To those who support the death penalty

Now first and foremost, I don't want this turned into a flamewar. This is actually just something that I want to get peoples' different perspectives on.

Personally I am against the death penalty for moral reasons. But I also respect those who support the death penalty.

For those who do, I have a question, though. What does society gain by executing criminals?

The way I always understood things was that the justice system is meant to serve society first and foremost. I always asssumed that this was why prosecutors always formally represent "The People". So what exactly do we as a society gain from executing criminals.

I know that as a society we have a bigger financial burden by having the death penalty. I know that in some cases, the appeals process costs 3x as much as it does to keep someone in prison for the rest of their life.

I know that as a society, we pay the burden for people who are wrongfully executed by the state.

I know that as a society we sometimes run into trouble getting other countries to extradite prisoners to us because we have the death penalty.

My point is that it seems like society is paying somewhat of a heavy burden to have capital punishment. I just want to know what we are getting out of it in return.

I said that my morals lead me to believe that the death penalty is wrong. I said that I respect other people whose morals lead them to believe the death penalty is right.

death penalty applies to some people.
OK, we can agree to disagree; the way you presented yourself led me to believe otherwise.

Shit if I didn't agree to disagree I wouldn't have any friends, because half of mine are Republicans.

For the sake of discussion, though, I was kind of hoping that you would answer the question in the original post

If, however, your only reason for being in favor of the death penalty is in fact for moral reasons, then I totally respect that and we can agree to disagree.

Personally if I didn't have all of those other arguments, I would still be against the death penalty for moral reasons. So I can understand why you would be in favor of it just for moral reasons.

you shot someone or stabbed someone, or blatantly killed someone, whether it was because you were young or high, or for no other reason than because you were affiliated with a violent group, you need to pay for your dastardly deeds. Bottom line for me is, I guess, an eye for an eye.
No one in my family has been killed this way, but I cannot even imagine the horror. I would want retribution for my loved one who lost their life for no damned good reason.
How's that?

I'm sure if someone in my family were murdered I'd want retribution as well. I'd probably want to kill them myself. But just because my family member was murdered doesn't mean that my desire for vengence is the right thing or that an impartial judicial system should take into consideration what I feel. It's perfectly okay for families of murder victims to want revenge, hell I think it is even human nature to want revenge. But I just don't think that a civilized society should act on human instinct. Again, though, those are just my moral reasons, and I don't think that my morals are better than anyone elses.

Also, with practical implications, I personally think that we would be better served as a society by investing the money that we save from not executing people and putting it into our underfunded police forces so that we can lock up more violent criminals and prevent them from hurting more people. Of course I also think that we should save money by releasing nonviolent drug offenders from prison and there are certainly plenty of legitimate argument as to why I'm wrong.

As for practical implications, if that worked, I again could change my mind. I wondered on another thread about the cost-effectiveness of this sordidness but don't know. That will be something I'll look into. Why is it cheaper to put someone who has been really over-the-top violent to death for their dirty deeds vs. having them loll around in prison for the rest of their life?
As for nonviolent drug offenders, we are on exactly the same page. Release them! I have no legitimate argument!

but it's OK when the state does it to someone else's family

the scum of the earth and have committed heinous deeds; if that is proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, I have no issue with their fate.

that they deserve to die is one thing - that we should be doing the killing is entirely another

The same kind of satisfaction a soldier gets by killing the enemy who killed his buddy.

Revenge, basically.

For the record, I am unequivocally against the death penalty.

be and feel vastly different, as I've never had to shoot at or kill anyone.
Actually, don't equate your feelings to soldiers either, unless you've walked a mile in their shoes in Iraq.

The death penalty is equivalent to a soldier shooting an unarmed enemy combatant with their hands tied behind their back.

Point blank.

That's what supporters of the death penalty have become.

So yes, I will equate your feelings with soldiers who sometimes commit crimes, regardless of how uncomfortable it makes you. Discomfort leads to enlightenment.

Perhaps it is about revenge. What don't you get about that?
Yes, the world is great, all's right with it, bad Americans who are in favor of the death penalty vs. the other bad Americans who do the horrendous deeds that put them there.
I don't have a big problem with it; I'm a good American who has many more issues to concentrate on that this POS who killed people brutally.
Discomfort leads to enlightenment? Man, I have discomfort but it has nothing to do with this POS!
It's the other one in the wh I worry about.

Doesn't make either of us stupid, and I don't presume to patronize, but you're surely not insisting I agree with you?

The death penalty is wrong, and that's all there is to it.

I have no brief for the families of the victims who claim the deaths of the convicted killers will bring them "closure." It will bring them nothing except nourishment for their blood lust. It won't bring their loved ones back; with loss of any kind, there is no such thing as closure.

I have no brief for those who claim the old "eye for an eye" canard holds in our culture. It doesn't.

We went for a long time in this country without a death penalty. The reinstatement of it proved the penalty to be nothing but a political beanbag. For those who were convicted while it was illegal, well, I guess they're just lucky.

Having worked inside the legal profession for thirty years, I know how many flaws it has. Don't get me wrong - it's the best of the best, but it's fallible. And that is not a luxury you can afford when you're talking about killing someone.

In my time, I've done appellate work on appeals for defendants convicted of first-degree murder. I've met with convicts who killed and who weren't ashamed of it. I've helped to defend men who were guilty, but who truly hadn't received due process.

I've witnessed two executions. For those who think it's such a fine solution, I urge them to witness the murder of another human being. I guarantee you that you will never be the same afterwards, and you will always regret what you saw.

The killing of Tookie Williams is a national shame on America, but, right now, we're the country of George W. Bush, where shame doesn't exist and redemption and forgiveness, coupled with proper punishment, mean nothing in this time of murder and mayhem. Fortunately, more and more juries, now aware of the dysfunction of the death penalty, are refusing to recommend it.

I've been in a place where they were getting ready to murder someone (San Quentin, to be exact) and believe me, it's the most corrosive, deadly place in the world. I'm sure it is again right now -- now that they're murdering another human being. As I write this, at 15 minutes after midnight, that coward Arnold the Gropenfuhrer has allowed another state murder to be performed and Tookey is probably dead.

The criminal-injustice system is COMPLETELY flawed, definitely too flawed to trust with capital punishment.

And, yes, I believe that anyone who favors state murder does have a moral problem. I think they have a serious lack of empathy and the ability to reason -- a conscience like swiss cheese, with serious holes in it.

I am unalterably opposed to the death penalty.

As is my girlfriend.

She recently called Ed Shultz' show to express her view on the death penalty. She caused the usually loquacious Ed to skip a beat when she informed him that she wouldn't want whoever murdered her sister to get the death penalty. It's a moral issue with her and with me. We don't support war, we don't support murder -- no matter who does it.

The death penalty, but not for moral reasons. I'm against the death penalty because I don't think it helps reduce crime at all and mainly because our system stinks and we've seen so many people who've been exhonnerated.

If we had a system where those 2 things could be fixed I would support it. I realize this is basically impossible, but if we had a system like they did in Minority Report I would support the death penalty.

At least for some of the cases there was a "minority report" meaning that there was a possibility that they would not end up committing the crime. The thing I dont' remember is if there was always a minority report or just in some cases.

System wasn't perfect. Obviously something like that is impossible and that's why I will probably always be anti-death penalty. But I'm not morally opposed to it. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with executing someone who has done a crime

I can't think of a single way in which it does.

Although I often sense from listening to DP supporters a vague and twisted notion that it comforts them to see society places a high value on life. It's bizarre, but it suggests that as a society we value life SO MUCH, we're willing to kill, or remove the highly valued life of, anyone who dares to take a life.

And I wonder if they need that weird reassurance, given the reality of the "slow-deaths" many of us will die - be it from poverty, pollutants and contaminants, wars, etc.

but knowing that the person who tortured, raped and killed my daughter, for example, is dead greatly benefits me, my family and society. I don't trust the legal system either. I'm well aware of it's flaws. But if he's the guy that had the knife in his hand and his dick in my nine year old daughter's limbless body when he was caught, the man deserves to die.

Justice would be the guy falling into a woodchipper and surviving for several weeks before slow organ shutdown and death characterized by inescapable fear, shame and self hatred before ever having had the chance to take my daughter's life.

My girlfriend does.

Her sister was murdered and she's civilized enough to not allow herself to sink to this level.

It's easy to spout this kind of sick drivel but the reality is something else.

You're obviously not the father of any child who can say they are loved or cared for by you. So I'm assuming your ex- wife or the mother of your child protects your child or children from you. If your name is not related to your having a child - Praise the Lord!

Just as a hypothetical question since it's obvious that you're incapable of empathy or even basic human brain function - If a child of yours, like mine, was raped, tortured, had her legs and arms cut off and died while the person doing this to her was caught with his dick in her vagina, what punishment do you think he deserves, if any?

Does countries without the Death Penalty have justice?

I have seen a lot of posters claim that the Death Penalty is about justice, which leads me to believe that with out it there cannot be any justice. Is that a correct observation?