The Death Penalty

[DrownedCrow]

Nah, vengence is empty.

Revenge plays an important role in group interactions and allows cooperation between humans to exist. See game theory. So revenge is empty only in the sense that all our psychological impulses and all our subjective experiences are ultimately meaningless. Your love for your children, for example.

[ErikConrad]

Lets say someone commits several horrible crimes. There are multiple DNA hits and clear video images. He confesses and shows no remorse. He is then incarcerated for life, and dies in prison, aged 85.

You know how much money that costs us? I don't, but it will be millions.

[The Mance]

I'm against it. The death penalty is about vengeance, not justice. That's not right.

Why shouldn't some amount of vengeance be a component of justice?

I can't get past my abhorrence at the idea of ever being a part of killing a living, thinking human being just because they happened to murder someone.

Generally the people who "just happened" to murder someone aren't charged with crimes that might carry the death penalty as a punishment, so, no worries there.

[Hereward]

Yes, it will. Keeping him on Death Row while the many and various appeals take place is supposedly even more expensive, though.

[Darkostar]

RC,

Should that even be a consideration? As I said above vengance is empty. When the murderer is executed the victim is just as dead. The only reason I can see that justifies execution is execution prevents that individual from ever harming another person. Hence, that is why I think Mormont's point was so cogent.

Every breath we take is precious, and it has to feel rotten when the person who ripped the life from a loved one gets that luxury, unlike their victim.

[Reek]

For the death penalty in principle, against it in practice.

The American Justice system is just so messed up.

If there was a way to know for sure that the person convicted was actually the guilty party, sure, execute them. Until there is a way to know for sure there is just too much room for error.

[jurble]

Every crime ought to be a capital crime, even littering.

[Darkostar]

Every crime ought to be a capital crime, even littering.

Jonathan Sharkey? Is that you?

[The Iceman of the North]

How is it fair to the family of the victim if the murderer is allowed to live?

How does it help the family of the victim if the murderer is killed, does the victim suddenly come alive again?

[Darkostar]

How does it help the family of the victim if the murderer is killed, does the victim suddenly come alive again?

I understand that it doesn't bring back the dead. Death Penalty =/= Necromancy. As I said before. life is precious. Why do we grant it to someone heartless enough to take it from someone else?

[The Iceman of the North]

I understand that it doesn't bring back the dead. Death Penalty =/= Necromancy. As I said before. life is precious. Why do we grant it to someone heartless enough to take it from someone else?

Using this argument, wouldn't the same apply to the prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner?

[Guest Raidne]

Yes, it will. Keeping him on Death Row while the many and various appeals take place is supposedly even more expensive, though.

I suppose there is the perfect case where no appeal could be brought? But that would have more to do with the prosecutor, often, than the nature of the crime itself. Was every expert who testified properly qualified as an expert? Was jury selection air tight? Was all evidence properly introduced? Properly handled leading up to the trial? All possible information of interest to the defendant disclosed before the trial? And what if the defendant is so violent in the courtroom that he can't be present in it? There's 10 years of appeals.

Even in the case where there's a confession - then it becomes about the conduct of the officers and whether it was perfect.

It has nothing to do with the criminal themselves and the nature of the crime. It's about constantly establishing and refining the rules. It's the way the common law works - it's organic.

To change that, you'd need to severely restrain the common law system and switch to a much more code-based system that spells out, in the text of the law, how things are supposed to go in particular situations, and allow, paradoxically, for more judicial discretion from case-to-case, so judges are focused on individual cases and not on finely tuning broadly applicable rules.

[Stubby]

I am opposed to the death penalty. I can only go by the way things work down here. The main reason is the number of people in prison for crimes they did not commit. It's a bit late after the death sentence has been carried out to say 'whoopsie' the prosecutors screwed you/ the police were too lazy to investigate properly/ the jury hated you for [insert inane reason here]/ the judge was half asleep/ your lawyer was a drongo/ you look shifty/ or whatever.

Andrew Mallard's case is what finally decided it for me. Institutional Fail at every step of the prosecution until the High Court allowed his appeal.

[Guest Raidne]

Rh'llor - Life is the status quo. It is a fundamental human right. We have been past the point where anyone "grants" it to you for arguably half a millennia now.

[devotee]

Philosophical discussions like this are the reason I dropped out of philosophy. I can see both views, but I don't feel a strong conviction for justice or fairness or whatever. I would be pro in some cases, against in most, probably mood dependent.

[BigFatCoward]

i'm not 100% against the death penalty, i just can't think of any cases outside the highly unusual where i'd be happy for it to be carried out. i'm thinking serial child killers only.

on the flip side, if i was sentenced to life (and i mean life) in prison i think personally i'd rather be killed. i don't want to spend 50 years in prison.

[Greywolf2375]

Using this argument, wouldn't the same apply to the prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner?

No - because without the hypothetical murderers actions, these people would never have been put into the position to have to make that decision.

I am in favor of the death penalty, however with how poorly our system is currently set and managed, I don't think it should be used.

[El-ahrairah]

Definitely don't think it's inherently wrong, but would rather not see it currently. If it is used, though, I want public executions where the judge who passes the sentence pulls the switch, Ned Stark-style.

[Darkostar]

Rh'llor - Life is the status quo. It is a fundamental human right. We have been past the point where anyone "grants" it to you for arguably half a millennia now.

Life is the status quo, sure, but that doesn't mean it isn't special. Hell, we could have a whole OTHER heated argument over pro-life/pro-choice simply BECAUSE we all believe life is an important commodity.

[Guest Raidne]

Definitely don't think it's inherently wrong, but would rather not see it currently. If it is used, though, I want public executions where the judge who passes the sentence pulls the switch, Ned Stark-style.

Unless the Judge was a committed sadist, like Gregor Clegane or something. Then that doesn't really help you out much.