SURVEY: Death Penalty -- Good or Bad?

[Scott]

With a number of countries increasingly using the death penalty and countries, such as the Philippines, considering reinstating it, do you believe the use of the death penalty is warranted?

 

Please feel free to leave a comment.

[Credo]

I am not a big fan of the death penalty, but I really don't have much energy to get my self worked up into righteous indignation when someone who commits murders and is found guilty in a fair trial gets put down.   

 

 

[Tchooptip]

Every questions cannot be answered simply  by yes or no. 

My main problem is the possible miscarriage of justice, what a nightmare. 

[NoshowJones]

The death penalty is only justified if guilt is 100% certain, you cannot execute anybody because the prosecuting lawyer is a lot better and experienced than the defence lawyer, is there any way that any court can be 100% certain of an alleged killers guilt? If a terrorist is caught in the act by more than one person, or by someones DNA, is that 100% certain of guilt? If it is then I say yes, execute them.

[humqdpf]

4 hours ago, possum1931 said:

The death penalty is only justified if guilt is 100% certain, you cannot execute anybody because the prosecuting lawyer is a lot better and experienced than the defence lawyer, is there any way that any court can be 100% certain of an alleged killers guilt? If a terrorist is caught in the act by more than one person, or by someones DNA, is that 100% certain of guilt? If it is then I say yes, execute them.

You cannot be ever 100% certain of guilt. That is the problem. Any sentence involving imprisonment can be rescinded but clearly once carried out the death sentence cannot.

[NoshowJones]

2 minutes ago, humqdpf said:

You cannot be ever 100% certain of guilt. That is the problem. Any sentence involving imprisonment can be rescinded but clearly once carried out the death sentence cannot.

I think that if there is a terrorist atrocity in progress, and there are armed police or soldiers, and more than two of them capture one in the act, that would be enough evidence to execute them, and if the people who captured him all lied, and the terrorist is executed then, that's fine because he is there for the purpose of killing innocent people anyway.

[snowgard]

36 minutes ago, humqdpf said:

You cannot be ever 100% certain of guilt. That is the problem. Any sentence involving imprisonment can be rescinded but clearly once carried out the death sentence cannot.

 

It give a lot of cases where it is 100% clear. Like the last iphone murder in BKK. And for clear cases like this DEATH PENALTY!!!
And done it in the next days and not after 20 years.
 

[SiamBeast]

The problem with that is that it is impossible to prove 100% guilt without any doubt. The only cases I can imagine is video evidence of the person doing the crime, and, for example, sperm DNA in a rape + murder victim. In many cases, someone is wrongly convicted or a scapegoat is used instead.

 

[abrahamzvi]

No body, but no body has the right to take life of other people. Is stealing from a thief legal? The same goes for capital punishment. This is as much of a crime as the crime committed by the one being put to death.

[abrahamzvi]

Allow me to add that even ignoring ethical considerations, it is proven that the capital punishment is not a deterrent. Further, there are cases where the court is wrong in its verdict and this comes to light. How can one correct the wrong? The innocent person is dead!

[gintis0604]

Countries with a justice like Thailand should of course not have death penalty. 

[petermik]

7 hours ago, abrahamzvi said:

No body, but no body has the right to take life of other people. Is stealing from a thief legal? The same goes for capital punishment. This is as much of a crime as the crime committed by the one being put to death.

Try telling that to a family that has had their young daughter/son brutally sexually assaulted and murdered to satisfy someones sick lust........there have been numerous cases where the evidence is overwhelming and even the perpetrator  has admitted guilt....HANG them I say

[elgordo38]

The results of the poll were about as expected. Seems rather a stupid law as no one has been executed here for ages thus it only becomes a club in the hands of the behind the scene rulers who will prevail here. In reference to its use here I would describe it as "overkill" carrying checks and balances to the extreme. This carrying a big stick approach does little to advance democracy here it only goes to show that it is still in its infancy state. 

[elgordo38]

7 minutes ago, abrahamzvi said:

Allow me to add that even ignoring ethical considerations, it is proven that the capital punishment is not a deterrent. Further, there are cases where the court is wrong in its verdict and this comes to light. How can one correct the wrong? The innocent person is dead!

Weighing my options if I were a murderer death would be the most desirable one rather than sit in prison the rest of my life. I am sure Charlie Manson can attest to that. 

[ThaidaGwaii]

I disagree with the death penalty.  Just like war, it gives the impression, the righteous justification, that killing human beings is OK.  It is not.  Buddha said so, Jesus said so, and many other great spiritual world leaders.  I think Thai people need to ask themselves, considering it is a "buddhist" country, why life is regarded to be so insignificant in their culture.  Looking at the amount of murders, people killed on the road, deadly accident and the list goes on, why it is just so normal in their culture.  It sure isn't in mine, Canada, and we also do not have the death penalty.  Then you have the way Thai people kill every animal roaming free, including their neighbor's dog sometimes, shows clearly how in a bad state Thailand is theses days regarding the value of all life.
The justice system is known everywhere to be potentially corrupt, often makes judicial mistakes and even have cases of people being framed by the government.  Many innocent people have been in jail, some on death row.
And for the people who actually have killed someone, the penalty should equal the circumstances.  But ultimately, everyone should have the opportunity for redemption, pay their debt to society, fix their karma before they die.  There will be plenty of reckoning after they die!

Buddha said that thinking of, or agreeing to bad actions, like killing human, stealing, greed and anger for example, is equally as bad as actually doing it for your soul.  So for the people who agrees in the death penalty, you have work to do...

[prakhonchai nick]

37 minutes ago, abrahamzvi said:

No body, but no body has the right to take life of other people. Is stealing from a thief legal? The same goes for capital punishment. This is as much of a crime as the crime committed by the one being put to death.

An eye for an eye - always - when there is total proof. And as someone above said...today...not 20 years later.

 

 

[ThaidaGwaii]

11 minutes ago, prakhonchai nick said:

An eye for an eye - always - when there is total proof. And as someone above said...today...not 20 years later.

 

 

People get framed with so called "total proof".  There is no such thing.

[xerostar]

There have been cases where the person who was guilty of serial rapes but allowed out on parole after a couple of years.

Then they have gone on to commit more rape and murder.  Such an example happened in Melbourne only 2 years ago.

If this animal had been given the death penalty, he sure as hell won't be doing it again !

Keeping these animals in prison at the taxpayers expense is a joke.

Criminals who are convicted of premeditated murder or other heinous crimes don't deserve the right to live.

[abrahamzvi]

51 minutes ago, petermik said:

Try telling that to a family that has had their young daughter/son brutally sexually assaulted and murdered to satisfy someones sick lust........there have been numerous cases where the evidence is overwhelming and even the perpetrator  has admitted guilt....HANG them I say

I can only repeat what I stated before NO ONE has the right to take the life of another human being. Is stealing from a thief legal? No. So why should murdering a murderer be allowed and legal? Te only , repeat ONLY, time killing is justified if your life, or the life of another is momentarily in danger.

[elgordo38]

40 minutes ago, ThaidaGwaii said:

 Buddha said so, Jesus said so, and many other great spiritual world leaders.

I think if you look at history religion was responsible for more deaths than all the other reasons combined. The religious right wing nut jobs are making a big comeback in USA politics. 

[abrahamzvi]

30 minutes ago, prakhonchai nick said:

An eye for an eye - always - when there is total proof. And as someone above said...today...not 20 years later.

 

 

Is the principle of eye to eye allowed in all cases? If that was the case we all would live, or die, in a chaos,  worldwide. As I rhetorically asked before, is stealing from a thief legal, i.e. does your principle apply here?

[Altalake]

Ny dad and g'dad were both judges. When I was a kid I asked them both What if an innocent man/woman was executed. Their answer was that the police (in the UK I stress) very seldom prosecute an "innocent" person. So tho' he or she might not be guilty of that particular crime, he or she was guilty of something else.

 

I am not sure of that nowadays. But with DNA......????

 

I am sure you all know that to execute someone in e.g. the USA costs much more than a life sentence in gaol when all is said and done. 

[kannot]

46 minutes ago, ThaidaGwaii said:

I disagree with the death penalty.  Just like war, it gives the impression, the righteous justification, that killing human beings is OK.  It is not.  Buddha said so, Jesus said so, and many other great spiritual world leaders.  I think Thai people need to ask themselves, considering it is a "buddhist" country, why life is regarded to be so insignificant in their culture.  Looking at the amount of murders, people killed on the road, deadly accident and the list goes on, why it is just so normal in their culture.  It sure isn't in mine, Canada, and we also do not have the death penalty.  Then you have the way Thai people kill every animal roaming free, including their neighbor's dog sometimes, shows clearly how in a bad state Thailand is theses days regarding the value of all life.
The justice system is known everywhere to be potentially corrupt, often makes judicial mistakes and even have cases of people being framed by the government.  Many innocent people have been in jail, some on death row.
And for the people who actually have killed someone, the penalty should equal the circumstances.  But ultimately, everyone should have the opportunity for redemption, pay their debt to society, fix their karma before they die.  There will be plenty of reckoning after they die!

Buddha said that thinking of, or agreeing to bad actions, like killing human, stealing, greed and anger for example, is equally as bad as actually doing it for your soul.  So for the people who agrees in the death penalty, you have work to do...

why do you think humans are " so special"  surely  if  youre  going down this  path then  killing anything including vegetables and bacteria is out.........life and death go hand in hand and  good and bad are  just figments of  our imagination.....foxes may  kill 4-5  chickens in a coup but i doubt they have any remorse or thought it was good/bad etc

[lungnorm]

Would be no good in Thailand because they seem to always have the wrong person in the dock and too much graft to be able to trust the RTP. When guilt is beyond doubt 100% yes remove them from the planet.

[Kiwiken]

After due process and a trial if someone is found guilty of first degree murder or Child Molestation I believe the Death penalty should be enforced. Where the conviction is made on so called forensic evidence i believe life imprisonment. And as long as the execution is carried out in a quick and humane fashion.

[otherstuff1957]

I have no philosophical objection to the death penalty, but I voted no because justice systems are imperfect and I would rather see 100 criminals who deserve the death penalty live, rather than one innocent person die.

[canuckamuck]

Yes it should be used much more often than it is. 

A very good result for very bad people. They should get it done within a few months at the most though. Several years of oxygen at the cost of the taxpayers is just more crime.

[ding]

3 hours ago, Credo said:

I am not a big fan of the death penalty, but I really don't have much energy to get my self worked up into righteous indignation when someone who commits murders and is found guilty in a fair trial gets put down.   

 

 

Just takes one unfair trial and the entire citizenry is complicit in the State murder of an innocent.

 

And it happens to poor people in American regularly. Prosecutors will not admit they had an innocent man when proof of innocence is available due to political aspirations.

You are a fair person, I'd guess, and it probably seems plausible that the justice system is actually JUST.

[Jiminy Cricket]

When a soul loses its human body prematurely, as in the case of execution, it does not progress beyond the first range of conscious beyond the physical, but is reborn into another human body  bringing with it its exact same emotional and mental characteristics.  So the same brute is back on earth. 

[Khon Kaen Dave]

I would agree with the posters that want the death penalty for crimes of murder,when the guilty party is proved guilty without doubt.And that would have to be 100%,because death is final,and the 'oops'  factor cannot be an excuse.This would apply to one on one murders. But let us consider multiple murderer's such as gang rapists,where the victim is murdered after or during the event.Also terrorism where the crime is carried out by one but is conspired by other members of the cell. Would the members of the forum also be happy to consider the death penalty for the crime of 'guilty by association?'