Red Liquorice
Member
I don't agree with the death penalty in general, but when I read what their crimes were I wasn't that concerned about their suffering.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Oklahoma Double Execution Botched: "We're going to close the blinds temporarily."
- Thread starter KingGondo
- Start date
- Status
I think there are chances that you don't die instantly from a bullet to the head.
chickdigger802
Banned
is drugs really the only way, especially unproven ones?
There are ways to kill people more effectively and less painful, from firearms to martial art moves etc...
unless this is some legal thingy majig?
There are ways to kill people more effectively and less painful, from firearms to martial art moves etc...
unless this is some legal thingy majig?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Am I the only one disturbed by the money arguments?
What I've heard is that many medical companies that manufacture drugs that can be used for lethal injections don't want them used for that purpose. As a result, states have to come up with different kinds of workarounds, which helps create situations like the one that inspired this thread.
I don't think those same companies care as much about similar drugs being used on animals, since euthanizing them is an accepted practice.
| Praxis |
Banned
In the documentary I linked to they say about a method that is completely painless. You actually die laughing, in peace. The ones against it say why should criminals die better than most of us? We will probably end up in hospital, dying in pain from cancer or some other disease whereas the guys on death row will kick the bucket in relative bliss. So the punishment factor is a big issue.
There is empirical evidence showing a deterrent effect.
http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/2/344.short?rss=1&ssource=mfc
http://econpapers.repec.org/article/ucpjlawec/y_3a2003_3av_3a46_3ai_3a2_3ap_3a453-78.htm
Some people support the policy for this reason. Some just want retribution
Zomba13
Member
Best would be good old fashioned guillotine. Just make a more up to date version. Super sharp and heavy, comes down very very fast. Chops head off in one go, very fast, insta-death. Rather than someone having a bad reaction to the probably expensive death drug and dying in a super painful way or something.
If they want the guys to suffer then don't kill them, keep them alive and torture them or something or make them starve to death. That way people who don't want criminals to die a better death than them will be happy.
I dunno if not wanting a person who committed a horrible crime to die laughing in front of an audience possibly containing family members of victims is a clear cut case of it being all about punishment. It doesn't seem appropriate for an inmate to die like an unrepentant comic book villian and literally get the last laugh.
Ahh I see. You'd think some executioners would be crafty enough to get a hold of those drugs anyway (especially when the used drug is kept secret) but I guess not. Probably don't think it's worth risking
| Praxis |
Banned
I oversimplified it, it's better to watch the show than to read me paraphrasing it. I'm sure the prisoner would be sedated so they wouldn't be laughing.
The current system allows the condemned the chance to make a final statement, so they could actually have the last laugh regardless, if they chose to say something inappropriate. So I doubt that's the main reason for it.
Red Mage
Member
While I understand your point, and I applaude you for not using the "Thou Shall Not Kill" approach (the word is "Murder" in Hebrew and Greek, not "Kill"), scripture also states that Governments are from God, for the punishment of the lawless. Thus it could be argued that the State has the right to execute criminals. I am personally against executions because of the risk of executing innocent people. I would also argue that we, as Christians, should allow for the possibility of redemption of every person, but I would not argue that the State executing convicted murderers is clearly unbiblical.
I would, however, say that anyone who is glad that the man is dead, or that he suffered in death, are definitely not acting like a Christian should.
I believe that the idea is that, in America at least, "Life Sentence" is only 30 years. With good behavior you could get out in 20 or so years. While I agree that there are some people who need to never be allowed back on the streets, I'd prefer they were simply locked up until they died, rather than executed. This would allow for a chance at redemption rather simply "removing" the problem.
The second was convicted of the rape and murder of a 11 month old girl. He claims he's innocent, but his defense is that he went to the store with his girlfriend, which she flatly denies, claiming he was left in charge of the children. The man's own son testified Warner abused the child in the past, shaking her and throwing her.
Even though I am against the death penalty, I'll admit that when I first read that, a part of me wanted him to be executed. My base desires warring with that which is greater in me.
How are you using that term, exactly here? Do you mean something like this? If so, why?!
The evidence is far from conclusive:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-about-deterrence-and-death-penalty
Death Penalty Information Center said:
No such thing. Death is inherently inhumane, since it's the anti-thesis of humanity.
What's perplexing for me though, is if you're going to support the death penalty, why make arbitrary decisions as far as what's humane and what isn't, all the while saying someone is "Deserving" of such a judgement given by the state. The only deserving punishment that would logically follow, is the same crime inflicted on the guilty party.
I think it's akin to funerals for the most part. The method of execution isn't for accused's benefit or consideration. It's for the audience, and it comes with squeamishness security. If you're going to support the death penalty, why not support beheading or hanging? Same result, right?
That said, knowing this - More than 4% of death row inmates wrongly convicted, study says - I don't know how anyone in their right mind can support the death penalty. 0.1% is outrageous. 4% is unthinkable. That's 1 in 25.
200+ People since the 1970's.
Now, you have to ask yourself. Is Capital Punishment worth 200 Innocent Lives?
Reminder:
Anyone who thinks he deserved a humane ending is disgusting to me. He got off easy.
Unhandled Exception
Member
Yep, best way to deal with horrible acts is to commit an equally horrible or worse act as a society.
So fucking ridiculous. Wasn't aware we were still holding up depraved old testament morality.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
you are literally disgusted by anyone that thinks a murderer should be put to death in a more humane manner than what he got?
the man died a gruesome death for a horrible crime, but saying that should be the norm is mental.
I don't think it should be the norm, but I'm not going get upset something went wrong either.
If I believed in Karma I'd say it all worked out. But since I'm wise enough to realize the world isn't that fair I'll just say that I'm glad it went to shit for him in the end.
But maybe I was too harsh. I'll redact to say I'm only disgusted that anyone would be disgusted at my lack of disgust. It's just as valid a reaction to this news.
It's the least messy, which I guess is important when the audience and the state are trying to maintain an air of civility.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I purposefully only used new testament passages. OT god is pretty pro death penalty.
Jesus seemed very firm in his antiretributative (is this a word or am I making it up?) Stance. And of course we shouldn't make policy on religious doctrine but when the people are espousing Christian values as their governing philosophy I think its fair to point out they're really isn't much support.
They have a stronger religious case for things like abortion and gay marriage.
If they have to kill these people why not use something like oxygen deprivation?
http://jme.bmj.com/content/36/3/174.abstract
http://jme.bmj.com/content/36/3/174.abstract
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Its like climate change. Find one study and beat it to death. Ignore all others.
Seems only logical. I can't see how life in prison sounds sexier than death anyway.
Nobody cares about the sentence until they get sentenced. Especially when we speak about major crimes like murder, rape etc. Reason is absent in those cases.
And even for the small crimes, the young thugs don't give a fuck about police. Minors laugh at the policemen when they get caught.
So no deterrent effect. The only question remaining is : do we exile these people, putting a blindfold on our eyes and make believe they never existed, or do we try to put them back on track?
Same reaction. I don't agree with the death penalty either, but assuming these people were guilty, I don't really care what happened to them. I'm neutral to this whole thing.
MisterFalcon
Member
And how many innocent people are we prepared to sacrifice until we achieve a 100% rate in determining who will and won't kill again after being released ?
brotherbean
Member
I don't really get the whole "humane" thing for the death penalty. There is no humanity in killing, even when that killing is sanctioned by the outcome of a legal process.
That being said, if we were truly concerned with providing a comfortable and humane end, isn't morphine a pretty decent way to go? How about a lethal dose of carbon monoxide?
That being said, if we were truly concerned with providing a comfortable and humane end, isn't morphine a pretty decent way to go? How about a lethal dose of carbon monoxide?
Red Mage
Member
OT God = NT God. Also, I was only referring to NT as well.
Romans 13:1-7 said:
1 Peter 2:13-14 said:
As I stated, I personally believe we should not execute people based mostly on my religious beliefs, but I will not pretend one can claim it's unbiblical.
Honestly I don't have the skills to judge if someone is safe to the society. But I believe support and surveillance by professionals can achieve great results and minimal risk.
And if some people minds are really beyond saving, then just keep them locked.
I also believe a redeemed criminal willing to speak his story is a very valuable asset in reducing overall crime.
Finally death penalty also kills innocent, so that's definitely not better.
Yes yes, let that cosy comfy feeling of blood vengeance bring peace and harmony to you. We should petition the state to hold such executions on a bright Sunday morning in a park so whole families can experience just how mindblowingly satisfying just retributions feels like
I never claimed it was conclusive, but there have been econometric studies showing an effect. A survey of criminologists is pointless without discussion of why they are doubting the studies, because the survey was funded by anti-death penalty advocates - not to mention, the questions in it are dubiously phrased.
Orbis Tabula
Member
I'm kind of sad. I just saw someone use the spelling "gaol" in a conversation, and its not the least shocking thing in this thread.
Both of those articles are from 2003, and most of the discussion and citations on DPIC are much more recent.
There's plenty of in-depth discussion here:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/discussion-recent-deterrence-studies
But think about the deterrent argument logically--do you really think someone who commits a crime that carries a possible death sentence--murder, or felony murder--is thinking rationally about the consequences of their crime? People who commit crimes like this are typically desperate, under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, mentally ill, or a combination of the above.
Yeah, and the rational criminals usually don't expect to be caught. If they would, they probably wouldn't commit the crime into the first place.
The Lamonster
Member
It's only the least messy because the government uses a paralyzing agent so they can't writhe in agony even if the experience is the most brutal torture imaginable, and, to the audience, it looks peaceful.
The moment shit goes wrong though, whoops, have to close the blinds, can't let them see how bad we're treating people in their last moments.
ErasureAcer
Banned
I was against the death penalty before I was a believer in the afterlife. But yeah, the latter even adds to the point that those on death row should not be allowed to crossover but rather sit in a cell and think about what they've done. Dude who was just (about to be) executed is probably living it up on the otherside right now. Where's the justice in that?
OrlanisWorks
Banned
Carbon minoxide builds up in the blood stream and that apparently can cause pain, rather than the lack of oxygen. Look up "inert gas execution", which I've mentioned two or three times in the thread (with zero responses) Conservatives, who support a death penalty, likely don't want a criminal to die so peacefully.
The vast majority of empirical studies on the marginal deterrence show no effect, though a panel of leading experts in the field concluded last year that the current research is inconclusive either way. It is also worth noting that there is little theoretical basis for the marginal deterrence effect of capital punishment.
I imagine it was lines of thought quite like these that led to the various inventions of Hell.
figadapaura
Member
That is messed up. Everything about this is so messed up.
Look, I never said its conclusive one way or the other. Someone mentioned that there is no evidence, but there is evidence. There's also a lot of questions about what that evidence tells us. Reasonable minds can disagree about whether there's a deterrent effect or not. The question is obviously not decided, which is often the case with empirical questions.
I do think that criminals are rational. This doesn't just apply to the death penalty. It's a basic principle of criminal punishment that part of the rationale is general deterrence. And a fear of death is something that everyone shares.
The current evidence (empirical and theoretical) says that you should either believe that it is more likely than not that death penalty does not marginally deter or that we can not say either way. Believing that it deters is not an evidence based conclusion, in particular if you aren't an academic in the field.
I don't agree with you that this is what the current evidence says. There is also theoretical evidence of the marginal deterrence effect. You have not cited anything to support your statements
For example:
http://law.bepress.com/gmulwps/art38/
Gentleman Jack
Member
Cool let's just play the game where we assume different viewpoints are borne of ignorance of widely known facts.
I'm not going to comment on the specific paper, but the point is that as a non-academic in the field you should be looking at the totality of available evidence rather than cherry picking ones that support your preconceived notions or agenda. It is a fact that most research finds no deterrence, but it also appears that the research is fundamentally flawed and we shouldn't draw any definite conclusions.
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13363 (the paper is available for free somewhere)
If you decide to draw conclusions anyway, it should be cautiously towards (marginal) non-deterrence due to most evidence (papers) leaning that way.
Dion Blaster
Member
1. I don't necessarily disagree with that as I'm against the death penalty. What makes the criminal killing someone bad, but the government killing someone allowed?
2. Being shot and buried alive is a horrible way to die. If we killed someone like that it would make society no better or less of a psychopath than the initial murderer.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked