Poll: More punishing; Death Penalty or Life in Prison

[kyp275]

Man, you just can't seem to stop digging the hole deeper can you?

Hey, if you believe that putting people to death out of vengeance is 'justice' then you can be classified (by certain people, at least) as mongoloid scum. Now, I never claimed to have solidarity in my character but I will claim, in this instance, to be above those that do hold that viewpoint from a moral standing.

And the racist rants continues...

Racial slurs? Ahem:

mongoloid

n.
A member of the racial classification of humanity composed of peoples native to North Asia, East Asia, Pacific Oceania, and Greenland, as well as their diaspora in other parts of the world.
n.
Someone with Down syndrome.
n.
Idiot, retard ? general term of abuse, due to association with Down syndrome.

See those last two? Yeahhh... Also the context is all wrong even if I was using it as a racial slur. You come from freedomland itself, not Asia. So good job with that insult, I'll also play a handy little youtube clip for you:

I was gonna ask you if you want a bigger shovel, but it looks like you're doing just fine.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid

The term "mongoloid" was introduced by early ethnology primarily to describe various central and East Asian populations...the term mongoloid is now considered derogatory by most anthropologist due to its association with disputed typological models of racial classification

You might as well be trying to argue that the n-word is not really a racial slur because it describes black people. Seriously, your argument is one that's lifted straight out of stormfront.

Oh, and I'm very much Asian - in fact, I was born in Taiwan, but please, do continue to rationalize how calling an Asian mongoloid is somehow not racist - after all you have already rationalized how it's ok to use racial slurs as long as that's "not what you meant".

But that is a subjective view

Since the last time I checked I haven't yet gotten my promotion letter to God, that would indeed make my viewpoint a subjective one, yes.

Also good job on responding to the actual points of my argument but whatever, let's just ignore those posts of coherency, instead stooping to the lows which your opponent admitted to.

Pretty sure I haven't let myself sink to your level.

 

[Glongpre]

I think it is safe to say that neither of these is the best decision from a moral perspective. Either way you are subjecting someone to suffering. Is there a way to change peoples minds on criminals? Because I think the big hurdle here for finding a better alternative is just humanity's built in emotions. When you feel wronged you want the others to be punished. Humans are fairly selfish creatures (that is just what I have observed, but also felt in myself).

We need to be able to empathize better with everyone, because sure the guy did something terrible, but what was his life like? People learn from their environment, so we as humanity need to become more loving, so as to reduce the number of people who are brought up in an environment that is toxic. There is a cycle of kids who grow up in a shit household, are taught to be shitheads, then these same kids grow up and no one helps them see that the world can be a better place, and they repeat the cycle.

The best thing for health is prevention. Like how preventing disease through the right food, exercise, state of mind is the best thing to keep your body healthy. Preventing suffering and ignorant/malicious attitudes through kindness, empathy, and positive/loving attitudes (I think), will be the best for the health of humanity.

I will sound like I am up on a high horse right now, but seriously, to all the people calling him scum etc., "be the change you want to see in the world". What he did was not right, but that does not make him any less of a human being.

OT: I personally think in this situation, the death penalty is better, as you reduce the suffering on this person, reduce the costs to society, and remove a problematic element. I would choose a few minutes of fear over a lifetime of torture.

 

[tippy2k2]

What is this good for though?
You can't apply the results of this to the real world in any useful fashion.

By the way I like how you snap reality in half just to preemptively counter most common arguments against the death penalty.

I'm curious, nothing more. I heard the arguments for what would "punish" the Boston Bomber more but people had various reasons outside strictly punishment one way or the other.

Personally,I actually think life is prison is the worse of the two fates (with or without the red tape removed I am not a fan of the death penalty) so I assure you that I didn't break reality to give myself the green light to kill the man. The red tape/financial side of the death penalty is something I wanted to remove as an attempt to keep the discussion about punishment alone. I don't know if that made people change their "real life" stance on the death penalty but the poll is still virtually even.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

**Snips**

Methinks you forgot the third option, which is "Depends on the Prison they end up at for life". A life sentence IMO is greatly dependent on the conditions of the prison in which said lifer is sentenced to. I'm not anti-death penalty but I'm not pro-death penalty. I'm neutral until I've examined the case. If the jury had given a life sentence without possibility of parole in the prison the Boston Bomber would have been sent to, a SuperMax in Colorado that a former Warden even said was the WORST place to be sentenced life in, that would have been just fine with me. I feel that there are times when a person who has done horrible things deserves to live in isolation with their crimes for life, and there are times where the person probably would never feel the weight of guilt because they just don't have that in them. The latter half is the ones I'd put to death. But since we don't have a way of measuring a person's ability to access empathy or sympathy or if they even feel guilty, its a hard thing to decide anyway.
If a person is handed a life without parole sentence, then it should be guaranteed to be a hard life sentence. No TV, no amenities beyond the required rec-time. Nutritional sustenance (which I'd prefer it be at least OSHA food safety standard) but it doesn't need to be great. Prisons should be punishment, and all but civil rights should be stripped from the person. They can be treated fairly, but still kept in a place they don't want to be.

However the reason I'm really on the fence about the death penalty is the appeal process. Sure it helps out the few that may actually have been innocent of the crime, but overall the hopelessly guilty get a stay of execution for a long damn time and the death penalty seems to carry no weight anymore. It isn't a deterrent.

Prison itself isn't a deterrent anymore, because of how they're run. I may not be a fan of France but French prisons as I've heard are no joke, and not somewhere where one would want to be sent. If we ran prisons as such where they were rehabilitation centers for the people who aren't in for life, give some of these people a REAL chance to get their lives straightened out, and the other prisons for people who fail to be rehabilitated (extreme violent repeat offenders, rapists, etc), and a third for people who are in for life. No general population in the second and third prison types. Single cells, no free time.... I've thought a lot about it.
Problem is that prisons are run privately and there's no real uniformity to how they're run, there's no system set up to help some of the people who really just made stupid mistakes in life and want to change. There are some who do end up rising out of the holes they've dug themselves into, but the system doesn't help them and they struggle daily. I don't have answers for it though and I'm getting off topic.

Whats worse? Life in a horrible prison never getting to see the sky again, just for gray walls? Or sitting on death row while civil rights lawyers appeal your case for years? I'm not sure but personally I'd rather take the death penalty than face life in a cell in a shit prison, and I'd refuse appeal, if I were guilty.

I'm not sure exactly what a death penalty proves to anyone anymore since we don't do public square hangings and the like, so really life in prison without possibility of parole sounds like a better choice. Let them live with their mistakes, in a shit place with shit food and no privacy, no hope of leaving. I'm not sure I'm comfortable though with public execution either... I'm of the mind that taking another life in defense of your own or another's is the only time it would be acceptable and even then its something one has to live with.

 

[DugMachine]

Death is far too easy. Yes its the absolute end but I'd rather have death than to be locked in isolation for the rest of my life.

 

[lunavixen]

Yeah I don't think the indonesian firing squads need a mention. Considering the fucking massive issue the Bali 9 had over here in Aus.

You have good points. I know CO's definitely dont train with weapons that much, and I know that US law enforcement don't as much either. Guess it's just my inner grunt that finds it silly.

Do you agree with CO's who signed up to be nothing more than Prison guards being the ones who have to do the execution? Signing up as infantry is one thing, you expect to fire your weapon at the enemy. A prison guard though? It's nothing something you'd be prepared for.

The Indonesian firing squads were the most recent examples I could find with the most information. I also live in Australia, I'm well aware of the Bali 9 debacle, no one would shut up about it and now our Government is punishing Indonesia in foreign aid for following it's own laws, and it's only going to punish the wrong people.

I don't have enough information to tell whether jail police or prison guards who have to perform executions are done on a voluntary basis or whether they have little choice. If it's voluntary, then I really can't have a say, it's not my place, if it's done like jury selection (i.e. called up at random), then they'd want to have similar fielding questions that they do for jurors to make sure that the potential executioners are sane and stable enough to not snap after it's done or are too eager to kill. I know that those who end up on the firing squad receive special training for it.

I'm against the death penalty as a whole. It's not a deterrent, it's more expensive and it gives no chance for rehabilitation (for those who can be rehabilitated or only committed their crimes in heat of the moment, like what happens in most cases of homicide that aren't a result of negligence, self defence or an accident). If you're wondering how I know so much about this sort of thing, I studied Criminology at university.

 

[Stg]

While death is the easy route it's a far bigger punishment to the surviving members of the victims to have the guilty party rot in jail until they die of old age. Not only is it far more expensive to keep them in for another 60+ years, but every day they are alive is a massive slap in the face to the people who died at their hand. That's essentially the government telling the families "look, he killed your loved ones so we are going to let him live out the rest of his life and we are also going to feed him, cloth him, and give him medical treatment whenever he needs".

Fuck. That.

Just send them in and tell the other prisoners they molested disabled children. Whatever the other convicts leave behind, let the guards finish.

 

[Xeros]

Meh, I've become mostly indifferent. I say kill 'em, if only because I see their prolonged life as a complete waste of resources. If we're truly going to dedicate funding and provisions that could be better used (or put to actual use for that matter) elsewhere, the psycho in me says we should torture 'em, much in the same vein as Firefly's Adelai Niska, or Gerard Butler's character in the first act of Law Abiding Citizen. Make them truly suffer for the wrong that they've done. Find the thing they actually care about, and slowly tear it away. At least then we'll get our money's-worth, especially if we televise it. Might even get Jason Statham to don a mask, and go Carmageddon on everyone.

Captcha: "one way" See? Captcha know's what's up.

 

[IOwnTheSpire]

While death is the easy route it's a far bigger punishment to the surviving members of the victims to have the guilty party rot in jail until they die of old age. Not only is it far more expensive to keep them in for another 60+ years, but every day they are alive is a massive slap in the face to the people who died at their hand. That's essentially the government telling the families "look, he killed your loved ones so we are going to let him live out the rest of his life and we are also going to feed him, cloth him, and give him medical treatment whenever he needs".

Fuck. That.

Just send them in and tell the other prisoners they molested disabled children. Whatever the other convicts leave behind, let the guards finish.

It's actually a lot more expensive to kill them. You may think killing them gives the victims closure, but it doesn't; nothing takes that pain away. Besides, executing someone because you'd rather not spend resources to provide for them (as in taking the easy way out) is just lazy and barbaric. You shouldn't condemn someone for being a killer, then advocate killing them and pretend you're any better. Also, that last sentence makes me worry for your mental health.

 

[tippy2k2]

**Snips**

Methinks you forgot the third option, which is "Depends on the Prison they end up at for life". A life sentence IMO is greatly dependent on the conditions of the prison in which said lifer is sentenced to. I'm not anti-death penalty but I'm not pro-death penalty. I'm neutral until I've examined the case. If the jury had given a life sentence without possibility of parole in the prison the Boston Bomber would have been sent to, a SuperMax in Colorado that a former Warden even said was the WORST place to be sentenced life in, that would have been just fine with me.

I did not specify (maybe I should have since I specified that it was dealers choice for the death penalty) but I was going to leave the prison up to the person voting. The thread is dying now so maybe it's a moot point but I will add that to the OP.

 

[Level 7 Dragon]

Well, I live in Russia. Believe it or not, we don't have a death penalty as punishment, however we have some of the most cruel prisons in the world.

If you are guilty of terrorism or murder you risk being send for life to the colonies. The colonies are incredibly harsh prisons set far away from civilization, in Siberia or Chukotka for example. The thing is that most prisoners send there for life don't survive more than twenty years because of a mix of hard climate and malnutrition.

 

[KissingSunlight]

snip

The problem I have with the question is that there are certain crimes that are truly heinous. There are no punishment you can administer that will be equal to what they deserve. So, in deciding what punishment to deliver unto the criminal like the Boston Marathon bomber. You need to remove the concept of "Does the punishment fit the crime?" Unless you are willing to kill an equal amount of his family members and friends, then nothing short of the death penalty is appropriate for him.

Quite frankly, I never understood the debate for life in prison. Prison is suppose to be about rehabilitation. If someone commits a crime so heinous that they should never return to society, then the appropriate thing to do is to put that person to death.

I understand the prison system is broken. Especially, in the U.S., where most of them are corporate own. So, there is a monetary incentive to send people to prison and keep costs down on how much they spend on prisoners. So, the concept of rehabilitation has fell to the wayside.

 

[V4Viewtiful]

There's a "Toss Salad Man" in Prison, death is merciful


But seriously, there's no nice way to kill someone, so i lean more towards prison.

 

[Amir Kondori]

You can always kill yourself in prison, I see the results are almost 50/50 but I'll bet a lot of those people who said life in prison is worse were given these options many would pick life in prison.

 

[J Tyran]

so a life imprisonment would be worst since it is pretty much the same thing, only with a longer duration.

That entirely depends on the person and the prison system they in, there is always some quality of life to be had even in some of the worst institutions around the world and for some people thats enough. There are other penal systems where the quality of life my even surpass the one they had when the inmates where free, clean clothes, good food, recreation facilities and maybe even conjugal visits can be a massive improvement for people that are homeless or living in abject poverty on welfare and/or with addiction issues.

Not all prisons are hell holes.

 

[kyp275]

Do you not understand the concept of 'context'? I could take that one line right now and claim that you are making the statement that anyone who ever uses a racial slur is a racist. You want to know why that wouldn't hold up? Because its missing context. Please, why the fuck would I ever use a racial slur to people who are faceless to me? Genderless, sexless, raceless? Over an ideological standpoint which is prevalent in the USA which is primarily by old conservative white fucks.

Literally arguing that it's ok to use racial slurs, as long as the "context" is justified in your head.

You are not asian

Now literally denying what my identity is.

By your logic, you can use all the slurs you want, whether they be racial or gender or whatever, and if someone in here pointed out that they are the target of said slurs, they're the one playing the race/gender card and is the one bringing it into the thread.

GG, I think I'm just gonna leave you to keep digging your hole.

 

[AgedGrunt]

Undoubtedly, life in prison is the worse fate, but it's also the worse idea for society, at least in cases where all doubt and faith in the humanity of the person is gone.

Why is society wrong? I find it strange how normally good people focus on the punishment and not the general welfare of society.

If someone has committed atrocities so far beyond reparation and the realm of sanity that there's no conceivable hope or safety in this person ever being allowed into society once again, then we have to concede that the person's ultimate fate, through some form, will be death.

That said, I find it really unusual how people can argue against the death penalty, particularly when people generally agree that they want there to be a lifelong process of suffering, anguish, despair and so on for the person, as a way of them reconciling with and answering for their actions.

Slow, agonizing, hostile and costly facilities that actually lead to more abuse, more problems and unnecessary costs in terms of resources and the lives of those working in criminal justice who have to take care of these people who don't deserve any of this is inhumane. We should not feed, clothe, house, secure and provide attention for the worst of humanity for the rest of their lives. That, in the context of the suffering they go through, and those good people who are being denied all of this aid and attention, is just appalling to me.

 

[Ravenbom]

I've never been to a supermax but the first thing I'll tell you about jail and being locked-up is, that it's not that bad.

I was on the edge of tears going to jail and once I got there (I'm half white but I look white as fuck) I was the only white person there. And the first thing I learned was that whatever you think it's like, it's not. Whatever you've seen on TV, it's not.
Adnan Syed said in one of the episodes of the podcast Serial was something along the lines of: I have a life in here, not the life I would have chosen but it's a life.
It's really not that bad. There's no lights out so get used to sleeping with the lights on and there's cameras in every cell so masturbation, just like shitting, is a public affair. It's a life if you had to live it. Mostly, it's just boring. Think of waiting at the DMV without your cell phone to distract you. It's life without intense labor, no cat videos to fill the in-betweens when you're bored.
It's basically retirement without vacations or cruise ships. It's what retirement would have been like 100 years ago. It's what all humans since history began worked towards.

It's boring. And if that's your biggest complaint in life, then it's not a bad life.



I've also nearly died. There's one time climbing I thought I was going to die and one time climbing in Yosemite I knew I was going to die.
I caught myself in the same second I started a 400 foot fall alone, late in the season in Yosemite. But in that one second (probably less than a second) I knew I was going to die.
Once I was safe, I literally had to check to see if I had shit myself. It turned out I didn't but I was pretty sure on the climb down I had. I also asked God to save me in that split second and still swore for many years after that I was an atheist.
Having watched a few people die through wasting diseases and barely catching myself from falling a couple hundred feet I know when it comes to it, everything in your being will rebel against death. Death looming over you will break you.
That's what torture is. They don't try to inflict pain to get you to talk, they try to inflict your death instincts. That's why every sane person will break.


Death penalty is worse.
TL;DR personal experiences aside, the simple fact is we're hard-wired to live no matter what. When it comes down to it, we have it hard wired in us to live. No species would survive otherwise.