Is the death penalty humanitarian?

It's not revenge.

How?............

How is the death penalty not revenge? It appears to serve no other purpose, the threat from society has been removed by placing the prisoner in jail. The friends/family of the victim(murder's really the only thing anybody gets the death penalty in the US for, I'm sure even the pro death penalty people would agree that having it for anything else would be excessive) aren't going to be compensated in any way except for perhaps a sating of some kind of desire for revenge against the perpetrator that they might have. I don't really see how justice demands blood, unless you're operating on some kind of fucked up Rorschach/Punisher logic.

And it's not a matter of justice demanding blood. Executions, at least as they are carried out in the U.S. aren't bloody.

Seems like a pretty barbaric/medieval conception of justice.

Personally I'm of the persuasion that an individual simply forfeits his liberties once he commits an act like that (specifically by infringing on the liberties of others).

It doesn't seem to me like the friends/family are entirely removed from the process, often justifications for the death penalty I've heard come in the form of 'well what would YOU want to do with them if it was one of your loved ones!'. At least that has been my experience.

Learn to metaphor.

Characterizing it as "barbaric" or "medieval" is parochial. And inaccurate. And not an argument.

It's justice.

Learn to express yourself with precision.

Because is an argument.

I feel that barbaric and medieval are accurate descriptions of a theory of justice based off of 'eye for an eye' and 'getting back' mentality. Two wrongs don't make a right. This is also why I make reference to the loved ones of the victim, since it appears to me to be based on an eye for an eye type system, the first eye in the equation is that of the loved one who was killed by the perpetrator, the second eye is the life of the perpetrator his or herself. Still failing to see how this is not the case.

What are you? An analytic? Metaphors are a perfectly accurate and meaningful way of expressing oneself.

The metaphor you used didn't make sense.

I don't really see how justice demands blood, unless you're operating on some kind of fucked up Rorschach/Punisher logic.

I was going to respond to you. But then you said this. Let's look at the metaphor in question shall we?



Demanding blood as a metaphor for calling for the death of someone is practically the oldest metaphor in the ******* book(or in plain, clear language for you, it's a very very common one). I'm not gonna try to teach you how to speak English and try to philosophize with you. Good day sir.

Just wondering what people on this forum think about the death penalty? Based on the constitution's prohibition against 'cruel and unusual punishment" in the Eighth amendment I believe that, in certain situations, life in prison is inhumane. I would rather die than be caged up for the rest of my life.

Of course before even considering the death penalty the crime would have to be so egregious that life in prison would be the only alternative. So the only options are 1) life in prison or 2) execution.

Also, a reasonable number of appeals and evidence would need to be in place. Once the fate has been decided, one suggestion is asking the prisoner what they would rather have...death or life in prison. Thus maybe it would be more humane to put some to death while placing others behind bars for life.

I know where I stand currently, however; I think not long into the future when our population of this world has doubled what it currently is. I feel people will look at death in a different perspective. When people are struggling for resources and their is a strain on living conditions, I feel people will become more lax on their "sanctity of life" feelings. I am not saying everyone will feel this way, but rather a majority will have less respect for life in general because they see this growing strain. I wouldn't be surprised if we were already seeing these sorts of feelings already in some.

I know where I stand currently, however; I think not long into the future when our population of this world has doubled what it currently is. I feel people will look at death in a different perspective. When people are struggling for resources and their is a strain on living conditions, I feel people will become more lax on their "sanctity of life" feelings. I am not saying everyone will feel this way, but rather a majority will have less respect for life in general because they see this growing strain. I wouldn't be surprised if we were already seeing these sorts of feelings already in some.

Before we feel it, humanity will not let that happen, given by the fact that humanity is aware of its condition, humanity is aware of any problem surrounding them, they know that there are problems like AIDS, H1n1, an incoming meteor, global warming, and any incoming problems.

death penalty is not a good solution on overpopulation, will you allow yourself to be sacrifice to reduce overpopulation?, of course not, instead of sacrificing, we just need to prevent it, and we can prevent it by controlling births.

i too don't agree
there is already a loss and their will be another loss
just like 2 - 1 = 1 -1 = 0
what if we punish him not by taking his life, but making him a great slave worker
in which he does not benefit anything, but benefit the economy for the greater good

if he loss it 2 - 1 = 1
then he need to regain it = 1 + 1 = 2
not by his life but regaining the same quality on what he loss

that could be a more wiser decision.

---------- Post added 04-18-2010 at 08:52 AM ----------

he offer his life for his losses to regain it and continue on being that

I don't really see where the uncertainty principle comes to your equation, I assume it's common knowledge that many innocent people has been put to death in USA, that's why a govenor in Texas would parden 100 "death rows", which was heavily critisized by many.

Too many of the crime labs has been proven sloppy in their research, in producing accurate results, some would even produce false evidence just for the sake of profit.

What i mean here is that instead of wasting another life, let just make it useful, in which he pay his losses by dedicating his life for productivity in which he does not benefit but the others, for the greater well being of all

two wrongs makes another one wrong, losing another life is not the payment for losing life, payment in which no one gains benefit, but only another loss.

How do you make an utterly psycotic/skitzophrenic person useful for anything?