First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
Utah becomes only state in America to approve death by firing squad.
13496 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Scotland
Offline
Posted 3/25/15
Hanging (ie. long rope hanging) I want back but isn't firing squad heading in the wrong direction? If it's an instant death then yeah but firing squad would be iffy for both the people doing it and the person taking it.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15 , edited 3/25/15

PhantomGundam wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:


PhantomGundam wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

Most of this is too high up in the metaphorical funnel. This topic, to me, is not about the death penalty in and of itself but about how this method adequately or inadequately addresses the concerns of inflicting death in capital punishment.

Yes, some methods are more likely to be botched than others, so I advocate using the most reliable methods in execution. However, there are also countervailing factors to consider, such as personal dignity and painlessness. I could say, for instance, that killing is terrible no matter what, including the killing of animals that are not human, but that is of little relevance and of little help.

Now that the penalty is allowed and is used, I merely contemplate the most reasonable and balanced ways to inflict death in capital punishment. You are free to address the morality of killing elsewhere but this is not what I am addressing.



So what you're saying is, even if you're against the death penalty, you won't try opposing it just because it's already legal? Please tell me I misunderstood that. There's no way I can believe someone would advocate for a practice they don't like just because it already exist.


That is not what I said. i think you misunderstand. You are still too high up in the funnel.



Then would you mind explaining? That's what I got out of your post. Especially that last part:

Now that the penalty is allowed and is used, I merely contemplate the most reasonable and balanced ways to inflict death in capital punishment.

It is impossible for me to get into that without explaining my own view on the morality of the death penalty. To summarize it, I believe killing is a necessary evil. Very short and broad summary.

Be aware, however, that this is overly broad and has little to do with what types of methods I think should be used for execution.

I do also have issues with the procedure and cost of our current way of using this penalty, but I consider this to be distinct from the moral issue of killing and the methods used to kill.
51150 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

It is impossible for me to get into that without explaining my own view on the morality of the death penalty. To summarize it, I believe killing is a necessary evil. Very short and broad summary.

Be aware, however, that this is overly broad and has little to do with what types of methods I think should be used for execution.

I do also have issues with the procedure and cost of our current way of using this penalty, but I consider this to be distinct from the moral issue of killing and the methods used to kill.


Killing is necessary, but certainly not to this extent. Even when killing animals, there's no way to defend that when it serves no purpose. If you killed an animal to serve it as food, that's one thing. But killing just because you can benefits no one (I won't even get into people who hunt for sport).

Killing humans isn't that different, cannibalism aside. The only way I can tolerate killing is if someone poses a serious threat and there's no other way to deal with that person. If it's for self defense or the defense of others, I don't see much of a problem. What benefit does the death penalty have? The person's already behind bars for the remainder of their short life. What makes it necessary to kill them when they're no longer a threat? Is it to make money off of killing people? To make the victims or their families happy that someone died?

I get that you're trying to find methods that cause the least amount of damage, but why should the death penalty even exist in the first place? It serves no real purpose.

Just curious, but would you be ok with the death penalty getting outlawed? I think I probably already know the answer but I just want to be sure.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15 , edited 3/25/15

PhantomGundam wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

It is impossible for me to get into that without explaining my own view on the morality of the death penalty. To summarize it, I believe killing is a necessary evil. Very short and broad summary.

Be aware, however, that this is overly broad and has little to do with what types of methods I think should be used for execution.

I do also have issues with the procedure and cost of our current way of using this penalty, but I consider this to be distinct from the moral issue of killing and the methods used to kill.


Killing is necessary, but certainly not to this extent. Even when killing animals, there's no way to defend that when it serves no purpose. If you killed an animal to serve it as food, that's one thing. But killing just because you can benefits no one (I won't even get into people who hunt for sport).

Killing humans isn't that different, cannibalism aside. The only way I can tolerate killing is if someone poses a serious threat and there's no other way to deal with that person. If it's for self defense or the defense of others, I don't see much of a problem. What benefit does the death penalty have? The person's already behind bars for the remainder of their short life. What makes it necessary to kill them when they're no longer a threat? Is it to make money off of killing people? To make the victims or their families happy that someone died?

I get that you're trying to find methods that cause the least amount of damage, but why should the death penalty even exist in the first place? It serves no real purpose.

Just curious, but would you be ok with the death penalty getting outlawed? I think I probably already know the answer but I just want to be sure.

I don't like to mix because of that reason. For instance, regardless of your stance on whether sex is permissible before marriage, dealing with teen pregnancy by talking about abstinence doesn't do any good when talking about pregnant teens. Anyway, you believe killing people like this is not necessary whereas I believe it is. This is the fundamental difference here.

I would be fine with outlawing the penalty if the penalty was so costly and unwieldy that using it became not worthwhile. Although I like to separate the issues into manageable facets, there is occasionally a point where one issue becomes so pressing that the rest of the details are overshadowed. I don't think this is the current state of the death penalty. Some people do but I for one dislike deciding material issues based solely on moral stances or solely on cost. Of course, everything hangs in balance, which is tough and often highly subjective.

This is what makes the death penalty controversial.
Sogno- 
45631 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/25/15
y u need a squad, in case someone misses?
51150 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

I don't like to mix because of that reason. For instance, regardless of your stance on whether sex is permissible before marriage, dealing with teen pregnancy by talking about abstinence doesn't do any good when talking about pregnant teens. Anyway, you believe killing people like this is not necessary whereas I believe it is. This is the fundamental difference here.

I would be fine with outlawing the penalty if the penalty was so costly and unwieldy that using it became not worthwhile. Although I like to separate the issues into manageable facets, there is occasionally a point where one issue becomes so pressing that the rest of the details are overshadowed. I don't think this is the current state of the death penalty. Some people do but I for one dislike deciding material issues based solely on moral stances or solely on cost. Of course, everything hangs in balance, which is tough and often highly subjective.

This is what makes the death penalty controversial.


I see. Well, I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I've yet to see a reason that explains how the death penalty benefits anyone, though. I don't want to see anyone saying it's for justice. There are better ways to hold people accountable for their actions without killing them.

Needlessly taking someone's life makes the executioner no better than the prisoner. The only difference is that the executioner can do it under the law.
21448 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Between yesterday...
Offline
Posted 3/25/15

aListers wrote:

Hanging (ie. long rope hanging) I want back but isn't firing squad heading in the wrong direction? If it's an instant death then yeah but firing squad would be iffy for both the people doing it and the person taking it.


Washington state has hanging as an option along with lethal injection the governor however put an end to that shortly after coming into office by having the sentences commuted to life without parole. Which is saving the state money over the long term. To keep appealing a death penalty case in Washington state runs about a million dollars every year. While they can still appeal it isn't the same type of appeal so it cost less. With the average length of time for a person sitting on death row being 15 years plus or minus a year. That rings out to roughly 15 millions dollars in savings for every person on death row. That would be enough to keep 500 people behind bars for a year based on the average cost to keep someone in jail in Washington state.
9376 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / San Antonio
Offline
Posted 3/25/15
While I'm against the death penalty in general, I would say that if I were to be executed, I'd probably choose firing squad over lethal injection.
13496 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Scotland
Offline
Posted 3/25/15

gvblackmoon wrote:


aListers wrote:

Hanging (ie. long rope hanging) I want back but isn't firing squad heading in the wrong direction? If it's an instant death then yeah but firing squad would be iffy for both the people doing it and the person taking it.


Washington state has hanging as an option along with lethal injection the governor however put an end to that shortly after coming into office by having the sentences commuted to life without parole. Which is saving the state money over the long term. To keep appealing a death penalty case in Washington state runs about a million dollars every year. While they can still appeal it isn't the same type of appeal so it cost less. With the average length of time for a person sitting on death row being 15 years plus or minus a year. That rings out to roughly 15 millions dollars in savings for every person on death row. That would be enough to keep 500 people behind bars for a year based on the average cost to keep someone in jail in Washington state.


That's more of a problem with the death penalty as a whole. To be fair, as long as life actually means life (which is doesn't here) I think it's more viable than the death penalty due to the sheer cost. While I would prefer hanging, it's probably better to not have a death penalty because the government needs money and people get butthurt over taxes. Over here, I would prefer the money going to the NHS seeing as we still have one.
Posted 3/25/15
Congratulations. How about some realistic nazi movie out of this?
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15
Well Utah just stepped back into the old west. Anyway can you believe america is one of the few first world countries that still has the death penalty. Me thinks we should catch up with the times.
Posted 3/25/15

megahobbit wrote:

Well Utah just stepped back into the old west. Anyway can you believe america is one of the few first world countries that still has the death penalty. Me thinks we should catch up with the times.


Death penalty will reappear once it gets cheap.
5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15
I knew there would be stupid comments on this thread but this takes the cake.

If you're a troll, bravo.

If you are actually serious, please find some kind of help.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 3/25/15

Log0 wrote:


megahobbit wrote:

Well Utah just stepped back into the old west. Anyway can you believe america is one of the few first world countries that still has the death penalty. Me thinks we should catch up with the times.


Death penalty will reappear once it gets cheap.


No it wont have you read any foreign literature on the death penalty? Alot of European countries view it with disdain. Americas really the outlier here culturally.
Posted 3/25/15

megahobbit wrote:


Log0 wrote:


megahobbit wrote:

Well Utah just stepped back into the old west. Anyway can you believe america is one of the few first world countries that still has the death penalty. Me thinks we should catch up with the times.


Death penalty will reappear once it gets cheap.


No it wont have you read any foreign literature on the death penalty? Alot of European countries view it with disdain. Americas really the outlier here culturally.


Europe changes its view according to its economical situation.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.