Why should we not have the death penalty?

Is there any reason why the death penalty should be banned?

untrustworthy/imperfect judges/courts/jury

Which is why the death penalty in the US requires a unanimous guilty verdict as well as unanimous call for the death penalty.

I'm not believer in the "what good is killing 1000 criminals deserving of death if 1 innocent man has to die" mentality.

it should be mandatory

I hate the idea of jury of peers, think about some of the people on this board maybe have been in jury duty

yeah id prefer a jury of AI. people suck and are bad, u cant expect people to do anything good, especially americans

>no death penalty in illinois
>tfw live in illinois
fucking end this state already

Psychological surveys to inmates to figure out why people commit crimes to eliminate the problem from the root, sadly political correctness gets in the way of this as well.

Nobody on this board is too stupid to get out of jury duty.

Until that 1 is you. We've killed the wrong man before, it's a proven thing. Not to mention a lot of them ride on confessions that are usually coerced or the person is to retarded to know what they're doing.

>to retarded
Like me

>Turkroach
>wants to "learn" why people commit crimes

You already know. It's in your jeans.

No. It's always existed, it works, and it continues to work. A piece of shit who rapes and murders people should not continue to live in prison on the back of the taxpayers. He is not only dead weight on our society, he is trying to kill us.

Except executions cost just as much as life imprisonment because the inmate is still going to be in prison for years in the appeal process. Generally death row inmates have way more trials than lifers and that costs more taxpayer money than feeding them for cents a day.

That's why you get rid of the appeal process, and don't care about how "humane" you are with a criminal.

Just buy some rope at home depot to strangle him to death, or a baseball bat to beat him into submission.

>Pre-Conventional Perspective
Beyond the obvious "you could be one of the innocent put to death," murder is murder, no matter how why or who you murder.

>Conventional Perspective
That's a human to use, there's no reason to waste the resources on killing them, force them into hard labor. Make them useful. Also worst come we can isolate and use them as needed.

>Post-Conventional Morality

Murder isn't right. Society doesn't benefit from eye-for-an-eye. It would be vindictively satisfying, but once again, either you could be falsely put to death, or you're a murderer/accessory. We as a whole would be either no better or very little better.

I'm with you in spirit but only if it's 100% proof positive you have the right guy. The overwhelming majority of cases aren't, though.

I worked in Corrections and it cost a lot because of lawsuits. But imagine being in a cell for 23 hours and let out 1 hour for exercise everyday for the rest of your life. Makes me wonder why they hang themselves if they get the chance.

>"you could be one of the innocent put to death,"
Are you a child? No one assumes that the justice system is perfect.
>murder is murder, no matter how why or who you murder.
"no"

This. Plus it's not going to bring back the victims if you kill the killer. It's revenge I suppose. Locking them up is fine with me so they can't kill again. There is no reason to abuse prisoners either and it is wrong. Anything like that is revenge.

Your death penalty is a joke.
First of all your justice system is a joke.

Common law is the ultimate cuck stamp.

>I'm with you in spirit but only if it's 100% proof positive you have the right guy. The overwhelming majority of cases aren't, though.
which is why there needs to be cameras and drones and satellites with cameras literally everywhere

I'm at a bit of an ethical/moral impasse on this one. On one hand, innocent people have been killed based on flawed or incomplete evidence, and that is not something I would be willing to condone. On the other hand, sociopath murderers, career criminals, and hyper corrupt politicians deserve the death sentence because they inflict constant and lethal harm on the citizens of our country.

Rehab would be a more efficient way of dealing with druggies, who make up large portions of the prison population, and job education programs would take care of those who commit crime out of desperation for money.

Besides those non-death penalty related reforms, I really can't determine yet what I fall closer to, besides that people who are currently attacking you physically have in my opinion forfeited their right to safety, physical integrity, or comfort, and you should be legally allowed to do whatever you deem necessary to disable them.

It's easy. If you're the party harmed then you get to pull the trigger to put the alleged to death once the courts decide it's legit.

You want to put a person to death? Do it yourself.

If you're going to nation bash, why hide behind a commie flag? You probably come from Norway where murderers cells are bigger and more furnished than my apartment.

Because if you don't like the idea of big government trampling your rights you probably wouldn't be on board with letting a potentially flawed government/court/legal system strip a person of the single most important personal freedom.

if you kill your enemies they win

I support the death penalty because life in prison is the alternative, and that's a harsher penalty.

>Die by lethal injection/firing squad/hanging/electric chair?
>Get anally raped by black men for the rest of your life.

The choice is yours.

I completely understand this point of view but there obviously cases where there is no doubt they have the right person.
We can skip the years of appeals in these cases.

If you fuck it up, you don't get a second chance.


GL trusting the prosecution to not fuck it up
If you put in sufficient checks to remove the majority of fuck ups (like USA attempts to do), you actually foster conditions equivalent of mental torture.

Just bring forced labor back

muh revenge
even if you're suggesting that you want to have state appointed executioners from the citizens that's still no reason to allow people who have been personally wronged to kill their malefactor
justice is impersonal

Quite backwards, sven. We use the usual court system to determine what the accused is guilty of, and the judge to pass as sentence.

But if it's an execution, then you pull the trigger yourself. You don't have to pull the trigger. But if there is a death sentence, then it's up to the wronged party to pull the trigger.

What's the point of that? I posted that justice is impersonal. The wronged party's feelings are irrelevant; why would you allow them the choice to pass judgement?

Judgement is passed by multiple third parties to determine which side is right.

If you have an issue where your fellow man might lose his life for what he's done, then you probably believe he should lose his life if you're taking him to court. And if you make a convincing case that he has forfeited his life, and the court rules in your favor, then you should have one last time in life to question yourself.

If the court gives you the green light to execute him, then go ahead if that's what's in you. Or you could forgive him if you can't bring yourself to take his life yourself.

>tfw in Texas they got rid of the last meal system because one guy took advantage of it out of spite

In all honestly, I'm surprised no death inmate did that sooner.


What would you have as your last meal Sup Forums?

who was the guy to take advantage of it?