Kill all criminals or deploy another method different from capital punishment.

in debato •  6 years ago 

To display the structured discussion or engage in the debate, view the topic on https://debato.org/html/discussion?a=ckole&p=kill-all-criminals-or-deploy-another-method-different-from-capital-punishment-a8mzd


The death penalty is a capital punishment as a sanction carried out on anyone guilty of a particular crime. I’ve seen many cases that resulted in the elimination of many people. I am not sure if all of them are genuinely guilty of the crime. Every life that is lost through this practice cannot be retrieved. However, judgment is passed daily on people guilty of one crime or another depending on the gravity. To give fairness a chance, we have some terrorists in the world that are causing harm than good to societies. They’ve massacred millions of people in recent times, and they are still hunting lives as we speak. Armed robbers kill and snatch cars all the time. It’s difficult to get the correct/exact statistics of the criminal records and the havoc they’ve caused. Should we encourage the elimination judgment passed on criminals? If they are given a second chance, can they benefit the society? An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Are we okay with that proverb or we need an adjustment? Please, I need your view on this.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

From a systemic point of view, any death penalty executed is a violation in the system. Those who are convicted and punished leave those involved in a conflict. Both family members and the executive powers, such as judges, lawyers, administrative officials, doctors, etc., are involved.

Killings must be justified, administered, scheduled and carried out, but basically nobody can really do this in a responsible way. One only has to imagine what is going on in those who give a lethal injection, those who then take the body from the stretcher, transfer it, those who bury it or cremate it.

Everyone is witnessing a failure, which cannot be good for people's mental health. More prisons create more failed existences. More murders, more failed ones. Killing is symbolic of maintaining the justification of killing for those who in turn committed killing.

How can satisfaction take place when one life is given for another? How can the parents, brothers, sisters or children of a person sentenced to death not suffer pain? They belong to that person, even if they do not approve of what he did. Killing is the admission of failure of all in the system. It is the artificial bringing about of an end where failure is affirmed and set as irrevocable. How can one not be compassionate with those who are involved in the execution of death penalties? One must then insinuate that these people must make themselves insensitive to it, for how else can one cope with the conflict? How do people perceive a situation where they close the cell door and lock someone who is waiting for death? Certainly not as a success of human coexistence.

Do the relatives of the victims have satisfaction? Are they really satisfied when the perpetrator is executed? Do people really still believe that a just punishment has been carried out? We no longer live in such times and although the execution no longer takes place on the public pillory where the people watch, it is not very different. It only takes place in secret, in secluded rooms, and nobody who leaves there after everything has happened leaves with a good feeling.

Of course, on each point. An execution needs a executioner. Where does one find such a person? How does that person integrate into society after committing a state-sanctioned murder? How does one turn on the ability to kill, and then turn it off? The person who kills is irrevocably altered. And if they're not, then they are dangerous, because they lack empathy.

Of course of the issue of error hasn't been addressed. And the inequities with which the death penalty is adjudicated. Do the rich and poor have an equal chance of being sentence to death? How about race? Do people of all races stand the same chance of being sentenced to death?

We can take a position on this argument based on belief or gut instinct. But we're dealing with life, so certainty is warranted. Every time a life is taken by the government, that's us. The government is us. We can either endorse the act, or resist it. And when it comes to life, we should know what we're talking about when we make that decision. Because, every execution is sanctioned by us, unless we resist it.
The argument over the death penalty, once we get beyond the Biblical eye for an eye, needs to be buttressed by proof. Well, it seems proof doesn't really exist, on either side of the dispute. Don't believe me. I just did some research. Here's a report--a very balanced report from U Penn (2012). The report looks back at 30 years of research. In the very end, the authors offer a conclusion: "perhaps the primary lesson learned from the latest round of empirical research on the deterrent effect of the death penalty is that researchers and policy makers must cope with ambiguity".
That's not really enough to strap someone to gurney and take their lives--or put them in front of a firing squad. I think we need something a little stronger than "ambiguity", to take someone's life.
Great discussion. It will go on....But I guess you know where I stand in this argument :)

It is a powerful incentive to prevent people from doing the crime.

Oh boy, I will engage on this one...but I'm involved in a long blog now. Have to focus.

I'm looking forward to it! Both your blog and your responses 👌

Capital punishment neither reduce nor stops the rate of crime. Those perpetrators already know the outcome of what their actions would lead them to if apprehended. I don’t think it is the best practice that would change people's mindset to committing a crime.

Oh and wouldn't this also be an argument against this statement rather than pro?

Couldn't a lifelong sentence behind bars be more discouraging than a quick death sentence?

How would you handle cases where errors have been made? It wouldn't be the first case to get sentenced incorrectly but with a death penalty there is no way to recover what is lost.

That is a good point. When a person is wrongly sentenced and killed for the crime he did not commit, getting the truth later cannot bring the dead back to life.

Wouldn't this be an argument pro to that argument? 😊

Some criminals repent while in prison and later serve as a model prisoner, advising others against committing crimes. They regret the heinous crimes they've committed and use their life as an example for others to learn from. The death penalty won't give such an individual the chance to affect other

However it may be appealing to 'get rid' of severe criminals that way, even when there is little chance to reintegration, but it is unethical and against our most basic human rights.