Is Capital Punishment ever justified?

This is such a shame.

I never thought I'd see the day when Optional777 - someone I have up until today had a modicum of respect for, would totally and completely degrade himself publicly merely because he cannot answer questions in a debate (and is obviously in fact unable to ever admit he may be incorrect about anything) -would have to resort to outright lies to protect his apparently infallible view of himself.

Now I have to scratch him off my list of ETers that I, for some twisted reason, had the impression were epitomes of reason and conduct (something I've never claimed to be, by the way).

Let's start with the (very) basics:

 

"There you go again"

- Ronald Reagan

 

From previous post by hapboy:

Hey, 13000 people alone are murdered every year by parolees and ex-cons. If the choice is between the criminal and innocent lives.

Let's go ahead and throw around numbers, what the heck. Approximately? I guess it isn't required any more.

 

But O Wise One, pray tell what number is acceptable to you? 5? 10? 50? 100?1,000? 2,000?


Laws are based on probability. The number is very important. We have to weigh the threat of murders by released murderers versus the execution of a man who was potentially convicted on shaky evidence.

If only 200 murders released from prison either via parole or serving their term end up murdering others, I would say that the prisons are doing their job of helping to rehabilitate.

We have to see the percentage of murders who repeat murder to draw conclusions conclusions to kill everyone who is found guilty of murder.

That is what civilized societies do. They look at the evidence, the data, and reach difficult decisions that the uncivilized take a black and white and dogmatic view of.

What is the probability of a threat of a released murder to society. Current murder rates hover around 8 per 100,000 citizens. That means the odds of being murdered are .00008. If we analyze who committed the murders, we might find that more murders are committed by family members per capita than convicted murders released into society after serving their time, and the number might shrink to .00001 or less of the chance of being killed by a convicted killer. Hardly a frightening probablity.

Even more important would be to track data of those who were released into society and given a good chance to have success re-entering society as a productive member, versus those who return to the type of environment that lead them to become killers in the first place.

The vast majority of those released from prison who were convicted on murder charges, do not murder again. Why deny them a second chance if the majority don't abuse the chances they are given.

This is the statistic not emphasized by the death penalty proponents.

Most return to become members of society who post no threat to you or me.

If the odds of dying in a boating accident this year are greater than being killed by a convicted murder released into society, then do we outlaw boating?

Please make an argument on use of the death penalty with accurate statistics showing the percentage of convicted killers who once again kill upon release from prison.

I will listen to accurate statistics quoted from reliable sources, but why bother to listen to numbers out of a hat?

 

Yes, "we" do. And 38 states of "we" have found capital punishment to we wholly acceptable. Your response? Those states are at times guilty of lynch mob mentality and lack common sense and reason! Whew, ya do think highly of yourself, now, don'tcha pard?

At one point, all states in this country legalized slavery. All states denied females and minorities the right to vote.

Over time, old concepts were replace through the evolution of morality and the application of reason.

That certain states outnumber other states is not in itself a good argument, as if that were true, then during the time of slavery and denying the women the vote, we would have to conclude that they were morally correct.

No one these days views slavery, or denying minorites or women the right to vote as moral, or considers that it was ever moral. It was just the norms of that day and age that we have evolved out of.

We progress, we evolve towards greater and greater civilization and humanity, despite the efforts of many not to change.

Such is our history.

 

On this thread we are discussing, for simplicity's sake, those cases in which guilt is irrefutable, based upon other things, DNA evidence. (Please see the first post of this thread for background.)

Current scientific thinking supports DNA, however we have seen throughout time that science supports new information and techniques in criminology when it is brought forth.

What was once certain through the science of the day, was that the sun was the center of the universe. People were put to death that questioned that concept.

Science gave us new information. Ideas and attitudes changed. Unless you can say we have reached the end of science in criminal forensic science, that we are 100% accurrate 100% of the time, some possibility exists that an innocent man may be convicted and killed through the death penalty.

In addition, we have seen many cases where DNA and other evidence has been planted by police after the fact.

Until such time that a defense attorney can confirm with 100% degree of certainty that a police officer didn't plant the evidence, we will never know with certainty that didn't happen.

So, we convict, but rather than kill we lock them up, leaving the door open for the possibility that new evidence can be discovered.

We also leave the door open for the possibility that methods of rehabilitation will be developed that will ensure safety of society once the prisoners are released.

Why kill on the basis of less than 100% certainty now and in all possible futures when we can protect the safety of our citizens with isolation and life without parole of a convicted killer?

I have yet to hear a cogent reason why the death penalty is necessary.

 

If you think it's inhumane to execute a murderer, you are insane.... and we have places for you too.


edit: funny how some people whine about how inhumane the death penalty is, yet they have no problem with the murder of thousands of cows, chickens and pigs every day. I guess if they slapped a bun on a roast rapist, people would just eat and shutup?

 

Optional, upon return from a lovely and late evening (and early morning) out, I can see you’ve been posting frantically in a pathetic manner trying to redeem yourself. You have failed, and rather pitifully.

You called me a liar. You called me dishonest and accused me of trying to deceive ET readers with false data. You somehow assumed I was making personal attacks on you when all I was doing was meeting your tone in equal measure. You totally dismissed the word “approximate” in a sorry attempt to bolster your weakening cause. You stated outright falsehoods -such as the comment about all I had to respond with about your assertion that life without parole was economic costs – when in fact I clearly had listed 4 reasons, and you also lied when you said I “fall silent” about the possibility of falsely planted evidence when in fact I have stated over and over in this thread, (beginning with the first post!) that the premise of this thread and discussion is that the perpetrator is undeniably guilty.

If anyone is a liar, is being dishonest, and trying to deceive ET members, it is unquestionably you.

And FWIW, it never grew into “personal attacks”! I thought we were having a good, tough, honest debate. You apparently thought I was somehow insulting you (!) – and then launched into your tirade. Now THAT was a personal attack! Perhaps your problem is that you are unable to handle the pressure that comes from being rebutted so thoroughly. Or was it my calling you out on your absurd “It’s-okay-to-torture-and-kill-Iraqis-and-terrorists-but-not-okay-to-execute-American-murderers-because-they’re-American-citizens-like-their-victims-and-are-thus-somehow-less-bad” statement?

Now I go over your posts and see that you not only have failed to address the worst fallacies of yours which I pointed out above and on my last post, but you are desperately clutching at straws, rushing into your argument such preposterous last-minute items as the planting of DNA evidence by officers, comparing slavery to capital punishment, and the like.

Furthermore, that you measure 200 innocent lives as the measure by which you judge the prison system as "doing their job of helping to rehabilitate" shows what a sick puppy you are. That even one innocent life is taken by a released ex-murderer is reason enough! But Good Lord! 200?!? You have unequivocally stated that the lives of 200 innocent Americans mean absolutely nothing to you, that in fact “rehabilitated” murderers are more deserving of empathy.

Please then note what acceptable number of innocent women raped by released convicted rapists meets your standards of effective “rehabilitation”. And child molesters. Not in order to deter from the heart of this particular debate, but because I am generally interested in the numerical value you put on rapes and child molestations vis a vis rehabilitation success rates.

Your posts are no longer worthy of special consideration, time, or attention anymore. You’ve proven yourself to be far from one of the wise sages of this board I once thought you were. In my eyes you are now merely a prolific liar. In the future I shall take whatever you post with a grain of salt the size of Baghdad.

Finally,

You’re crying for “reliable” statistics? I’m gonna give ‘em to you. And you’re not gonna like ‘em. I really hope you’re getting accustomed to the taste of crow.

And I expect that when I do so for you to be, if not honorable, then at least a man, and apologize for slandering me here on ET.

So now, before I post my sources of information which follow your above criteria, I want you to post in public on ET that you agree to do exactly that. If I post "reliable" information that "more than 200 murderers released from prison either via parole or serving their term end up murdering others," and "make an argument on use of the death penalty with accurate statistics showing the percentage of convicted killers who once again kill upon release from prison" you will make a public apology on this thread and in a new thread in the Chit Chat forum labeled "Optional is a Jackass, by Optional" for lying, slandering me, and deceiving ET and its members.

Good night (morning).

 

You can either feel wounded, or you can present the statistical data and the links.

Opinions around here mean nothing, this is the Internet.

Facts, and reasoning mean everything.

I am challenging your "facts" and your reasoning.

If you can't handle that, I understand. Those who are watching can also understand.

My guess is they don't give a rat's ass what you think of me or what I think of you.

However, they do see that I have challenged you on your statistical data, the use of it, the veracity of it, and the cogency of it as relates to your position of the statistical data, and how it lends support to your argument for capital punishment.

Be in a hissy fit if you want. Or just address the question.

Your choice.

The internet is full of liars and scam artists. So what else is new?

Those who can prove what they say, or provide sound arguments to support their position is all that matters to me in the debate process.

Getting bent out of shape because someone I don't even know calls me names, and questions my motives, why should I even care? I don't. Let them. Free country.

I just try to stay on point of the topic at hand, apply reason to the process, and if I quote data, provide proof of that with a link.

Simple.

Let's see the link to the data. Let's see the statistical number of ex-murderers who upon release from society murder again.

Such a simple request, one has to wonder why someone is not forthcoming with a simple response?

 

I voted a resounding YES... it IS sometimes justified...