Political Crossfire Forums

[Zampano]

In the United States there are now 5 methods legally available:
A)Hanging
B)Firing Squad
C)Electric Chair
D)Lethal Injection
E)Lethal Gas
The 8th Ammendment in the US Constitution which above all prohibits 'cruel and unusual punishment' was ratified in 1971 and hass been debated since.
In your opinion, what is the most humane form of capital punishment? Does it qualify as cruel and unusual punishment?
What should be the dominant form of execution (if execution should be allowed) in America considering cost, damage to executee's body, etc.?

[sLiPpY]

I personally believe that the perpetrator, should receive the same punishment they inflicted on their victum. No matter how gruesome.

[Zampano]

That's pretty creepy . . .
How would that be done without making the justice system a perpetrator too?

[Zampano]

That's pretty creepy . . .
How would that be done without making the justice system a perpetrator too?

[Zampano]

That's pretty creepy . . .
How would that be done without making the justice system a perpetrator too?

[callous]

Capital Punishment = Inability to come to grips with the human condition, and child-like need for revenge.

[CountryGuy]

callous wrote: Capital Punishment = Inability to come to grips with the human condition, and child-like need for revenge.

I see it as culling those who have committed the ultimate crime (killing other human beings). Nothing at all to do with revenge -- Rather, it should be the way to reduce the amount of time and money the government needs to spend on a being like that (unfortunately, our system makes it the opposite).

[Fido]

I don't know what the most humane form of capital punishment would be. I guess that it might be letting someone die of old age. But I know the most inhumane execution is being bored to death.

[Charlie Man]

It doesn't actually reduce the money spent. People come to terms with life sentences more easily and don't burn bajillions in court fees in appeals so often.

[Revenant]

That's pretty creepy . . .
How would that be done without making the justice system a perpetrator too?

[Revenant]

That's pretty creepy . . .
How would that be done without making the justice system a perpetrator too?

[Nelson]

Read up about Mitt Romney's "Error-Proof Death Penalty" if you are curious, but I share his views:

The death penalty costs more than life imprisonment right now, and under Romney's death penalty measure it would cost more than three times as much as life imprisonment in order to be absolutely positive that the criminal is truly guilty of the crime he was accused of committing.

The cost of the death penalty is a minor concern compared to the importance of delivering the punishment for crimes so heinous that they can merit only one punishment - death. I support lethal injection because it is considered the least painful and least 'barbaric' of all measures of execution.

The death penalty is not a deterrent, the death penalty does not save tax payer dollars, historically the death penalty seems to be used particularly often on black criminals rather than white ones - and juries will demand the death penalty more often for black criminals than they will white ones. None of these reasons is sufficient to make an error-proof death penalty inapplicable or inhumane. The most heinous of all crimes demand the harshest of all punishments.

[The Russian]

I know a way to solve all of our problems.

All people deserving life imprisonment should not have all the privelages of entertainment we do, no tv or radio, and as little human contact as possible.

In each cell, there should be a built in little box, with a red pill, that pill would render you unconcious, then kill you, brain first... similar to the cocktail we got going now. An inmate could choose to off themselves at any point in their life... make it all optional I say.

To me, life in prison would be worse than death... if I'd killed Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheyney... and actualy got caught and sentenced to life in prison, I'd take the red pill. (I know, get off with life-impris after offing the pres and his personal fat bastard...is a fat chance, but you understand what i'm saying.)

[Thrilla]

Nelson wrote: Read up about Mitt Romney's "Error-Proof Death Penalty" if you are curious, but I share his views:

The death penalty costs more than life imprisonment right now, and under Romney's death penalty measure it would cost more than three times as much as life imprisonment in order to be absolutely positive that the criminal is truly guilty of the crime he was accused of committing.

The cost of the death penalty is a minor concern compared to the importance of delivering the punishment for crimes so heinous that they can merit only one punishment - death. I support lethal injection because it is considered the least painful and least 'barbaric' of all measures of execution.

The death penalty is not a deterrent, the death penalty does not save tax payer dollars, historically the death penalty seems to be used particularly often on black criminals rather than white ones - and juries will demand the death penalty more often for black criminals than they will white ones. None of these reasons is sufficient to make an error-proof death penalty inapplicable or inhumane. The most heinous of all crimes demand the harshest of all punishments. you are correct about a racial element in the death penalty.. but you are incorrect in saying that it depends on the race of the perpetrator.
the racial element is glaring when you look at the victims race.

aprox 80% of death row inmates were given the death penalty for killing a white victim...

there is normally more whites on death row than blacks

its not about the perps race.. its the victims race that behind the divide

[Lumina]

sLiPpY wrote: I personally believe that the perpetrator, should receive the same punishment they inflicted on their victum. No matter how gruesome.

Please read Anna Quinlan's "An Eye for an Eye: The Death Penalty's False Promise." Even if you exacted the same cruel death that, say, a child-kidnapper/torturer/killer perpetrated on a child, it still wouldn't be the same. No way to call forth the innocence and trust betrayed, for example. It's not just about physical pain. No adult can understand the terror of a little kid, so no "equal" physical pain could ever equal that poor child's horrific experience.

[Thrilla]

Lumina wrote: sLiPpY wrote: I personally believe that the perpetrator, should receive the same punishment they inflicted on their victum. No matter how gruesome.

Please read Anna Quinlan's "An Eye for an Eye: The Death Penalty's False Promise." Even if you exacted the same cruel death that, say, a child-kidnapper/torturer/killer perpetrated on a child, it still wouldn't be the same. No way to call forth the innocence and trust betrayed, for example. It's not just about physical pain. No adult can understand the terror of a little kid, so no "equal" physical pain could ever equal that poor child's horrific experience. not too mention that the perp would know its coming as opposed to the child/victim not knowing.

i'm in favor of the death penalty.... these asshats are removed from our presence.. and put in front of their maker for some real justice

[Nelson]

Thrilla wrote: you are correct about a racial element in the death penalty.. but you are incorrect in saying that it depends on the race of the perpetrator.
the racial element is glaring when you look at the victims race.

aprox 80% of death row inmates were given the death penalty for killing a white victim...

there is normally more whites on death row than blacks

its not about the perps race.. its the victims race that behind the divide

A good point - the racial element is far more noticeable when you look at the victim's race rather than the perpetrator. I disagree, however, to your claim that the race of the perpetrator is irrelevent.

There are normally more whites on death row than blacks because there are far more whites than blacks in this country. The question is, suppose for the sake of ease I use these numbers: 50 blacks have committed heinous crimes which could merit the death penalty and 100 whites have done the same. If 20 blacks are given the death penalty and 30 whites are, there will be more whites on death row than blacks but blacks will still, proportionally, be receiving the death penalty more often.

Based on the reading I have done, I think the statistics I provided above to be accurate - you are more likely to receive the death penalty if you are black when you commit a heinous crime than if you are a white man committing a heinous crime, and you are especially likely to receive the death penalty if you are performing a murder on a white victim when you are black.

[Thrilla]

Nelson wrote: Thrilla wrote: you are correct about a racial element in the death penalty.. but you are incorrect in saying that it depends on the race of the perpetrator.
the racial element is glaring when you look at the victims race.

aprox 80% of death row inmates were given the death penalty for killing a white victim...

there is normally more whites on death row than blacks

its not about the perps race.. its the victims race that behind the divide

A good point - the racial element is far more noticeable when you look at the victim's race rather than the perpetrator. I disagree, however, to your claim that the race of the perpetrator is irrelevent.

There are normally more whites on death row than blacks because there are far more whites than blacks in this country. The question is, suppose for the sake of ease I use these numbers: 50 blacks have committed heinous crimes which could merit the death penalty and 100 whites have done the same. If 20 blacks are given the death penalty and 30 whites are, there will be more whites on death row than blacks but blacks will still, proportionally, be receiving the death penalty more often.

Based on the reading I have done, I think the statistics I provided above to be accurate - you are more likely to receive the death penalty if you are black when you commit a heinous crime than if you are a white man committing a heinous crime, and you are especially likely to receive the death penalty if you are performing a murder on a white victim when you are black.
well.. when you put it in that perspective.. you do have a point...it is a bit disproportionate that a race that makes up roughly 12% of the total population represent 40+% of death row :think:

[Nelson]

Even still, I agree with the Error-Proof Death Penalty legislation proposed by Romney. Certain crimes merit the death penalty, specifically those that involve incredible brutal crimes or a 'prolific' perpetrator of crimes.

[gavnook]

I support capital punishment not so much as a means of punishment, but because I don't think peaceful citizens should have to put up with murderers and rapists. This support does not exactly apply to the modern version of the death penalty in the US for the reasons given by others.

Imagine you're part of a group of 20 living in the very remote Alaskan wilderness in the winter. One in the group rapes and murders another. The rest of the group has every right to kill the bastard for their own safety and should not have to cage and feed him just to protect themselves. That is my stance.

Also, I don't understand why prisoners who commit capital offenses while in prison are not promptly sentenced to death. One should only get one chance to attempt a rape or murder in prison.


Another point is that I get bothered every time the discussion turns to how we must be absolutely sure that the one to be executed is actually guilty, as if it's no big deal to sentence an innocent person to life in prison. If I were wrongfully convicted of a capital offense, I think I'd rather be sentenced to death because I'd have more opportunities to get the conviction overturned.