Can capital punishment deter people from commiting crimes?

My answer is absolutely yes. The most improtant thing of human is his or her life.

But if you ask the capital punishment is required or not I'll say this is the subject of another argument.

In most of the U.S states, capital punishment didn't work to reduce the crime rate. In China and Iran, either.So what's wrong with it?

Can capital punishment deter people from commiting crimes?

In a word, no. Of course, whether or not capital punishment works as a deterrent is something impossible to definitively prove one way or the other, so of course my "no" is just an opinion.

In most of the U.S states, capital punishment didn't work to reduce the crime rate. In China and Iran, either.So what's wrong with it?

How do you know this? Can you foresee these countries' and states' crime rates without capital punishment?

How do you know this? Can you foresee these countries' and states' crime rates without capital punishment?

Just a little google research can help you.

If we kill a person who killed someone, what is it that makes us different from him/her?

If we kill a person who killed someone, what is it that makes us different from him/her?

In a word, nothing.

Yes, it certainly does and I'm for death penalty. In some states of the U.S. and some other countries it is still administered. Laws should not protect the criminals.

I said above teacher. This is the subject of another argument.
You asked a different question.
And my answer to your second question is yes.
I'm surely against capital punishment. I think all kinds of punishments which are not irrevocable are wrong.

If we kill a person who killed someone, what is it that makes us different from him/her?

Well, you will not administer the punishment personally. The administration will do that.

Yes, it certainly does and I'm for death penalty. In some states of the U.S. and some other countries it is still administered. Laws should not protect the criminals.

Its being administered in some countries didn't reduce the crime rate, did it?

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004902.html

I think it depends on the reality of the country in which capital punishment to be executed. Maybe in most countries, this kind of punishment does not work, but in some, it works as a deterrent force even never being executed...

Well, you will not administer the punishment personally. The administration will do that.

No, I'm on the fence now, just trying to strike a nerve (Let Saposcat's ear burn)

Well, you will not administer the punishment personally. The administration will do that.

I don't think that's what he's asking. What he's asking is whether or not an administration's killing a murderer, for instance, makes that administration just as much of a murderer. Personally, I believe it does.

Its being administered in some countries didn't reduce the crime rate, did it?

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004902.html

I searched too but didn't come across any reliable statistics favoring either side.

This question seems to need a prior question:

What does punishment stand for: To revenge, to stop a criminal, to stop a crime, to train a criminal to be a better citizen...?

I don't think that's what he's asking. What he's asking is whether or not an administration's killing a murderer, for instance, makes that administration just as much of a murderer. Personally, I believe it does.

I do not believe it does. The administration has the very duty of protecting the lives of its citizens and to me this is an effective way of doing that.

I searched too but didn't come across any reliable statistics favoring either side.

What do you mean "either side?" Just compare the countries where death penalthy is carried out to the ones where it is not.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21670/Crime-Statistics-Murders


http://www.geocities.com/dtmcbride/reference/murders_us_2003.html

What do you mean "either side?" Just compare the countries where death penalthy is carried out to the ones where it is not.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21670/Crime-Statistics-Murders


http://www.geocities.com/dtmcbride/reference/murders_us_2003.html

the ones who are for or against the capital punishment

I searched too but didn't come across any reliable statistics favoring either side.

deathpenaltyinfo (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=168)

the ones who are for or against the capital punishment

You can see all sorts of countries in the list, there is not much difference between those who favour and who don't.

deathpenaltyinfo (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=168)

excellent Henry-Waldo!

Well, these statistics do not show that it is ineffective. We need statistics showing rates both before and after the application of death penalty in a particular country.

Well, these statistics do not show that it is ineffective. We need statistics showing rates both before and after the application of death penalty in a particular country.

No Solid Evidence That Killing Stops the Killing (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=2374)

The link does not work, at least for me.

The link does not work, at least for me.

it's working. :)

I do not believe it does. The administration has the very duty of protecting the lives of its citizens and to me this is an effective way of doing that.

I suppose this aspect of the question probably also has something to do with one's attitudes in general towards the state and that sort of administration. My attitudes in that regard are, in large part if not entirely, what make me (personally) say that the state has no right to murder anyone under any circumstances, whether inside or outside of its borders.

There has been fire in the forests between Manisa and Izmir for 5 days. And according to first impressions, the reason of this is "sabotage". As you all know forests belong to not only to human being but for all kind of lives. I have a question : Considering millions, maybe more, of lives being killed in fire, what would your decision be about the saboteurs if you are an administrator ??

Well, I respect your opinions, Saposcat. Everyone has his / her own ideas about life/death et cetera. Killing is no ordinary crime and thus demands no ordinary punishment in my opinion.

There has been fire in the forests between Manisa and Izmir for 5 days. And according to first impressions, the reason of this is "sabotage". As you all know forests belong to not only to human being but for all kind of lives. I have a question : Considering millions, maybe more, of lives being killed in fire, what would your decision be about the saboteurs if you are an administrator ??

As a person who lives in Manisa and feels the pain of this inhumane actions my answer is absolutely YES.Furthermore they must be executed publicly to teach a lesson...

And I have something to say about this subject : They will fire one and we will bed two

There has been fire in the forests between Manisa and Izmir for 5 days. And according to first impressions, the reason of this is "sabotage". As you all know forests belong to not only to human being but for all kind of lives. I have a question : Considering millions, maybe more, of lives being killed in fire, what would your decision be about the saboteurs if you are an administrator ??

I suppose, given the way the administrative system is at present, my gut reaction is to say that I would imprison them.

As a person who lives in Manisa and feels the pain of this inhumane actions my answer is absolutely YES.Furthermore they must be executed publicly to teach a lesson...

So, how many people have been killed in these fires so far?

Suppose a near relatives of yours , your brother, sister etc..(perish the thought) has been exposed to torture and rape resulting in total massacre. Honestly, would you again stand against execution?

So, how many people have been killed in these fires so far?

Millions of people's rights were killed and maybe their children's...

and why dont you try to show your sympathy to the victims as well :(

Suppose a near relatives of yours , your brother, sister etc..(perish the thought) has been exposed to torture and rape resulting in total massacre. Honestly, would you again stand against execution?

Of course, speaking in the hypothetical about that sort of situation is always tricky, since passions can tend to overrule ideas in the moment. But I would like to think that yes, I would stand against it. It would be likely that the criminal in that case has a family and friends and loved ones as well, and I would hopefully see no need to compound the suffering by having him or her killed.

Suppose a near relatives of yours , your brother, sister etc..(perish the thought) has been exposed to torture and rape resulting in total massacre. Honestly, would you again stand against execution?

Everybody must set against that.Torture cant be supported,I think..

Millions of people's rights were killed and maybe their children's...

and why dont you try to show your sympathy to the victims as well :(

First, please be aware that my asking the question I did is in no way an expression of support for the deed, nor should it be taken as a lack of sympathy. I, too, get angry and upset about such things, and feel terrible for those who suffered and are suffering.

I simply do not think that the perpetrators—if there are any, and whoever they may be—should be killed for their actions. That is my opinion.

Of course, speaking in the hypothetical about that sort of situation is always tricky, since passions can tend to overrule ideas in the moment. But I would like to think that yes, I would stand against it. It would be likely that the criminal in that case has a family and friends and loved ones as well, and I would hopefully see no need to compound the suffering by having him or her killed.

In all probability, such criminals commit the similar crimes again. Being discharged from the prison after a long term of sentence, repetition of crime is inevitable for those bloodthirsty criminals. (BTW I'm still on the fence)

In all probability, such criminals commit the similar crimes again. Being discharged from the prison after a long term of sentence, repetition of crime is inevitable for those bloodthirsty criminals. (BTW I'm still on the fence)

My own opinion on why this sort of recidivism happens in many, though not all, cases is simply that prison is effectively the University of Crime. If you want to learn how to commit crimes, and continue committing them, prison is generally the best place to learn.

It seems to me that it is society and the prison system that need to be changed, above all, in order to try and prevent this sort of thing.

Just to add a bit of an ancillary yet potentially interesting (if dangerous) question to this argument: if a person who cruelly kills another person should be killed, then should a person who cruelly kills an animal also be killed? Why or why not?

My own opinion on why this sort of recidivism happens in many, though not all, cases is simply that prison is effectively the University of Crime. If you want to learn how to commit crimes, and continue committing them, prison is generally the best place to learn.

It seems to me that it is society and the prison system that need to be changed, above all, in order to try and prevent this sort of thing.

But this time, the prison conditions for criminals starts another discussion. Must they serve their sentence in equal conditions just like those of the innocent people outside the prisons. If your answer is yes, then another question arises; doesn't it encourage the potential criminals?

I can't bring myself to be that composed. We aren't speaking of innocent people. They are bloody-handed murderers. The executions should be broadcast live across the country to deter potential criminals.

I saw that you continued the argument when I was out, but unfortunately I realised that you haven't talked about the most important disadvantage of the capital punishment: It is irretrievable. There could be any mistake which is made by the Judge or the Jury. In this case what will you do?

But this time, the prison conditions for criminals starts another discussion. Must they serve their sentence in equal conditions just like those of the innocent people outside the prisons. If your answeris yes, then another question arises; doesn't it encourage the potential criminals?

Luckily then (;)), my answer is no, they shouldn't serve their sentence in equal conditions to those outside the prison walls.

The executions should be broadcast live across the country to deter potential criminals.

He he, :) An awesome fantasy!

I saw that you continued the argument when I was out, but unfortunately I realised that you haven't talked about the most important disadvantage of the capital punishment: It is irretrievable. There could be any mistake which is made by the Judge or the Jury. In this case what will you do?

Interesting point. There are people who served years of sentence for crimes they did not commit. The Shawshank Redemption" adeptly portrays this.

He he, :) An awesome fantasy!

Personally, I would use the word "gruesome" and not "awesome", but to each their own.

There are people who served years of sentence for crimes they did not commit.

There are also, of course, people who have been killed for crimes they did not commit.

There are also, of course, people who have been killed for crimes they did not commit.

We hope such mistakes will not happen in the future, but we know they do, but it is not enough to make us stand against the death sentence on its own.

We hope such mistakes will not happen in the future, but we know they do, but it is not enough to make us stand against the death sentence.

Who is the "we" whom you are representing here?

"Mistake" seems like a bit of a light word, but so it goes.

We hope such mistakes will not happen in the future, but we know they do, but it is not enough to make us stand against the death sentence.

I think it is excessively enough sir. I agree with the idea that capital punishment decrease the crime rate but this side of the balance is less weigh than the other side.

Who is the "we" whom you are representing here?

the people who are for the death penalty. here in this forum it is me and I don't know who else :) am I alone in this?

Who is the "we" whom you are representing here?

Silent majority??

I can't bring myself to be that composed. We aren't speaking of innocent people. They are bloody-handed murderers. The executions should be broadcast live across the country to deter potential criminals.

!!!
Could you please give some details about your judical and philosophical proficiency that could calculate the life-death case of other people and criteria of their being penalized? To clarify the notion of "innocence" have you read any books or articles regarding the issue involved? What is innocence, or what is not?

Your offer to broadcast of the executions is something that reminds me some sights of medieval ages!

?

Silent majority??

Unfortunately (I say that because I'm on the opposing side, of course), I think that is probably the case.

Crime is inherent to the man. "Lord of the flies" was my Dissertation Topic at University, and I learnt from that that whereever you go and at whatever age you are, even on a remote island being not exposed to the decadent society, you are bound to commit crime. Man is born criminal. What a pity to think I am too :(

!!!
Could you please give some details about your judical and philosophical proficiency that could calculate the life-death case of other people and criteria of their being penalized? To clarify the notion of "innocence" have you read any books or articles regarding the issue involved? What is innocence, or what is not?

Your offer to broadcast of the executions is something that reminds me some sights of medieval ages!

?

Well, I knew this medieval thing would come up somewhere. as far as I know, we haven't handled the issue on a religious basis so far. then did America remind you of medieval ages when she executed Saddam?

Crime is inherent to the man. "Lord of the flies" was my Dissertation Topic at University, and I learnt from that that whereever you go and at whatever age you are, even on a remote island being not exposed to the decadent society, you are bound to commit crime. Man is born criminal. What a pity to think I am too :(

As I've mentioned before, there's that wonderful saying of Pedro Calderón de la Barca:

... pues el delito mayor
del hombre es haber nacido ...

... for the greatest crime
of man is to have been born ...

To my biased mind, that would seem to support not having capital punishment ... but that's just me.

then did America remind you of medieval ages when she executed Saddam?

She did me.

Crime is inherent to the man. "Lord of the flies" was my Dissertation Topic at University, and I learnt from that that whereever you go and at whatever age you are, even on a remote island being not exposed to the decadent society, you are bound to commit crime. Man is born criminal. What a pity to think I am too :(

Yes and no. Not all people have tendency towards criminal acts. I do not agree man is born criminal. Man is born innocent, but the social, economical, educational, cultural... atmosphere he/she lives in plays a crucial role in his/her future acts.

Yes and no. Not all people have tendency towards criminal acts. I do not agree man is born criminal. Man is born innocent, but the social, economical, educational, cultural... atmosphere he/she lives in plays a crucial role in his/her future acts.

I think so...

She did me.

Me, too.

The death penalty has a long history of polarising views and I think, in many ways, that reflects the fact that there are also a lot of people who are focusing on the crimes that society is having to face here and they're looking at the death penalty as a possible solution, whether it's drug trafficking or violent murder and so on. And I think what those people need to be aware of is the death penalty hasn't been shown to be effective. In study after study around the world, we have no evidence that it provides societies with the sort of protection they're looking for. If you're looking for a drastic penalty to solve these crime problems, the death penalty is not the answer. And, of course, it is a violation of some of the most basic human rights.

Another question comes. Why do people kill each other in warfare and put that action on a pedestal, while they favour banning death penalty in their country. Is killing an intruder to your country in warfare more justifiable than killing a a rapist or a murder?

Yes and no. Not all people have tendency towards criminal acts. I do not agree man is born criminal. Man is born innocent, but the social, economical, educational, cultural... atmosphere he/she lives in plays a crucial role in his/her future acts.

So, why aren't we looking for the solution by solving these kind of issues instead of firstly thinking "capital punishment"?

Another question comes.

They just keep on comin'! (No one's dared to touch my one about animal killers above yet, I see.)

Why do people kill each other in warfare and put that action on a pedestal, while they favour banning death penalty in their country.

I don't really understand why myself, but my guess is that it's got something to do with nationalism and/or jingoism.

Is killing and intruder to your country in warfare more justifiable than killing a rapist or a murder?

In my view—as if y'all haven't guessed already—neither one of them is particularly justifiable.

So, why aren't we looking for the solution by solving these kind of issues instead of firstly thinking "capital punishment"?

Well, actually that's point. We tend to ignore the process and evaluate the result like ÖSYM.

but I believe if all the other factors were bettered, still some people would commit crime. and we would need this punishment as a deterrent.

We tend to ignore the process and evaluate the result like ÖSYM.

:) Good analogy!

In my view—as if y'all haven't guessed already—neither one of them is particularly justifiable.

Nay, it ain't I guessed not, I scent a bit of pacifist there. You could make yourself clear enough, on behalf of me at least:)

Cheers!

I scent a bit of pacifist there.

You've got a good nose.

Well, actually that's point. We tend to ignore the process and evaluate the result like ÖSYM.

but I believe if all the other factors were bettered, still some people would commit crime. and we would need this punishment as a deterrent.

This comment is contradictory to the one below



Yes and no. Not all people have tendency towards criminal acts. I do not agree man is born criminal. Man is born innocent, but the social, economical, educational, cultural... atmosphere he/she lives in plays a crucial role in his/her future acts. .

Well, actually that's point. We tend to ignore the process and evaluate the result like ÖSYM.

but I believe if all the other factors were bettered, still some people would commit crime. and we would need this punishment as a deterrent.

this an absolute condition and tends to go into religious realm; and at this point I can not step ahead even one more. Sorry:)

tends to go into religious realm; and at this point I can not step ahead even one more. Sorry:)

Too bad. Interfaith discussions can be extremely stimulating.

Just to add a bit of an ancillary yet potentially interesting (if dangerous) question to this argument: if a person who cruelly kills another person should be killed, then should a person who cruelly kills an animal also be killed? Why or why not?

That reminds me of people who skin animals alive! I will not give the link as it is unbearable.
Yes, they should be executed too.

Yes, they should be executed too.

I'm glad to see that you are consistent. That is admirable.

this an absolute condition and tends to go into religious realm; and at this point I can not step ahead even one more. Sorry:)

No, just relax, I like the way Recephoca discusses. He has an immense tolerance and patience as far as I know.(Isn't it so RecepHoca?:)

This comment is contradictory to the one below

well, I mean you cannot prevent crime one hundred percent. this is what I mean.

Too bad. Interfaith discussions can be extremely stimulating.

Indeed it is. Interfaith dialogue refer to cooperative and positive interaction between people of different religious traditions, yet on the issue in question if one side said that [even] all the other factors were bettered we would [still] need this punishment as a deterrent, then this would mean that nothing from now on in the discussion could add something extra to my opinions. So on this absolute condition your claims or opinions go around a vicious circle

:)

No, just relax, I like the way Recephoca discusses. He has an immense tolerance and patience as far as I know.(Isn't it so RecepHoca?:)

Well, though I am a religious man, I try to pay utmost attention not to turn the subject into a religious one because I know such discussions bring harm rather than benefit.

such discussions bring harm rather than benefit.

I don't think they by any means have to ... but unfortunately, people and their passions being the way they are, it does often end up that way.

Well, though I am a religious man, I try to pay utmost attention not to turn the subject into a religious one because I know such discussions bring harm rather than benefit.

As you may well guess, I am not religious, but I have respect for you and the way you approach to people. You talk through your mouth not through.....like some bigots do.

I've patiently read all the sentences. Exactly a provocative topic, but unfortunately only Admin Board seem to say something, if we overlook Aksun's contributions.

I personally couldn't execute anybody, but I believe that a killer deserves to be killed. It does not mean that he/she has to be killed. I believe in eye for an eye, a motto which declares the highest probable response. Needless to say, forgiveness shows how virtous we are.

But a capital punishment, which can be justified only for very limited situations, is not merely thought as a response or a repayment of what was done, it is also a relief and a reduction of pain for the victim's fellows. The society mostly thinks the justice can only be carried out in that way. If we just abolish an application before the people develop a different thought or approach to the situation, we directly cause them to lose their sense of justice. They won't be for the law any more, unless an enforcer do stand nearby. "Who cares the law; it just works for the criminals".

No, I am not a "hang one of them, and see how silent they'll become" man. But punishments are not just responses, they are discouragements, reduction of pains, control mechanisms, temporary measures etc. In this darkness and uncertainty, we have to peer out more carefully.

All I can say: A murderer deserves to be killed, but forgiveness will show what we really are.