Executions / death row

Executions / death row.

Moral or not? Is it the right thing to do

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=oe6OMo0UyJQ
youtube.com/watch?v=Cjx7-b2yluo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Yes they deserve to die and I hope they burn in hell.

Everyone deserves to die

Not moral or right. Can't be undone in case of false prosecution. Would'nt mind seeing life in prison in a high Arctic work camp though.

This is my serious opinion.
No, try to rehabilitate everyone, yes with tax payer money. If they cant be rehabilitated keep em in a mental asylum where they can live in madness until they decide they want to have assisted suicide and then kill them

Only 4%

It's time to bring this bad boy back

There is no afterlife it does not matter when they die, life is infinite anyway

We have done it for thousands of years so it is basically the moral thing a society does when an individual has done things that upset others.

But it is still not the most ethical thing to do. Unless the resources for keeping them alive are directly causing a bigger damage to others, than it would be for them to die.

Like imagine if there was a kid with a rare disease that needs a treatment which costs exactly as much as keeping a serial killer alive, plus it has a 100% success rate. Would you either keep the serial killer alive in prison and let the kid die, or kill the serial killer and let the kid have the treatment?

They should be as painless as possible because some people might acctualy be innocent

Brush if they're innocent they shouldnt be there in the first place

Let the kid die if it's nature's will, then there it's a reason it dies

Only 4%...I guess that's okay then, SMH!

Nope. It's unjustifiable by any criminal justice metric except for pure retribution, and the risk of error should far more than outweigh that basis for capital punishment. Furthermore, minimizing the risk of error (which will never eliminate it) is costly enough that it's more expensive than the alternative. Add in that it's typically applied in racially discriminatory fashion, and the overwhelming weight of good policy is against capital punishment.

From a spiritual standpoint - no it's not ethical.
From a materialist standpoint - yes, of course it is.
From a nihilist standpoint - IDGAF.

I'm firmly against the death penalty.
Not on a "moral" standard, but on a common sense standard.

>Number of DAs proven corrupt
>Number of cops that like and falsify info
>Court systems bogged down in shenanigans

Since the courts, and cops aren't trustable, I can't support killing humans for a "crime".
Punish cops and courts that falsify info and lie, and I'll support the death penalty.

How would you compensate the next of kin of that 4%?

If some cunt guns down 5 people at a school fair, then they deserve torture and then death.

>Yes they deserve to die and I hope they burn in hell.

Nice reference

No. Because the founders firmly stood by the notion that it was better that 10 guilty men go free, than one innocent man be wrongfully punished.

The rate of false convictions is way too high to even remotely entertain executions as acceptable.

It's also cheaper to actually lock people away for life, rather than execute them. The appeals process gets expensive.

Many murder victims are laid to rest for the single reason that the death penalty can be "taken off the table" if they "give up" where they ditched the bodies. I don't actually support the death penalty, but I do so that families can have closure.

>smh

Nigger detected


Kys you fucking nigger

Spoken like a true neckbeard

if people in america are free to shoot each other to death for petty things like theft and trespassing, then what difference does it make?

Idk wtf you're talking about... Here in nyc it is 100% illegal to do that. You can't even carry a gun here unless you're leo

It is obvious that the state must be willing to use lethal force to protect the citizens under its custody; otherwise it can provide no protection whatsoever. Capital punishment provides serious protection by serving as a deterrent- possibly more of a deterrent than our increasingly comfortable prisons could ever be.

Yes only if the person is responsible for terrorist attacks or mass murder, and there has to be SOLID evidence that it was zed person and has to voted on.

Are you a pacifist? If not, then it seems you accept the risk of harming the innocent as a necessary cost for the prevention of greater harm.

We are a little too liberal with the death penalty, but i do support it.

In an ideal world the courts would have to irrefutably prove the severity of the crime, the jury be unanimous, and the criminal taken off to be killed immediately. But since this is not an ideal world we make due i suppose

Who is too liberal with it?
America only executes a tiny number of people.

>quick google
>holy shit anons right

Well then. We arent too liberal. I say we streamline it then

I'm not for it. A lifetime to contemplate a crime seems harsher than ending that life. That being said, those sentenced to death should not have any sort of comfort while serving life. No contact with friends or family, etc. Otherwise, the death penalty isn't immoral.

Hell yeah, fucking Alaskan gulags.

youtube.com/watch?v=oe6OMo0UyJQ

Texasfag here. We kill more inmates than any other state. A Texas Tech student recently shot and killed a campus cop, and its basically guaranteed that the freshman will face execution.

In 25 years?

I don't think it's moral

There are two sides to this:

On one hand you have other human beings allowing people to live and choosing people to die. This is not natural. When an animal kills one of its own species in the wild the other animals do not call animals with authority to execute them based on the act. Of course humans have more intelligence and are more kind to one another and we are not wild.

On the other hand you have human beings who might be mentally ill and cannot be mentally treated or cured enough to be placed in a normal society. Or you might have other humans who can never be trusted around others and will always break the law and corrupt or threaten other humans with violence. Logically it makes sense to kill one human who could kill ten or a hundred if they cannot be rehabilitated or trusted.

Kill the fagz

>On one hand you have other human beings allowing people to live and choosing people to die.
So? Not inherently bad.

Only for white collar criminals like Jamie Dimon. If the perp stole a generation's retirement, he can afford the best lawyers. If they can't get him off, let his red red blood make the harvest grow. It's civilization level hygiene, not personal. Psychopaths get the rake.

They should at least make the executions entertaining like these ones: youtube.com/watch?v=Cjx7-b2yluo

those are pretty cool, so weird though

Probably less time than that, Texas is generally relatively efficient when it comes to executions