Capital Punishment

[zukes]

I picked yes, but the caveat is only if the person is caught red handed or admits to it. Otherwise I would be a no. You can't kill someone if there is even a chance that they are innocent.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Even in the case of a confession, there is uncertainty. Here's a good corner case that is just chilling:
http://www.ew.com/article/1994/04/29...merican-family

[FlamesAddiction]

Some people believe that death is actually more humane than life in a max security prison.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by zukes

I picked yes, but the caveat is only if the person is caught red handed or admits to it

The number of people convicted based on false confessions pretty much excludes this as a criteria.

[Canehdianman]

We've got a lot of infrastructure maintenance (roads, bridges, etc...) that needs some hard labour to help fix them.

I think that's a much better use of their lives than an injection of an expensive mix of drugs designed to kill them humanely.

[Bootsy]

Yes, if there is no doubt and its an extremely heinous crime like Robert Pickton and Paul Bernardo.

[Amethyst]

I voted no.

-I would not be willing to do it and if I wouldn't be willing, I think it's wrong to expect someone else to do it.
-I think it takes us (society) down to the level of the criminal and we should have better ways to solve things.
-If even 1 innocent person is killed by mistake, that is too many for me.
-It really lets the person off easy. I would rather someone have a miserable time in prison than have the escape of death.

[Kjesse]

I tried to do this as short as possible, this is what I came up with:

-confessions are useless unless they are corroborated by good evidence, very good evidence. Even then they can be suspect. DNA excluded
-25 years w/o parole is one hell of a long time. It reduces any life at any stage to something of much less worth, depending on how they are when they are released
-There are circumstances where death is a just penalty. I would like to have seen it in a few cases gone past.
-the news media tends to whip the public into a frenzy in some of these cases, and it is the media in particular which I have little trust of-- especially now with so little money being allowed per story. Again moreso in the US.
-The judicial system is to be immune from public sentiment but judges live in the community like everyone else. In highly public murder cases, moreso in the US but also in Canada, I think it is reasonable to say that a judge's view could be influenced by those around them, even if they don't read media reports or even discuss the case-- judges are people too, they will have social interactions, and even unsaid things can have real influence.
-Given that the system involves people, accusing other people first, then investigating, and all through the system there are people, all with their own biases and tendencies, right from the first officer on the scene, to the psychologist, to the coroner, to the lawyers, etc etc, I think our system is the best there has ever been but is naturally prone to error and in particular vulnerable to the resources of the state vs. the resources of the often indigent murderer.
-Top notch defence lawyers are a rare breed. We need them, though often they are not given due respect. The indigent often to not get one, even if their lives are on the line. In some parts of the US attorneys have to be capital punishment certified before taking on a death penalty case, I'm not sure how well that system works.
-While I think the death penalty is warranted in clear circumstances, I would not support its reinstatement.

Edit: Though based on the question, I have voted yes: I "can" support it where guilt is "clear". But I'd need more.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Some people believe that death is actually more humane than life in a max security prison.

Honestly, I think I'd rather be dead than spend the rest of my life in prison.

[CaptainCrunch]

To me I'm unsure. Bottom line if there is no doubt, which is unlikely unless you catch them in the act and its certain crime.

Child killers, mass murders, multiple time killers. Then I could be convinced that it would be better for them to hang from the short rope.

But I don't believe in the ordinary application of the death penalty that the American's seem to have.

[Mr.Coffee]

How does the death penalty cost more? What about it costs so much? You'd think feeding and housing a person for decades would cost more than to kill them.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

How does the death penalty cost more? What about it costs so much? You'd think feeding and housing a person for decades would cost more than to kill them.

Years of appeals and all that. Takes forever in the States. Those guys languish on death row for years, if not decades.

The actual killing of the person is practically free! (I don't know that, but the expense isn't in the execution, but everything that leads up to it).

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Honestly, I think I'd rather be dead than spend the rest of my life in prison.

Really? Just for the sake of argument, life in prison is better than your average quality of life just a few hundred years ago, and people made it through that okay. I feel like most people could make do.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Really? Just for the sake of argument, life in prison is better than your average quality of life just a few hundred years ago, and people made it through that okay. I feel like most people could make do.

Yeah but I wasn't alive a few hundred years ago, my point of reference is my life right now. I guess maybe I would feel differently if I was sent to one of those luxury minimum resort prisons that rich people go to but I was thinking of life in a maximum security prison.

[Dion]

Will never support it.

[pope04]

I'd have no problem flipping the switch on Bernardo or Russell Williams.

[Igottago]

Seems like a relic from the past. Society tends to be more "thoughtful" now, and thats a good thing. It means we're evolving. I'd rather we try to gain some understanding from the situation, maybe some scientific data can be collected about these criminals and understanding how their brains work and why they did what they did (and no, that doesn't mean coddling them or letting them off the hook). By all means lock dangerous people up, for life when necessary, but killing them really solves nothing other than an attempt to satisfy some sense of vengeance that appeals to the lowest part of our collective ego. I would totally understand the victims family desire for revenge but it doesn't mean that's what we should seek as a society.

I also agree with those saying death isn't necessarily a worse penalty. IMO taking away someones freedom is probably one of the worst things you could do to someone. These inmates would be living a terrible life, relatively speaking. They would also have to live with whatever emotional turmoil they have (if any) for the rest of their lives.

[edslunch]

I hate the cost argument for or against capital punishment, it's purely a moral decision in my mind.

I'm also not a huge fan of the false imprisonment argument that basically says if one innocent person could die then it's bad otherwise spark it up. Don't get me wrong, I do think it's a real issue, it just detracts from the main issue, which is should the state execute criminals under any circumstance.

My belief is that killing another human is wrong, whether by an individual or the state. We should take the higher ground and not succumb to vengeance.

[CroFlames]

The state executing a citizen is just simply wrong in my opinion. Extremely primitive and I don't want to be a part of a society that thinks it's OK to kill a citizen for their transgression.

Locking up said citizen for the protection of society feels like the only reasonable option.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm a believer in consequence for actions as well as the existence of deterrents.