Do you believe that Death Penalty is good form of punishment?

[Eazy]

Do you believe that Death Penalty is wrong form of punishment?

We're not talking here about punishing innocent people(like "what if he was proven innocent after 10 years?" or something). I'm asking if that's a wrong form of punishment if we have clean proofs that they commited cruel crimes(videos from cameras etc).

For example(this happened FOR REAL) - a guy stopped his car near a women with her childer in the baby carrage(8 months old) and he killed them both with an axe(kid first, and then his mother), there we plenty of witnessess and the guy even admit that he killed them.

Do you think that Death Penalty is good punishment for such a human being? I mean, what's the point of keeping them alive in the prisons. They're wasting money and have toxic influence on other people there.
No one is going to tell me that death penalty costs more than keeping this man in prison, a simple shot in the head and funeral, that's all.
Do not ask "what if he was a father", because his family do not deserve any money for losing "father"(which is criminalist) - stop this nonsense... Well, maybe if they had insurance, but that's completely have zero connection to the thread.
I know some people who were murderers/rapists/thieves and after going out of the prison they were still doing what they were doing before... Though I don't want to discuss if prison is a good form of punishment, but if death penatly for cruel crimes is.

If you have any alternatives - please, explain.
(this is other, fresh thread about death penalty as being good/wrong form of punishment)

EDIT:
As I wrote above(because I see that some people have problems with reading):
-evidences CLEARLY points that the criminal is guilty (no chances for mistake, like for the case of Breivik),
-death penalty - simple shot in the head + funeral (almost no costs),

[Sesshomaru]

Killing the man who killed the woman with her child is like indirectly killing the woman & her child.

You all know the sick-o sitting in a certain prison here in Norway, complaining about how un-humanly he gets treated, but for me, I just giggle at the thought that he thinks he's at hell rather than knowing he's been killed. So that's my answer; seeing the punishment for killing to be in prison, maybe isolated from time to time, is a better way in comparison to simply "remove the problem." You don't remove the problem, you are vanquishing responsibility in the name of Justice.

It's more of an ethical issue and whether or not people have embraced the fact that extreme wrongdoings leads to capitol punishment, in this case, Death Penalty.

[Krille]

Death penalty is letting them get off easily. I'd consider it if someone get let out and instantly commits another crime, then it shows no matter how much you rehab this person he/she will never function, just end it.

[Azadina]

One could argue that you are doing the criminal a favor. Who wants to spend life in prison, if you have a quick way out? Just like Breivik example above, he's not enjoying his life behind bars, and that sounds like a good punishment.

[Eazy]

Killing the man who killed the woman with her child is like indirectly killing the woman & her child.

What?
/10chars

You all know the sick-o sitting in a certain prison here in Norway, complaining about how un-humanly he gets treated, but for me, I just giggle at the thought he thinks he's at hell rather than knowing he's been killed.

So, torturing them/making them live in a bad environment is better punishment?

Also - no every prison is bad. I think that his prison is actually pretty comfy. And the parents of the kids he killed are still paying for his "home"(through taxes).

I wouldn't like to pay money for someone who killed so many students, no matter what.

For actually guilty, absolutely.

My issue is that the system makes mistakes, and some times the innocent are wrongly punished, so better not execute anyone until such time comes when we can do a scan of the suspects memories or something and be absolutely 100% sure they are guilty.

As I said - the Judge is 100% certain, because the evidences are clearly leading the criminalist(camers, he commited etc).

[Deleted]

Sure, for people like breivik and so forth.

[Deleted]

Absolutely yes. When a person becomes a menace and a drainage to society, he should automaticaly lose his human rights-since he cant act as a human anyways. Use the to test drugs, weapons or simply torture and kill them. Would be a good lecture for future criminals.

[Azadina]

I always roll my eyes at the people who manage to sometimes use both "death penalty is inhumane" and "killing then is letting them off too easy".

Which one is it?!?!?

Letting them off too easy. Give them life in prison instead. That's a long time to think about what you've done.

[May90]

First of all, no, we are not savages. Second, "punishment" is not what system of justice should be about at all, so this question is kind of obsolete: there is no "good form" of punishment, since punishment in itself is the wrong goal. Third, countries with death penalty overall tend to have much higher crime rates than those without, and while there is probably no direct causation, the correlation makes one think: the crueler the society is, the higher the crime rates are, and cruelty manifests in many forms, supporting death penalty included.

[Ahovv]

For actually guilty, absolutely.

My issue is that the system makes mistakes, and some times the innocent are wrongly punished, so better not execute anyone until such time comes when we can do a scan of the suspects memories or something and be absolutely 100% sure they are guilty.

I agree with this premise. Our legal system is not perfect, therefore innocents have certainly been killed before.

[Sesshomaru]

Absolutely yes. When a person becomes a menace and a drainage to society, he should automaticaly lose his human rights-since he cant act as a human anyways. Use the to test drugs, weapons or simply torture and kill them. Would be a good lecture for future criminals.

Following your example, you might as well make the criminal a slave to the society instead; make him do labor as a lifetime punishment. That way, s/he will never become a part of the community again, and the society reaps benefits.

[Eazy]

Letting them off too easy. Give them life in prison instead. That's a long time to think about what you've done.

And then what? You think that they'll eventually come up with "woaaah, I made a bad decision in my life...", and then?... Nothing would happen because they'll still be in prison, no matter if they realise their fault or not.

Also - we're wasting money for them.

I agree with this premise. Our legal system is not perfect, therefore innocents have certainly been killed before.

Did you even read the thread? Seriously?

First of all, no, we are not savages.

Yes we're, we're killing other people(as human beings).

Just don't give me that "we're above that, we're not killing them, though they're killing us(murderers)", it's like saying "I have a gun but I won't kill that lion which is in the cage with me, I'm pretty sure he thinks the same".
Whenever someone says something like that(your explaining that "we're not savages) I see a big failure in their way of thinking - murderers think in other way than you.

[Cradyz]

No, we as a society are supposed to be better than that. Indulging in vengeance and killing the killer stoops us down to their level, lock them up and let them deal with that for the rest of their lives. Besides that I don't think we should give that state the ability to kill it's own citizens.

When you count all the arguments for and against what it really comes down to is whether you think vengeance supercedes justice. I don't think so, someone who commits a horrible crime should pay the price and death is simply the wrong way to do that.

Btw, on the cost thing. Death penalty is more expensive than life in prison because of the way the legal system allows the defendant to appeal this most extreme of punishments. We don't just shoot them in the head because we are a lawful society and innocent people do get wrongly accused.

[Azadina]

And then what? You think that they'll eventually come up with "woaaah, I made a bad decision in my life...", and then?... Nothing would happen because they'll still be in prison, no matter if they realise their fault or not.

Also - we're wasting money for them.

Then nothing. They can continue to dwell on their wrongdoings until the day they die in the prison.

[moremana]

Letting them off too easy. Give them life in prison instead. That's a long time to think about what you've done.

People like he described dont think, they just take and take.
Kill em.

If they are 100% guilty.

Eye for an eye. Spending millions to keep them in prison is an injustice to the people, society already suffered for this scum. That money could be used elsewhere, a person that kills someone out of cold blood has no right to live.

[Krille]

I fully support explosive collars and forced labor in conditions where there is zero percent chance of them harming innocent people.

Yes, let's give all those jobs we have to the prisoners instead.

[derpkitteh]

no. i'm kind of agnostic, and don't know if there's an afterlife. if there is, we shouldn't be sending people to it.

nobody deserves to go to hell.

[Azadina]

The beauty of forced labor with convicted life timers is that you don't need to pay them. Use the money on welfare of the innocent population.

Companies would love nothing more than slave labor. Pay nothing, get every cent for yourself. Great plan...

[Krille]

The beauty of forced labor with convicted life timers is that you don't need to pay them. Use the money on welfare of the innocent population.

Where will that money come from when thousands of lost jobs is not even taxed. Bad idea.

[May90]

Yes we're, we're killing other people(as human beings).

Just don't give me that "we're above that, we're not killing them, though they're killing us(murderers)", it's like saying "I have a gun but I won't kill that lion which is in the cage with me, I'm pretty sure he thinks the same".
Whenever someone says something like that(your explaining that "we're not savages) I see a big failure in their way of thinking - murderers think in other way than you.

So your solution is to copy murderers' way of thinking to get rid of murderers' way of thinking? How does it even make sense? A murderer that is already in custody presents no danger to anyone else, as long as they remain in custody. A murderer running at you with a weapon is another thing, and I don't think killing someone in direct self-defense can be compared to killing someone you are already holding a prisoner, when you have alternative solutions, which are better, as statistics show.

It is not about pity towards the criminal as much as it is about not becoming one oneself.