Computer Science Canada Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
| Author: | bbi5291 [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 5:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
Is it just me, or is there no thread on this? OK guys, let's hear your opinions. (This should give us a break from talking about religion... unless you guys bring religion into this  )
I am excluding crimes against humanity of an unconventional nature; most of us would not be mourning if the army has to drop a nuclear bomb on somebody to stop him/her from taking over the world. |
|
| Author: | saltpro15 [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 5:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
No, what if you ever got the wrong person? Perhaps for a REPEATING offense, such as a serial killer or a rapist who has been convicted multiple times, but that is only the odd or extreme case, in general I say nay, there are better ways of dealing with these people |
|
| Author: | jbking [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
My personal opinion is that if you would get someone to the point of sentencing them to hundreds of years in jail then execution makes sense to my mind. This would typically be for a couple different cases to my mind: 1) Serial killers. Paul Bernardo would be a good example here though I'm sure there are other examples one could take of people that have committed enough murders and been convicted long enough that I think death may be a good option for taxpayers in the long run. 2) Child molesters that are repeat offenders. In this case, it is more of a public protection reason coupled with really long jail time in some cases I think. In these cases I say aye but for general first time offense, nay. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
I don't think you should ever kill some one unless you absolutely have to for self defense. I blive that most serial killers have mental disorders that lead them to such acts and they should be treated not killed. I also think that most of our prision senteis right now are too long and should be about reforming them and not about punishing them. |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
jbking @ 26th March 2009, 6:01 pm wrote: 2) Child molesters that are repeat offenders. In this case, it is more of a public protection reason coupled with really long jail time in some cases I think. You have to be carefull here, in some places a "Child molester" can be an 18 year old sleeping with a consenting 16 or 15 year old. I think the jail time should match the acutal crime and we should not have minium sentenices as it should be decied on a case by case bases. Also i think giving long jail time to punish some one might not be the best idea, i would rather see them threated for there disorededs and problems that lead them to commiting the crime and reformed back in to socity and have shorter jail time then just throwing them in a hell hole and making them 100 times worse for when we let them back out. |
|
| Author: | bbi5291 [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
All right, just to be more specific: by "ordinary crimes" what is meant is the type of crime that would be handled by a court. So if you believe that repeat offenders are sometimes worthy of capital punishment, vote Yes. (The crimes excluded are those that require immediate action... such as world domination attempts  ) |
|
| Author: | saltpro15 [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
now you tell me Brian  well too late now haha |
|
| Author: | jbking [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
Dan @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 4:09 pm wrote: You have to be carefull here, in some places a "Child molester" can be an 18 year old sleeping with a consenting 16 or 15 year old. I think the jail time should match the acutal crime and we should not have minium sentenices as it should be decied on a case by case bases.
True, there is some determination in what I meant by "Child molester" where the victims would generally be pre-teenage children is likely enough of a division there so that horny teenagers aren't accidentally put under the same name. At times though I think if "sexting" spreads, there should be some tough child pornography laws as well as education done to illustrate that there is some serious consequences for those "youthful indescritions" as some politicians would call them but that is more of a peeve of mine at the moment. |
|
| Author: | Analysis Mode [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
All people who commit crimes (excluding, as Brian mentioned, extreme cases) should be given a chance to repent (after, of course, they serve out their punishment). If they learn their lesson, then the justice system has successfully re-integrated that person into society. If they are repeat offenders, then they should be given a tougher sentence, whether that be death or a longer sentence, etc. Progressive discipline should be tried, but not at the expense of the majority of other people in society. |
|
| Author: | BigBear [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
Dan @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:04 pm wrote: I don't think you should ever kill some one unless you absolutely have to for self defense.
It is still considered a crime for killing someone for self defense. |
|
| Author: | bbi5291 [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
It doesn't matter if it's considered a crime in this country or any other; and the ethics of killing in self-defense are a different topic altogether. Do you have a view on capital punishment? |
|
| Author: | Analysis Mode [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
If the person is charged, it is downgraded from murder to manslaughter. (Of course, if you mutilated the body after killing the person in self-defense, they migh reconsider). AS for whether or not someone is charged for manslaughter, it depends on thes itutaion |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
jbking @ 26th March 2009, 6:18 pm wrote: At times though I think if "sexting" spreads, there should be some tough child pornography laws as well as education done to illustrate that there is some serious consequences for those "youthful indescritions" as some politicians would call them but that is more of a peeve of mine at the moment. Right now in canada and many other countires sugstive cartoons of made up and fictional charartices are considered child porn. Also there have been cases in the USA of 14 year olds getting child porn charges for taking naked pictures of them self. Also there have been cases of peoleop getting charged for child porn becues there browser cahced an thumb nail of an image that may or may not be of a minor or they clicked on a bad link. Some browsers will click on every link behind the secnes to cache images and content on links before you click on them, so it is very posible that thses peoleop never even saw the porn they are charged with seeing. I don't think we should make laws for child porn thougher if we are charing peoleop for the stuff above, in fact it might make more sence not to charge peoleop for poessing child porn at all but only for making it and distubiting it. At some point the war on child porn stop being about protecting childern (witch it should be) and truned in to a witch hunt for any one that looks at images that a judge does not aggree with under the claim that if they look at such things they must be more likey to rape a child. I think the peoleop who are caught with masive collections of real child porn (pictures of real childern doing sexual acts) should be charged and given help for there porblems and realsed when it is blived they are no longer a danger to childern or any one else. However i don't think we should be going after peoleop who might have clicked on a link to a site that had a link to a thumbnail of somthing that could be child porn and i don't think we should be going after peoleop who watch anime that happens to have nudity or sex in it. |
|
| Author: | Insectoid [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
I believe that Capital Punishment is no punishment at all. Modern executions are a simple needle injection of potassium that stops your heart. You fall asleep, but never wake up. When you are dead, you are not suffering. You feel no pain, no remorse. You also have no second chance. No chance to reform yourself, to change. I believe it is rather a punishment for the family of the accused, as they are the ones who are still around to suffer, to their brother, sister, son, daughter, mother, father, etc. die and a thinly padded bench because of a mistake they made, or a mental illness they have. Ask yourself, what hurts more? Dieing, or watching a family member, or friend, die? I agree with Dan. There should be therapy, and reformation sessions rather than long prison sentences. Let's help these people, rather than hurt them more. Most people who get out of prison are bitter at what society has done to them, and repeat previous crimes. But given help, they can become happier, and would (hopefully) be less likely to recommit past crimes. |
|
| Author: | DemonWasp [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
Not really remarking on the ethics, but the practicality: every study I've ever seen shows that executing a prisoner is MORE expensive than just imprisoning them for the rest of their natural life. |
|
| Author: | saltpro15 [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
really DemonWasp? Aside from the increased hydro bill I really can't see execution being expensive. I think I read somewhere it costs around $18000 US to keep a prisoner in a US jail for 1 year |
|
| Author: | Dan [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
If we want to save money and be ethical we should stop puting peoleop in jail for non vilonent crimes. If your crime in no way invoilded phsyical hurting another person you should get house areset (other then to go to work), have to work to pay back fines and money realting to your crime, and have to take clases and get threatment so you can be reformed and reintroced in to socity at some point. That way the person is punished with home areset, is paying there own way threw fines, and even paying off any damage they did during there crime. Unfrontly alot of poeleop in our socity think justic is about punishment so this kind of idea does not get far. |
|
| Author: | btiffin [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
No, never, ever, regardless. Canada's SHU is more than enough punishment for Dangerous or Long-Term offenders. They get put in a box, 23 hours a day, and they may never come out. Now ... perhaps more crimes could warrant SHU treatment, but that's a different question. Capital punishment is not a deterrent, it's not a "good thing", and the level of reciprocity isn't worth it in my humble opinion. I'm not religious, but "thou shall not murder" is pretty basic. And I do prefer the "thou shall not murder" version of the commandment. "thou shall not kill"; well, when someone is attacking your kids with intent to murder ... they might die if that is the only functional level of deterrent force, end of story. As a Canadian, you are still charged, which is a good thing. We are not allowed under any circumstance to use excessive force without charge. It is up to the Judge to clear your name, not the police in that case. If you are in service and enemy is shooting, you shoot back. Bombing runs over civilians? Hmm, iffy, but I don't hold the personnell of the plane responsible ... that burden of blood on hands falls to others. Bombing runs over advancing soldiers. Go to it. Do it twice. There are a few rare cases were "he needed killin' Judge" is an appropriate response. Few, rare, and never by the State as a calm, calculated response. Ever. Inappropriate. This isn't the case today, but in my humble opinion, reciprocity does dictate that those that rape and murder should never taste freedom again. Be that jail or perhaps a life long loss of freedom. Eat when told, sleep when told, never ever be given the privilege of money, only tokens for services that can get them to and from the work they are told to do. Continual and never ending monitoring of all activities. The only out I would offer is when society (by unanimous opinion; including the offended and loved ones of the offended) offers that out. But, I'd guess, someone would probably argue that to be unusual treatment. Cheers |
|
| Author: | Insectoid [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
saltpro15 @ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:34 pm wrote: really DemonWasp? Aside from the increased hydro bill I really can't see execution being expensive. I think I read somewhere it costs around $18000 US to keep a prisoner in a US jail for 1 year
Note that people spend upwards of a year in jail before they head over to death row, except in extreme cases. |
|
| Author: | Unforgiven [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
I just voted "no", and will be really amused if I have to argue with a Canadian _against_ capital punishment. |
|
| Author: | DemonWasp [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Capital punishment: Aye or nay? |
Yes, really. A case where capital punishment is the prosecution's objective includes a lot of additional legal work. Lawyers are expensive. This adds up very quickly, to the point where the prosecution will often go for life imprisonment because it costs less. On the topic of ethics, it's important to realise that what is ethical / moral and what is practical are often completely separate. Reconciling the two is difficult. Ethically, we should not kill others - this infringes on their right to safety and happiness. However, the world is not a safe place, and reality trumps idealism. There are clear-cut cases: you kill a store clerk for the cash in the register - murder, you go to jail. A crazed man attacks your children, and you have to kill him to defend them and yourself - innocent, as that falls under the category of "self defense". There are grey areas too though: someone invades your home; you have no idea whether he's armed or not, but you have a pistol, and you're directly behind him. What do you do? If you shoot him and he's unarmed, that's probably murder; if you don't shoot and he is armed, you most likely die. The reality of the specific situation foils any analysis of the general situation. Soldiers in a war is different. They know they're in a dangerous environment. Barring conscription, they are there by choice. They know that death can come in an instant, with no warning. In that case, ethics go out the window very quickly; this results in both "shoot first and ask later" and something called Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. I'm of the mind that in a war, it's not the soldiers that are guilty, but those that ordered the soldiers into war - as long as they're only engaging soldiers. Shooting civilians is clearly murder, regardless of what gun / bomb / other weapon you use. For the original topic: No. Capital punishment has been shown as ineffective as a deterrent. There's absolutely no way for it to rehabilitate offenders or anyone else. It's immoral, it's unethical, and it's a waste of taxpayer resources. The only exception I would make to that rule is trials for war crimes, probably including the previous US administration. |
|