When does someone deserve death?

[vesago]

I beleive it should be when someome takes somebody's life and/or inicence (rape or chld molestion) and for those things you should get the nazi gas chamber

 

[silasbufu]

If someone kills a person "just because" or fore some idiotic reason brewed inside their psychotic brain, he/she deserves death in my opinion.

Got some other examples but that's the one that jumped out .

 

[orangeban]

No-one deserves to die. If I'm about to be knifed, I have the right to protect my life, and if that involves killing the dude then so be it. For the second scenario, I'd refuse to kill the accused. Send him to jail, help him rehabilitate, ect. ect. no death.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

This is probably one of the most important things you will ever watch.

Edit: Posted the wrong video earlier (though related and still interesting!)

To summarize my views: People are responsible for their actions, but not in the way you probably think they are. Once you have a better view of it, moral justifications can be reduced to functional justifications. Killing people is an expedient solution to the problems they tend to produce. This expedience is no longer necessary and the potential good that can be done by these people when we use other methods to avoid the problems of their problematic behavior outweights the need for expediency.

 

[spartan231490]

Rape deserves worse than death, and murder may also deserve death.

why?

Because They are despicable and monstrous acts that cannot be forgiven. You are destroying a person's life your own selfishness.

 

[zehydra]

Rape deserves worse than death, and murder may also deserve death.

why?

Because They are despicable and monstrous acts that cannot be forgiven. You are destroying a person's life your own selfishness.

and why does that person deserve death?

 

[spartan231490]

Rape deserves worse than death, and murder may also deserve death.

why?

Because They are despicable and monstrous acts that cannot be forgiven. You are destroying a person's life your own selfishness.

and why does that person deserve death?

Because they are beyond forgiveness. What they have done is so monstrous that the only acceptable punishment is death.

 

[Vigilantis]

Apologies. I jumped the gun a little - I misunderstood what point you were making. I was assuming that you were talking as a person who would be paying for these people, so I was pointing out that it's actually cheaper to keep them locked up rather than give them the death sentence.

If you're in such a crappy position as to murder someone just so you could go to prison... Then yeah, again, I've got no problem with paying that tiny amount of taxto keep you in prison. If you're really that screwed up, then I'd rather keep you locked up than on the streets.

Now, yes, if the death penalty was in place, this may not even occur to you as an option if you'll just end up being killed yourself. However, if the death penalty was in place, there would be innocent people murdered anyway. It's just that this way, they'd be killed legally, by the state.
(A couple things to note. Yes, there are people who are killed by the state who were actually innocent, and yes, the number of these people may be small, but surely that number is as small as those who, somehow, didn't get to successfully apply for money from the government, didn't manage to make it into shelters, etc., and after all this would actually murder someone just so that they could get into prison of all places.)

Neither situation is inherently better or worse. It's just that one way has murderer's either rehabilitated and re-entering society as "normal" people again or being locked up for the rest of their life (the problem being that, yes, there may be some people out there who are so incredibly desperate that they'd kill just to get into prison, however I'd like to re-iterate that without seeing any statistics I'd probably say that this number of people would be pretty low), the other has possibly less people committing murder and other heinous crimes some would deem worthy of the death penalty (but this way has some innocent people killed, too).

Thanks for the flashbacks to Criminal Justice 101, I know that men/women are imprisoned and/or sent to death row wrongfully (literally its pounded into your head all the way up to the academy) and that there's a likely chance in a Cops lifetime that he will commit even one innocent to such a fate.

So tell me, if the cost for the death penalty (according to your statistics) were a lower cost than to house said inmates, would you or would you not be in favor of it as at this point it seems you are the one worried about money lol. If average Joe on the escapist with no street smarts can see this loop in the system allowing them a free home for the rest of their miserable lives I have no doubt many an actual person knows of this tactic and should things go bottoms up they can always rely on it as a backup. Sorry no statistics/graphs to show you (pie charts just make me hungry)

You are correct, either way innocents die whether it be on the streets or in prison, and the system is there to attempt to weed out the absolutely guilty from the maybe he did it maybe he didn't guys. The system will never be perfect and the innocent slaughtering will never be stopped, its just a matter of attempting to reinforce and prevent said matters. I however do not see the point in allowing a murderer the pleasure of living 40+ years well fed and taken care of where as the 5 year old child he killed never made it to a quarter of the guys age. Also have you thought about the murders being committed after imprisonment? Just because they have life in prison doesn't mean they suddenly become sorry for their actions and stop. Many a innocent prisoner and guard are killed by these same guys who come off the street for the same actions.

Finally no I am not insinuating that you yourself would be paying for "my" room and board, simply that if you are willing to pay for this tax that others are willing as well and if that's the case I also end up having to pay this tax because...ITS A TAX, and if you haven't noticed I'd rather burn all my assets before allowing a scumbag to leech off me. If you truly do not care for the cost of imprisonment to the death penalty I understand. I have no doubt you are a good person whom has the ultimate goal of protecting life, and life should be cherished by all, of which I commend your actions noting that the world needs more people like yourself. Sadly as stated before, I do not see everyone as being redeemable at the end of the day.

 

[Eggsnham]

Because sentencing a rightfully convicted murderer/rapist/whatever evil crime you can think to convict someone of to death is only stooping to their level, and because said criminal deserves real punishment, they can have life in maximum security prison where they'll be forced to do hard labor daily.

 

[Soviet Steve]

At no point do people 'deserve' death as such, it'll come to everyone regardless of what happens. Use of potentially deadly force can be justified when dealing with a highly dangerous situation wherein an individual is attempting to kill several people.

One shouldn't aim to kill, but such outcomes can be inevitable in certain cases.

 

[Terminate421]

When they have proven to the world that they are no longer Human beings, but assholes who cannot under any circumstances be controlled. Not a beast, even the strongest beast can be calmed. But a Demon, thats impossible. (But this is only for punishment)

For defending oneself? Thats uncontrollable, if someone attacks me and I suspect them of having a weapon and I just so happen to fire and kill them. Then he pretty much deserves it. I didn't want to kill him, but he attacked me accepting the risks that come with it.

 

[Torrasque]

What about you? Are there people that deserve death?
What would a person have to do to deserve death?
Instead of death for the most horrible of actions, what fate should they receive?

Hi! I'm actually a professor (well, i'm teaching it for the first time this semester) on this very kind of thing.

While lex talionis is always an attractive option. Statistic after statistic shows that adding or abolishing a death penalty doesn't actually effect the rate of capital offenses. Ever. Anywhere. So it clearly doesn't work as a deterrent.

As you already stated due to the appeals process, higher security, and not to mention that the health of someone on death row tends to on average be poorer (and therefor more expensive) that a death row inmate on average will cost more than a life sentence. In fact people that have life sentences (anywhere but Texas this is true) tend to die of natural causes within 1-3 years of when they would've been put to death anyway. Living in prison is no picnic and ages you terribly.
I've worked in a similar environment before and lifers/in-n-outers (guys who while not ever getting a life sentence still spend most of their life in jail due to repeated minor offenses) you will always guess them being 10-15 years older than they actually are.

Personally, I'm against the death penalty as a christian. But as a pragmatist I know there are some instances where it's the only thing that will stop more lives from ending. I'm thinking like facist dictators or violent terrorist leaders here. (Though then you've got the 'martyrdom' thing to worry about)

Sorry if this was tl:dnr

location: a very very red state

Pffft, hardly TL;DR. My original post is more TL;DR
I'm guessing you are teaching ethics regarding death? Or is it more specific than that?
My ethics class touched on this subject, but we never go into it in much depth.

 

[Torrasque]

Thanks for the flashbacks to Criminal Justice 101, I know that men/women are imprisoned and/or sent to death row wrongfully (literally its pounded into your head all the way up to the academy) and that there's a likely chance in a Cops lifetime that he will commit even one innocent to such a fate.

So tell me, if the cost for the death penalty (according to your statistics) were a lower cost than to house said inmates, would you or would you not be in favor of it as at this point it seems you are the one worried about money lol. If average Joe on the escapist with no street smarts can see this loop in the system allowing them a free home for the rest of their miserable lives I have no doubt many an actual person knows of this tactic and should things go bottoms up they can always rely on it as a backup. Sorry no statistics/graphs to show you (pie charts just make me hungry)

You are correct, either way innocents die whether it be on the streets or in prison, and the system is there to attempt to weed out the absolutely guilty from the maybe he did it maybe he didn't guys. The system will never be perfect and the innocent slaughtering will never be stopped, its just a matter of attempting to reinforce and prevent said matters. I however do not see the point in allowing a murderer the pleasure of living 40+ years well fed and taken care of where as the 5 year old child he killed never made it to a quarter of the guys age. Also have you thought about the murders being committed after imprisonment? Just because they have life in prison doesn't mean they suddenly become sorry for their actions and stop. Many a innocent prisoner and guard are killed by these same guys who come off the street for the same actions.

Finally no I am not insinuating that you yourself would be paying for "my" room and board, simply that if you are willing to pay for this tax that others are willing as well and if that's the case I also end up having to pay this tax because...ITS A TAX, and if you haven't noticed I'd rather burn all my assets before allowing a scumbag to leech off me. If you truly do not care for the cost of imprisonment to the death penalty I understand. I have no doubt you are a good person whom has the ultimate goal of protecting life, and life should be cherished by all, of which I commend your actions noting that the world needs more people like yourself. Sadly as stated before, I do not see everyone as being redeemable at the end of the day.

Are you replying to someone else? Because my original topic asks you to ignore the whole legal system, and focus on the actual killing of the person.
Many others have brought up the points you are addressing, but not I.
As far as this thread goes, I want you all to ignore the legal procedure, and focus on whether you think it is ok to end a person's life.

 

[Henkie36]

Well, here is the law, if you kill someone while he's trying to rob or even rape or kill you, you go to jail. Bwerk. My old-man government think we can't handle ourselves. But wheter or not someone deserves death is a different sory all together. I myself think that if some tries to kill me with a knife, I take the knife from him and stab him in the neck with it, he shouldn't have tried to kill me in the first place, hence not my fault but his. And did he really deserve to die? In that case, I'd say yes. But something like the death penatly is pointless, unless you do it quickly. So do it shortly after the processs or don't do it at all.

 

[Jakub324]

1) Damn straight I'd kill him! Without hesitation, it would be one shot to kill him, and another to kill him again.
2) No, I wouldn't. I'd send him inside for the next 50 years, though.

If it's you or the other guy, and you've done nothing wrong, and the guy if fully aware of that, you have every right to end him, in my opinion.

 

[Roofstone]

I am more or less for "An eye for an eye" punishment, but I never condone ending someones life. Though I do reckon that it is needed on occasion.. So, meh.

After a whole fuckin' lot of evilness.

To put it bluntly.

 

[zehydra]

Rape deserves worse than death, and murder may also deserve death.

why?

Because They are despicable and monstrous acts that cannot be forgiven. You are destroying a person's life your own selfishness.

and why does that person deserve death?

Because they are beyond forgiveness. What they have done is so monstrous that the only acceptable punishment is death.

and my question is why is that?

 

[Torrasque]

Our births are random, the right to life is not earned, so "You deserve to die" is meaningless. A death may be convenient, expedient, practical, satisfactory or exemplary, but that doesn't mean it's deserved.

Why do we say it then?

Often, "You deserve to die" is a dispassionate code for something more bluntly self-interested: "We claim the right to kill you, and our power to kill you is our authority to do so."

But we don't say it that way because it would reveal more about ourselves than most of us would care to admit: that we're vengeful, violent and highly self-interested.

A much harder statement to face is: "You *don't* deserve to die, and killing you is *not* right, but I mean to kill you anyway." Fewer people still want to admit that, because the consequences must be lived with for the rest of our lives.

Among the worst victims of this realisation are victims of trauma relating to people they've killed: returned soldiers who find that they had more in common with their enemies than with the civilians they come home to, and police who know their neighbourhoods so well that they recognise the offender that they ultimately shoot.

"You deserve to die" doesn't say much about the person we mean to kill, because we can kill on any pretext once we decide that power equals authority. The statement is much more about ourselves -- about the limits of our sympathy and honesty.

An interesting point that I have not seen come up in this thread (surprsingly). It is slightly off topic, and not an issue I wanted adressed in this thread, but considering it is not more QQ about jails and how they cost everyone all their money, I will adress it. And cuz it is actually interesting =)

Birth isn't always random, but I'd be an idiot to say that it is 100% planned. This is irrelevant to the rest of your post though, so just ignore it.
It is interesting that you are the first person to see this kind of difference between a soldier and a judge. Others have said that soldiers are paid to kill, and that their power to take life is their job, so it should not be horrible, but they are still taking a life. Why is it that when someone is paid to do something, their feelings and ethics must be separated from the task? Shouldn't soldiers receive MORE mental reinforcement because of all the killing they must do? Something like, "You are going to kill people. Good people, bad people, you cannot know whether everyone you kill, deserves it or not, but you are going to kill them anyways. Open your eyes and try your best to judge the situation on the fly, and when the time comes, don't let your decision worry you" except that is a pathetic excuse for "yo bro, its alright" =/

Also, my original intention for creating this thread, was to state what reasons a person may be killed, to answer "We claim the right to kill you" with what justifications one might have in taking another person's life.

As with OP, one of my personal philosophies is: "There is nothing a living being could ever do to deserve death", but I also add (in order to be inclusive of cases of self-defense) that "Killing isn't always wrong, but it is never right" (or good/a positive thing).

In case 1, I'm assuming this hypothetical is set up just the right way so that any other option than killing is unavailable. Ok, my life vs. another, in this case I would let self-preservation kick in and kill my attacker. Like I said before, I don't deem killing in self-defense as being "wrong", but it certainly isn't a positive or "right" thing. I would feel horrible, and make sure that I had tried my best to explore all non-lethal action before.

In case 2, I wouldn't sentence the person to death. I would send the person to the best rehabilitation possible, according to the specific crime, so as to be safely re-integrated into society, with the lowest chance of repeating the crime (and hopefully no other crimes either).

I'll probably sound naive/idiotic, as I know there will always be ppl who disagree with other opinions, and I know mine can't possibly be "right" or superior. But how can pple be so fixated on punishment? How come what I just presented in these 2 cases, especially the second one, seems like a rare opinion? How come ppl don't want to treat other ppl humanely and with the respect we are all equally deserving of, by right of being alive?

I'm a Swedish citizen, who has grown up and lived most of my life outside said country. I don't know whether my connection to sweden, or my "international perspective" has had the biggest impact on this issue. Probably a combination, though.

There are several others (including me) that share this opinion
Most people that do not share your opinion, get fixated on the whole "well what about the costs of jail time?" issue, which I didn't want them to do in the first place because it changes their answer to a question that should be about their morality, not their sensibility. Whatever >.>

Scenario 1) the person does not "deserve" death, but you killing him is ok given the circumstances.
Scenario 2) the person does not "deserve" death, and the issue at hand should be whether or not the prison system or other punishments will protect society from the accused.

Exactly, unless the person is / could / wants to strike again, then yes, strike them down, but for one guy who kills another but only wants to kill that ONE, then they don't get death. I like Canada policy.

Why does it matter where I live, anyways?

I just wanted to get a summary of opinions to see if people shared opinions based on country/state/province/region. I'm glad that people do not, and that not all Americans are blood-thirsty "KILL EM NAO!"
/joke

 

[Torrasque]

Personally, when I think about the death penalty, it isn't about considering what that person has done, it's more a matter of pragmatism. It's like when you've got a wild animal that's developed a taste for humans; you don't hunt it down an kill it to teach the animal a lesson, you hunt it down and kill it so that it can't kill again.

When you have a violent criminal who's violent because they've had a shitty life and make a living through criminal acts, or because they acted hastily in a bad situation, you lock that person away. There's a chance that person can be redeemed, so you separate them from society for a while and hope they're ready to clean up their act once they're released (not a very good system, but hey, you got any better ideas?)

When you have a violent criminal, like Charles Manson or John Wayne Gacy, who's violent because they are insane, or they just love hurting people more than anything else, then you kill them. It's not a matter of punishment; really, what's the point in punishing someone like that? Punishing that person isn't going to right any of the wrongs they committed. The people they've hurt won't get un-hurt by torturing the crazy bastards. The best thing you can do to those kinds of people is to get rid of them as quickly and efficiently as our criminal justice systems will allow, so that they can't hurt anyone else and all of us can rest a little easier at night.

So, referencing OT, when I think of the death penalty, asking if that person "deserves death" is the wrong question, because the death penalty isn't really a "punishment" per-se. You only punish something when you have some hope of correcting its behavior, so saying that death penalty is a punishment is probably fallacious. For people like Manson and Gacy, it's less accurate to say that they "deserved to die", and more accurate to say "we had no choice but to kill them". People who commit such heinous acts pose such a dire threat that our fear of them rightfully overrides any sympathy we might have for them, or any moral qualms we might have about taking their lives.

Bottom line: When someone "deserves death", it's not really a matter of them "deserving" anything. It's more a matter of "what is the most effective way to protect ourselves from this person". It's not about revenge or punishment, it's a rational, pragmatic decision made to protect society from its most dangerous members.

Others have said that the only time it is ok to kill someone, is when they abandon/lose their humanity, which I will agree with.
I still believe that no one should be killed, but if someone kills 40 people and eats their bodies, then that person has stopped being human.
This could be a potentially slippery slope for discussion, so I'll quickly say that I do not think that humans have all of the same rights as animals and leave it at that. If you want to discus that point, please take it to another thread.
Your post summarized the other "people who stop being human deserve death" opinions well, so that is why I am addressing it.
Death penalty is a deterrent, and while it doesn't work the same as a punishment, it serves the same purpose. Also for the sake of discussion, the only reason I say "death penalty" instead of "take out a gun and blow them away on the spot" is because most people can identify with the death penalty. It is merely the vehicle for killing a person that has committed a heinous crime, and I don't want you to get too hung up about it (like others have, talking about the cost of the death penalty and other irrelevant things).
I would prefer you ignore the death penalty altogether and just imagine that people who "deserve death" in your mind, just fall over dead, and their pants turn into flamingoes that make a nest in the person's mouth.

 

[ace_of_something]

Pffft, hardly TL;DR. My original post is more TL;DR
I'm guessing you are teaching ethics regarding death? Or is it more specific than that?
My ethics class touched on this subject, but we never go into it in much depth.

I'm only a 'part time' prof. I am teaching criminal justice 101, interview and interrogation techniques, and law enforcement public relations. This semester.
They switched that last one at the last minute on me so i had to scramble cuz originally i was going to do 'sociology 101'

Pretty much any 'criminal justice' class you take you'll have to spend at least a day or two learning about capital punishment. Next semester i'm just doing the 2nd two classes but having multiples of them because both are 'new' and everyone wants to take them.

edit: i fail at 'quote tags'