse tends to be the case. I don't think passing a moral judgement on the practice of capital punishment ultimately says much when both its prohibition and its necessity have been legitimized and argued for in the name of both transcendental and secular causes irrespective of the argued self-consistency of the various related dogma.
A lack of it is barbaric. Making the victim and society at large pay to house and feed criminals is unjust.
>Many people believe that the death penalty is more cost-effective than housing and feeding someone in prison for life. In reality, the death penalty's complexity, length, and finality drive costs through the roof, making it much more expensive.
https://ejusa.org/resource/wasteful-inefficient/#:~:text=Many%20people%20believe%20that%20the,making%20it%20much%20more%20expensive.
What if we develop a chemical that makes one minute feel like 100 years and stick them in a dark padded cell for a few hours?
funny thing about the death penalty was it was used less and less before it was removed, Only on extreme cases too.
So the lie that the death penalty was being used liberally for innocent people was just that a lie.
No. What is truly barbaric is throwing a man in his 20s in a cell for the rest of his natural life. People who get life in prison usually outlive the judge, guards, & victims with the only evidence of their crime remaining being a piece of paper.
The blood of the innocent cry out for vengeance but justice has a time limit to be enacted. The death penalty is humane compared to the alternatives.
>the rest of his natural life
Does he get to finish the unnatural part of his life a free man?
No. I am talking about people who are not innocent. It is more humane to give a murderer a set date for an execution than it is to let him waste away in prison for an unknowable length of time. Keeping a man in a cell for 23hrs a day with barely any contact with other human beings is considered torture by most nations, and yet we allow such things to occur in our prisons.
Unless the man is a pervert psychotic, why not give him a chance of redemption ?
This only happens in usa where you get jailed for 100+ years.
In most civilized countries the sentences are more reasonable.
This. Life w/o parole is much less common in other countries, and some places allow either life w/ parole or 20-30 years, so judges and prosecutors can't impose what's effectively a life sentence by giving 50+ years.
It is barbaric to keep murderers and rapists alive at taxpayers' expense.
So, im only the bad anon to talk here, sorry im a little bored lately.