Should this murderer get the death penalty?

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Opposing death penalty, in any case.

For a lot of reasons.

[Zarn]

He should get life.

I'm opposed to the death penalty.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

No, no one should get the death penalty.

[Mint]

No, no one should get the death penalty.

[Joe Republic]

No, of course not.  As we extensively discussed in the other thread, there are far worse punishments possible than simply ending their life.

[John Dibble]

^ Actually, witnesses are among the worst and least reliable pieces of evidence there is...which is tragic because juries consider them THE most reliable.  A lot of the cases where people were incorrectly put on death row were based on witness testimony, even where the woman picks the wrong rapist out of the line-up...

Which is exactly why I said multiple witnesses, though I didn't mean to imply that that alone would always be sufficient in any case.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     No. As I have said before, nobody should ever be given the death penalty.

[Lunar]

^ Actually, witnesses are among the worst and least reliable pieces of evidence there is...which is tragic because juries consider them THE most reliable.  A lot of the cases where people were incorrectly put on death row were based on witness testimony, even where the woman picks the wrong rapist out of the line-up...

Which is exactly why I said multiple witnesses, though I didn't mean to imply that that alone would always be sufficient in any case.

I think I took into account the "multiple" thing with my response   They still are almost never credible enough to kill somebody over.

[KuntaKinte]

No, since I oppose the death penalty.
And by the way I don't see how death would be any worse then this:

Still, this guy is most likely going to have a life of living hell anyways - child rapists and murderers are considered to be the lowest of the low even by the prison population, and are subject to murder attempts, beatings, and whatnot.

[Sbane]

No, of course not.

As explained in the other thread, nobody should ever be put to death, regardless of their crime.

Peddling a 5 year old off for sex and then murdering her doesn't even get you closer to thinking yes?  Hmmmmm.

And what would killing that piece of human trash accomplish? Revenge? I admit it would feel good but I don't think the death penalty deters anyone. And imho it only shortens their misery (as I don't believe in heaven, hell, reincarnation and all that junk).

[Marokai Backbeat]

No, of course not.

As explained in the other thread, nobody should ever be put to death, regardless of their crime.

Peddling a 5 year old off for sex and then murdering her doesn't even get you closer to thinking yes?  Hmmmmm.

And what would killing that piece of human trash accomplish? Revenge? I admit it would feel good but I don't think the death penalty deters anyone. And imho it only shortens their misery (as I don't believe in heaven, hell, reincarnation and all that junk).

Yeah I found his response to Franzl here a little disappointing. It was entirely an emotional appeal and some sort of implication that Franzl is cold/heartless.

[Franzl]

And what would killing that piece of human trash accomplish?

Now no offense to you, sbane.....it's a natural human feeling, but I must admit I don't even like talking about criminals as "human trash" or "monsters" or whatever else.

As soon as we stop considering the person in question to be a human being just like the rest of us....I think that's when the problems of our justice system start.

Of course the person committed a terrible crime, and he should be punished very severely.....never being released from prison would be my wish. But he's still a human being, despite everything.

[Sbane]

And what would killing that piece of human trash accomplish?

Now no offense to you, sbane.....it's a natural human feeling, but I must admit I don't even like talking about criminals as "human trash" or "monsters" or whatever else.

As soon as we stop considering the person in question to be a human being just like the rest of us....I think that's when the problems of our justice system start.

Of course the person committed a terrible crime, and he should be punished very severely.....never being released from prison would be my wish. But he's still a human being, despite everything.

Oh I consider them to be human. Just very, very horrible human beings.

[Torie]

Yes if we are certain we have the right killer. Witnesses alone are not enough. The death penalty does not offend me as a moral matter. And I don't care if it does not deter (although there is surprisingly persuasive although not conclusive evidence that it does); it in some cases is what I think is necessary to effect what is just.

[Lunar]

Yes if we are certain we have the right killer.

How are we ever certain unless he does it in the middle of a crowd and then sits on the body unmoving until the police arrive?   Digital evidence is getting easier and easier to fabricate, right? To those that think life in prison is almost equally unjust...who knows what technology like DNA will come along?  If the alleged killer admits it, do we know it wasn't forced?  What if an innocent man would rather be killed than spend life being raped by the other inmatess?  And we still have an adversarial justice system that essentially rewards overzealous prosecutors and indeed prosecutor misconduct.

I think the biggest problem for us anti-death penalty people is that oftentimes the most obviously weak cases against the condemned are supplemented by the accused being a genuinely bad person.  Wife-beaters, people accused of past crimes, etc. are all more likely to end up in jail falsely than your prototypical rich suburban types....

[useful idiot]

The guy should get the chair, or at a minimum life in prison (with a cop informing some of the inmates that the guy killed a little girl after buying her for sex).

The mother should have her tubes tied so she could never have children ever again.

I'd pretty much agree with that

[Mint]

And what would killing that piece of human trash accomplish?

Now no offense to you, sbane.....it's a natural human feeling, but I must admit I don't even like talking about criminals as "human trash" or "monsters" or whatever else.

As soon as we stop considering the person in question to be a human being just like the rest of us....I think that's when the problems of our justice system start.

Of course the person committed a terrible crime, and he should be punished very severely.....never being released from prison would be my wish. But he's still a human being, despite everything.

Pretty much. I mean I have other reasons (brutality, uneven application, poor evidence standards, etc.) for not supporting it anymore but really that's what it boils down to for me. Plus I wouldn't trust any government or jury to decide who was worthy of life or not even assuming it was morally permissible to execute.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Yes, this waste of space does not deserve to live. When you take away another's life you lose the right to your own.

[Franzl]

Yes, this waste of space does not deserve to live. When you take away another's life you lose the right to your own.

Why?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Yes, this waste of space does not deserve to live. When you take away another's life you lose the right to your own.

Why?

In my view, because it's just punishment.

[GMantis]

If the death penalty didn't exist, it would have been invented for a murder like that.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Yes, this waste of space does not deserve to live. When you take away another's life you lose the right to your own.

Aside of the fact that to me there are a lot of reasons to ban death penalty, if we follow your logic then those who apply death penalty have to be put to death and so on, until the last human on earth gives him suicide for having killed the preceding one...

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Yes, this waste of space does not deserve to live. When you take away another's life you lose the right to your own.

Why?

Look at it this way, there are certain ways society must be run in order for it to survive. If the human population was as small as 20 people, and someone was running around killing people, we would have to elimate that person in order for the rest of us to live. It's self preservation. Even with 6 billion people, it is still necessary to make sure that killers must be killed in order to prevent more killing.

[Sbane]

Yes, this waste of space does not deserve to live. When you take away another's life you lose the right to your own.

Why?

Look at it this way, there are certain ways society must be run in order for it to survive. If the human population was as small as 20 people, and someone was running around killing people, we would have to elimate that person in order for the rest of us to live. It's self preservation. Even with 6 billion people, it is still necessary to make sure that killers must be killed in order to prevent more killing.

Wouldn't locking them up for life serve the same purpose as the death penalty?

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Yes, but it is a matter of opinion of whether or not it is an adequate punishment. I happen to believe it isn't.