most people are against it, which makes it interesting to argue in favor of. personally, i would have to say i'm against it, but that's an emotional reaction.
to make this debate much simpler, i'm going to give you two options for the most serious violent criminals we have. supermax motherf***ers.
these options are solitary confinement and the death penalty, both of which I would personally categorize as capital punishment. one is torture, the other is death. we're using the criminal group that has no middle ground and typically live in the box and walk death row on occasion.
you can also disagree with both, but you'll have to provide an alternative for violent criminals. if you think prisoners killing eachother is ok you can offer that as an alternative, it's your opinion
who's right
16
whoever posted last
3
dead people
2
other people
0
solitary people
deletedover 8 years
yep lol
deletedover 8 years
That's the difference between you and I. I see people as people, and you see bad people as not people anymore, like the right to be a person is gone for people who don't deserve it.
deletedover 8 years
you see, the thing is, i dont see anything wrong with "one human life for another". whoever sentences the guy to death isn't as bad as the murderer, lol? your point is invalid in my mind. there's a difference between the innocent victim and the person who did the crime getting punished. there's no way youre going to convince me that "it makes sense" lol and calling it "far-fetched" isn't helping. this is an issue of fundamentals. you're looking at the criminal as just a regular human who still deserves all of their basic rights- i see a person who doesn't deserve them anymore.
just accept it lmao- our two points are fundamentally different in how we see the criminal. trying to convince me, and me trying to convince you, is futile because of our inherently different values
deletedover 8 years
Right, i never had to said this before but now I do. There is no statistical evidence anywhere that the death penalty is a deterrent to stop others doing the same thing, they already know people die for it. they will do it anyway, there is nothing, anywhere that says the death penalty is a deterrent. It can even thought not in this case, cause the opposite where riots and everything can occur after if people really thinks he was wrongly accused.
He did not give the chance to the girl to have the stage of her life after meeting up with him. He took away a life for no reason.
There is no point in teaching him he did wrong. He was a 26yo neurotypical person. Someone like that knows that being a pedophile is wrong and someone like that knows that killing is wrong.
If you off him, it works as both a warning to other people that may plan to do something like that and it also assures her family that the death of her kid at least helped to eliminate a monster from the world and that justice was delivered.
So no, I don't want to teach him his wrong doings. He knows he was wrong. Even if he doesn't thats really not my problem. He performed a monstrous crime and should pay for it.
deletedover 8 years
I know this is kinda far fetched for some but if you think in simple terms it does make sense: Lets say somebody murders his wife or his daughter or his son. just whoever, he killed somebody. He is sentenced to death. Now whoever makes that call to kill him, are they just as bad as the murderer. Its 1 human life for another, Is it different and if you think so, how is it different.
deletedover 8 years
alright cool you can continue sympathizing with the criminal and care about the criminal's "life-changing experience" lmao. it could go one of two ways: regret for killing the girl and regret for getting caught. well the latter isn't much of a basis for a better human being, is it?
you obviously think that the person has humanity to be salvaged. i don't, lol, as simple as that. he lost it and doesn't deserve a second chance. as long as we disagree on the fundamental point of whether or not the person still can be and deserves to be salvaged, then we're going to disagree on this point.
deletedover 8 years
1 more thing, It goes back to what I said in that the death penalty is not justice, its revenge. What you want is revenge, you want him dead because he did this wrong thing. You don't want to teach him his wrong doings, you just want to kill him.
deletedover 8 years
Yes. There is no denying this person is a monster,and if you kill him now, when he is 26. then you split his life into 3 parts, His childhood, his bit where he was a pedophile and killed the girl and the last bit where you give him his appeals and them kill him. The other option is too put him in prison,if you lock him up forever and he dies around 60-70. Then you have the 3 parts again, but it would be his childhood, a small bit where he was being a pedophile and killed someone, then the bit where he is in prison and getting psychological help. If you lock someone away for 40+ years with help he will come out a different person no matter how terrible his crimes were. He would then feel sorry and carry the guilt for what he did. So he would see from are point of view and see himself as a terrible person, So by the end of that I believe you would have a guy who was genuinely sorry for what he did.
Someone messes up when they put too much salt on a salad.
Manipulating a 12yo to meet up with you and strangling her after she doesn't want to have sex with you is not a mess up. It's one of the most disgusting crimes that ended up with an innocent young lady dying for no good reason.
The guy took a **** on her life and her human rights. The guy was later discovered to have multiple facebook accounts, with all around 1500 friends, a majority of them underage girls. So who knows, maybe its the first time he killed someone but who knows how many times he did the rest of it?
I'm not saying death penalty should be a thing for everything. But for cases like this one, it should be an exception, once its been proven to be true anyways.
deletedover 8 years
^he was a pedophile who strangled a young girl to death, it's more than "he just messed up"
robbing a liquor bank < killing a 12 year old girl because she wouldnt have sex with you
im all for the death penalty for cases like these. trying to extend the argument to crimes like "robbing a liquor store" and trying to blur the differences between a pedophile killing a girl and just robbing a store is trying to get rid of any conditional statements. no one's saying that the death penalty in this case is going to be applied to all situations, jesus christ. if a child murderer who tried to get a young girl- only 12- to have sex with him is just someone who "messed up" then tell me when "messing up" ends and it starts being straight up unforgiveable
deletedover 8 years
Right, this guy was 26 years old. You are saying someone who messed up deserves to be killed. He is 26. Put him in a prison cell and give him psychological help, he will be sorry for what he did, and if he aint, we keep him in that little room. Now you said its 10 bucks and bullets are less, ok so why don't we take every criminal and shoot them point blank with a shotgun right there in the courtroom. "What this guy do" "he robbed a liquor store" *BANG*. "ok next." Do you see why that don't work. also, it really aint cheaper unless you do it that way depending on how long the appeals process goes on for, if it goes on for 5-10 years then you have to pay for lawyer for 5-10 years, I say that's more expensive than throwing somebody in a locked room for a life time
deletedover 8 years
We don't do nothing to criminals but throw them in a dark room and give them psychological help, As I said, its revenge not justice. Justice is where you take someone who fu*ked up, teach them why they fu*ked up and them release them if they wont fu*k up again. if they will fu*k up again, then you keep them in that room. by the end most people will be genuinely sorry for what they did. Its not about what is worse off for them, its about teaching them what they did. You cant just say "a cell is worse" Because that is just revenge as well... Once there genuinely sorry, that's when you let them out otherwise keep them in jail, if they f*ck up in jail, put them in solitary.
We'd just treat extreme criminals the same way we treat lab rats. From what I've read, his experiments weren't all that scientific and were done for the purpose of torture/domination, so obviously 21st century version would be much more ethical.
Basically instead of just outright killing them after being sentenced to death, we use them in scientific experiments as painlessly as possible and then, when finished, kill them as we normally would.
In Argentina we just had a case of a 26yo male who catfished a 12yo female via facebook. He convinced her to meet up. When they met up, the guy kept insisting her to have sex. The girl said no. So the guy strangled her to death. He admitted to it.
Do we really have to waste money and resources in making this guy a part of society again?
A rope costs under $10. A bullet even less than that. And we'll have one of the worst kind of people gone for good, he won't be able to do this to anyone again. Doing what he did, he pooped on human rights. Why would we have to respect his human rights?
if revenge is all you care about then lifetime solitary has you covered: a lifetime of suffering, struggling to keep a grip on reality knowing it makes no difference because youll never get out, and likely killing yourself via self imposed malnutrition, sickness, or blunt contact with the walls and floor
but the death penalty is more barbaric. mostly because all laymen know about is the death penalty, not the hell on earth those more fortunate criminals get to experience
but if the death penalty is revenge, i'd rather be vengeful than whatever you call the box
i think people are "toxic towards the prison system" because the prison system doesn't do these things
remember its a private prison system that makes money off prison population, spending more money on getting people out of prison is a shot in both feet for them
It is torture in a sense, and it really depends how it's carried out. But if we were going to kill them anyways, we might as well get some use out of them.
im tryin to figure out how that doesnt translate to torture ?? like best case scenario the products/methods tested are benevolent but if they arent ... ????
ethically u have to consider at what cost those impacts on medicine come; north korea, germany & the soviet union r among regimes that have produced beneficial results from horrific human experimentation and it really shouldnt surprise anyone that these 3 states are/were also some of the worst human rights violators in recent history
@sishen i think some of those ppl are definitely eligible for rehabilitative programs and those who are deserve to be treated like human beings but kept indefinitely incarcerated imho
what would happen if we put all these criminals in a dome and had them play out something like the hunger games, where they are forced to kill each other?
As was kind of already mentioned, capital punishment could be more lucrative for society if done in the form of non-consensual scientific research. Let's not limit it to just research on psychotherapy, though. Let's extend this research to all domains of scientific inquiry, kind of what Josef Megele did during WWII. Of course, it wouldn't be done in the same torturous fashion; these criminals would be used very similarly to lab rats, and for those of you who don't know, having human lab rats for use in scientific research could have monumental impacts in medicine and save millions of people.
