Death penelty

Author: Alec

Posts

Total: 67
#61
SamStevens
SamStevens's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
1
3
SamStevens's avatar
SamStevens
0
1
3
-->
@Alec
I'm pretty sure that living anyhow is better then not living at all.
Living anyhow(?) is better than not living at all? There's plenty of situations a person can find themselves in where death is the ideal option. Have you ever had any pets? Euthanizing an animal that is suffering from cancer, a ruptured gall bladder, or etc, and who has a questionable chance of survival with surgery is objectively the better decision than having it suffer just because. I can totally see why someone suffering from a terminal illness would like to go out on their own accord than lay in a bed as they succumb to whatever is killing them. You can extend this illness to a sickness of the mind for those who are crazy enough to kill someone. That's what they have to live with for the rest of their lives. Withholding treatment and forcing them to live a miserable existence is more effective at achieving justice than letting them out the back door. 


I'm very scared of death

Why are you scared of simply ceasing to exist? Unless you believe in an afterlife that may be characterized by people spending an eternity in hell for simply not believing in the right God(s), there's nothing to be scared of other than the fact that death can come at any moment and cut your life short. This just means make the most of your life, not to be paranoid about when death will knock on your door. 

I personally would rather have an air conditioned cell and 3 meals a day then to get executed if I were a murderer.
If executions are public and broadcasted, and the murderers die a painful death
Yeah, the punishment should fit the crime. If a person is convicted of murder, they should not be in an airconditioned cell. IMO that should be reserved for non-violent offenses, etc. 

The ideal sentence for someone convicted of murder, if your aim is to put them through a painful ordeal and to dissuade others from murdering, is to simply torture them for life, broadcast it if you wish, as opposed to a public flogging or whatever that leaves them dead in a short period of time. 

They only suffer so long as they are alive and hosting public executions in a way shortens what could be a life long broadcast of what results when you choose to murder, rape, etc. 

But, since we like to think of ourselves as a civilized people, life in solitary confinement without all the amenities is the next best option lol.
Topic's author
#62
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@SamStevens
Why are you scared of simply ceasing to exist?
Because life is extremely valuable.  Almost no one wants to die.  It is why murder is among the worst single crimes you can commit.  Taking it should have a very strict punishment.

Unless you believe in an afterlife that may be characterized by people spending an eternity in hell for simply not believing in the right God(s), there's nothing to be scared of other than the fact that death can come at any moment and cut your life short.
I personally believe in an after life and I hate God because he burns most people in hell.  This is a tangent though.

 IMO that should be reserved for non-violent offenses, etc. 
What is IMO?

The ideal sentence for someone convicted of murder, if your aim is to put them through a painful ordeal and to dissuade others from murdering, is to simply torture them for life, broadcast it if you wish, as opposed to a public flogging or whatever that leaves them dead in a short period of time. 
If not broadcasted, no one sees the solitary confinement, so deterrence is not maximized.  If broadcasted, there are 2 objections I see to this:

1: Who is willing to see some murderer in prision?  It's just not entertaining for the average person to watch.  Watching them get painfully executed, or eaten by a lion or something will deter many more people from committing murder and would help pay for the execution via ticket sales.
2: Any cameras in the cell ruins the whole point of solitary confinement which is to be as isolated as possible.  Once the murderer discovers the cameras, he would be happy.
#63
SamStevens
SamStevens's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
1
3
SamStevens's avatar
SamStevens
0
1
3
-->
@Alec
Because life is extremely valuable.
To an extent. Some people would rather die on their feet than live on their knees. Or die on their own terms instead of being forced to deal with a myriad of issues that result from disease and sickness, or what typically follows a murder(guilt, shame, fear of retribution).

Who is willing to see some murderer in prision?  It's just not entertaining for the average person to watch.  Watching them get painfully executed, or eaten by a lion or something will deter many more people from committing murder and would help pay for the execution via ticket sales.

Chances are, if people are buying tickets to watch a person getting eaten by a lion, they see it more like entertainment and you'd have a select few who actively try to get their 15 minutes of fame by killing someone in order to fight a lion on national TV. 


"Who is willing to see some murderer in prision?"

Exactly. Where is the appeal in knowing that if you murder someone, you'll be stuck in a prison cell actively getting tortured and having your life prolonged in order to continue a painful existence, ultimately serving a grim reminder of what awaits murderers? There is no excitement of fighting lions and having audience cheering. You have a camera panning over you once in a while to show everyone your pitiful existence and there is no fame involved. 

Suffering is only experienced so long as they are alive, so if you are willing to entertain the idea of feeding people to lions to give everyone 15 minutes of painful fun at the expense of someone and hoping people learn a lesson from seeing that, you should be willing to get behind the idea of having someone tortured for life without all the glamour and excitement that a modern Colosseum would bring. 

Any cameras in the cell ruins the whole point of solitary confinement which is to be as isolated as possible.  Once the murderer discovers the cameras, he would be happy.
In this reality, the murderer doesn't have free range of his cell. He's tied down to a bed and forced to experience what I described above. There is no dancing and acting like a fool in front of the cameras.
Topic's author
#64
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@SamStevens
you'd have a select few who actively try to get their 15 minutes of fame by killing someone in order to fight a lion on national TV. 
I doubt many people, even by these small rare standards would be willing to die by getting eaten by a lion just to be famous for 5 minutes.  Their name doesn't have to be mentioned, but merely his crimes.  The crowd would be cheering for the lion and it would be bad for the prisoner.  The prisoner would be very scared.  If preferred, it doesn't have to be broadcasted.


Exactly. Where is the appeal in knowing that if you murder someone, you'll be stuck in a prison cell actively getting tortured and having your life prolonged in order to continue a painful existence
I mean to the typical person, they wouldn't be interested in watching some murderer in prison because it's boring.  If there was a channel dedicated to murderers in prison, I doubt it would be popular for people to watch.  This means that deterrence would be minimal.  As harsh as life imprisonment is, they get used to it and they adjust to life there, so they aren't really suffering a lot for their life, they are just being tortured slightly until they adjust.  Plus, doing that to prisoners, even murderers will inevitably get called "inhumane" by liberals and murderers from this might get treated comparably to other prisoners as a result.  There are already people who want solitary confinement abolished for all crimes.  Executing them one way or another, if done multiple days after the court case, would give the prisoners time to fear for their lives.



#65
SamStevens
SamStevens's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
1
3
SamStevens's avatar
SamStevens
0
1
3
-->
@Alec

so they aren't really suffering a lot for their life, they are just being tortured slightly until they adjust.
In this reality where we have the death penalty entailing someone being eaten by a lion, life in prison could be characterized by subjecting someone to waterboarding on certain days of the week, subjecting murderers to microwave weapons that torture them mentally and physically. I mean, no one is getting used to that stuff and that's not being tortured slightly. 

I mean to the typical person, they wouldn't be interested in watching some murderer in prison because it's boring.
You can always show highlights of prisoners as they are in the middle of a waterboarding session, as they are being bombarded by microwaves, as they endure 'whatever'. It does not have to be boring. 

would give the prisoners time to fear for their lives.

What do you do with the people who want to die? People who failed to commit suicide before being taken into custody? People who want an easy way out courtesy of a 5-minute session with a lion or who want to be in front of a firing squad? Not everyone who ends up on death row will be fearing for their lives. 

Topic's author
#66
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@SamStevens
The people who kill dozens of people, like the Christchurch shooter can get tortured 3x a day or so for the rest of their lives with some method, but what if you only murder 1 person by a gunshot?  If you murder 1 person from a gunshot, is waterboarding too torturous?  Or would death by firing squad be a sufficient punishment for the crime?
#67
SamStevens
SamStevens's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
1
3
SamStevens's avatar
SamStevens
0
1
3
-->
@Alec
Let's say that this is the average murder involving a firearm, that they killed a person because they were angry, wanted to get revenge, etc.

I'd say that since murder is among the worst single crimes you can commit, it would be justified to subject that person to an array of torturous methods, as they have the same thing in common with the Christchurch shooter, a disregard for human life and others. 

A gray area may be this: In this situation, this woman was playing with a gun and pointed it at a guy's head under the assumption it was unloaded only to have it fire, leaving him with life long disabilities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT1CuulU5H4

In this case, although she was charged with aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury, she expressed complete disregard for others and should be subjected to the same punishment for murderers.