Wish it was that easy for everyone..

Guarentee it would serve as a better deterrent.

All the points you have made shows how Capital Punishment is now a much lesser deterrent than it actually was back in the day when criminals were probably scared when they were going to be shocked, shot, or gassed to death.

I feel that if a criminal was publicly executed in the same manner that he killed his victims it still wouldn't serve a deturrent value. It is like the person who wrote "A Letter to an Abolitionist" where he argued that slavery benefitted society. The enslaved were better taken care of than the low wage "free" english earner. American society also benefitted from the wealth produced by slave labor. Thus slavery was a "good thing" much like those that argue that the death penalty is "humane" or "beneficial" to society.

I have to agree with srg on the death penalty. The way things are there is one way to fix things and this includes using the death penalty. There are people in this world who are sick and warped and do not deserve to be given the respect due to human beings. The hard core rapists and murderers do not deserve any slack at all. Some of these people's mental makeup does not allow us to use guilt, fear, and jail, as a serious deterent to them commiting a crime. They will do what they do because they are sick damaged animals and should be treated as such.
I now will paste from another post of mine as it relates to this.

http://defendingthetruth.com/viewtopic.php?t=1229

Todays judical system is a joke. We put people who are known criminals in jails with other known criminals. Does it make sense we are supporting these learning institutes of crime? We put kids in prison for marijauna and they come out knowing more about stuff like bank robbery and car jackings. Come on.
My view is they should take all the child molesters, rapist, murderers and hard core criminals and throw the switch. Take all the prisons and make them into real schools. Sentence these kids to a associates degree. Test them and get them into something they'll be into, can make good legal money doing and and release them to a hopefully productive future. If they keep screwing it up, make three strikes the chair. Period. You think they'll go back to a life of crime then? I highly doubt it.

I think that once we did away with the hard cores the teachers would have no problem with working this system. Once all the hardcores were weeded out, the funding would be there to pay these teachers. No more supporting real criminals for life. Plus we would be able to do away with some of the gaurds and hire teachers.
I am with you on the decriminalization thing. That would be a great start. These people should not be charged at all, let alone locked up over pot. What a big waste of money. I think we need to head any new criminals off before they break the law and the only way to do this is to reach them early. Putting them in with real criminals; aren't we just creating more real criminals? Sentencing them to a degree is giving them the knowledge they need to make it in this world without crime. This is heading them off before they learn real criminal techniques, and helping to make them self productive, from which we all benefit.


Of course, this would only work if we changed everything at once. This would have to include legalization of Marijuana. Changing our criminal justice system would be only part of fixing our worlds problems. Getting all people educated would make each person more responsible for the earth and all her problems.
If The US goverment grew, taxed, and sold all the marijuana, this country would be the ecological and economical leader in a couple of years. Just from sales of smoking weed would bring us out of debt quick.
Hemp oil is really the best route to go as it does burn the cleanest. Using it to make electricity, alone with solar, hydroelectric and wind generatiors, could support our needs and save our enviroments, and our self destruction.

Very interesting post tyreay!

The problem with our current judicial system is the misguided notion that rehabilitation is its priority. Take for instance the judge in Vermont who sentenced a man who abused a 6 year old girl over a 4 year period to 60 days. Why, because he would not receive the treatment necessary for his sickness while in prison. How noble of the judge. However, the reason the suspect in this case should have been sentenced to prison was because he committed a crime. The purpose of our judicial system should be that of punishment first. The mere taking away of ones freedom by sentencing them to prison/jail is not punishment.

The whole purpose of civilization is for individuals joining together to create a society that is governed by laws. In forming this society its members agree to live by the laws. The job of government is to ensure that the laws are obeyed, and when broken to punish those who break them. That is what prison should be for, the punishment of those who are unwilling to abide by the laws created by society.

Although it is a noble ideal to sentencing a criminal to an associate's degree, what happens when you have individuals committing crimes so that they can get an education. That is not a good idea. Those who break the law should be punished first. After being punished for committing their crime, then the system should worry about rehabilitating them. Prison is not a detterent alone, the punishment must be made so that anyone committing a crime would not want to be placed in prison again.

As far as the murderers and others who are sentenced to death, their execution may only be vengeance, however, it beats the alternative of the individual members of society taking the law into their own hands. The only thing that our use of the death penalty establishes is the recognition that there are some crimes that we as a society will not tolerate and that our only recourse is to put these individuals to death.

dmk

Well said sgtdmski! With you 100%

That is very bullheaded. The judge was very insightful and was proving the point that jail time does NOT solve the problem in these cases. At all... doesn't matter how long the sentence is. Doesn't matter period.

The only thing that works is what they don't get BECAUSE OF FOLKS LIKE YOU.

Its just not true that we would have to restructure our society(or at least in not such a drastic unthinkable, or impossible way). As it is we are the ONLY westernized country that still has capital punishment. 12 States officially do not employ capital punishment, and even more have it as a legal punishment but have not used it. Also the death penalty was federally illegal in US befor 1979 for some time.

In fact even though a majority of people support capital punishment in some cases, it would be completely ideologically and morally natural for the US to outlaw the death penalty, as far a societal beliefs go. We are primarily a christian society, and all christian religion which subscribe to the new testement as an institution DOES NOT support the death penalty. The catholic religion only does so if there is no possible alternative to dealing with the criminal in such a way that is safe for society(which would never be the case unless by some rare chance someone can come up with a complex enough research study to take in all factors to prove deterance value.)

That is a very good argument you bring up. By the way, welcome to the forums!

When it comes to heinous crimes of mass murder, or any heinous crime in general, do you feel that the person who committed that crime should not seek the death penalty?