Is the death penalty ever justified?

I've always had mixed feelings about the death penalty. I go back and forth and now that DNA has been so positive in ruling out guilt or innocence, I have many reservations about it. But when there is a case, that is so horrific, like the dragging death of James Byrd in Jasper, Texas, I can't help but feel it is justified.

The Murder of James Byrd Jr.

In June of 1998, a sadistic murder of a middle-aged black man from Jasper, Texas, rekindled memories of lynching practices from the blood stained American past. James Byrd, Jr., 49, was beaten savagely to the point of unconsciousness, chained to the back of a pickup truck by his neck, and dragged for miles over rural roads outside the town of Jasper. It is believed that Byrd survived through most of this experience, that is, until he was decapitated. Three white men, John William King, 23, Shawn Berry, 23, (both of whom had links to white supremacist groups) and Lawrence Brewer Jr., 31, were arrested. Brewer and King were sentenced to death for a racial hate crime that shocked the nation. Berry was sent to prison for life.

more...



http://amath.colorado.edu/carnegie/lit/lynch/byrd.htm

family.

imho

usually by people who desire revenge.

i am just bothered by the fact that the state is allowed to make decisions of life and death

lock the guy up for life, sure, but any government that claims to be free and democratic shouldn't be killing their own citizens.

for one thing, I understand the idea of revenge - that were someone to murder my wife, I would want revenge.

This, however, is neither a civilized reaction, nor even a logical one. Would the revenge bring my wife back? Would it really make me feel better? No, on both counts.

I used to be fairly strong on the idea of the death penalty as being something that was a necessary evil; good for society.

The past few years I have started to doubt this. Not only do I not think the government should have that kind of power, but it bothers me on a moral level also. Although I am not a Christian, I feel that killing is wrong with very few exceptions. Yes, there are those rare times when a single life taken will save the lives of many, but DP is not one of those - no one's life has been saved.

This is a very hard issue and I suppose I still do not know where I stand, although I am fairly against it now, for a variety of reasons - what about innocent people on death row, and since I doubt I could do the deed, I would not expect anyone else to do it for me.

what about the children who are tortured and killed by homicidal pedophiles? what about government officials who order torture?

lots of things that are terrible happen. i don't believe we make them better when we stoop to our lowest nature for the answers.

High Treason... hold it, here is the reason, and lets use george for an exmaple here...

His actions have led to the death of thousands, and quite possibly the ruin of the country. The other reason are war crimes.

Notice, these are so horrific in scope, that these are the only situations where it is conceivable something to consider. Otherwise, no, no way, no how.

Often rationalized, never justified. It's cowardice, a failure of imagination, a failure of compassion, an abidication of responsibilty...future generations will look upon it with horror and pity.

n/t.

one. Though I don't know if I agree even with that. Still - I would not lift a finger to fight for the life of a convincted war criminal.

That one gets me.

opposing it for the worst of crimes may be harder, but is just as important as opposing it for all crimes.

Sid

my emotions would say it is justified. I say this when I read reports coming home from Iraq. A soldier remarked after viewing a father carrying the dead body of his son who was missing part of his head that if somebody had killed people he loved, he would not stop until the killers were dead. He understood at least one reason why an Iraqi would choose to fight something so much more powerful than himself.

Of course, it was people like Jesus, Gandhi, and others who advocated a path that wasn't full of rage and revenge, and I try to follow those people, but it's easy to stray away from that path. I'm only human.

The level of brutality can be accounted for in the sentence, and in where the murderer spends his time in prison.

You say you feel that the degree opf brutality can be balanced by "where the murderer spends his time in prison." What sort of thing do you have in mind?

Opposed to medium. Restrictions on access to areas outside of their cell. Restrictions on their access to outside contacts. Restrictions on access to entertainment. Things like that.

It is, of course, pretty seldom any murderer is confined outside a maximum security facility.

Murderers and rapists are mostly irrational, most officeholders are rational. The threat of death could actual deter white collar crime and government corruption.