Do you think it is ok to fatally harm someone because they are bad or killed someone?

[Kgal]

Some would rather be dead and should we not oblige them? Killing someone because they killed someone else is hypocritical of course, but locking some crazed minds up in a room by themselves, or even with people, is worse than death for them, so what about humanity?

Yes we should oblige them. In a weird way I think of it as the same as a Reboot.

But locking them up? It might be inhumane....it might not be.... How could you determine that if you cannot put your Self into their mind?

These are all case by case kinds of scenarios in my mind. We already lock the crazed minds up into mental institutions and they are crowded to the max. It's a horrible situation no matter which way one looks at it.

I look at the individuals who need to be isolated from society and I see how society created them in the first place. It's a vicious circle and it shows me how short sighted we are.

 

[Kgal]

I agree with everything @JGirl said.

I would rather have people put to work than just punishing or killing them for the sake of punishing them, without any real benefit to the rest of society. Hurting people except in self defense is wrong, and once murderers are contained, the defense is taken care of.



That is interesting. I did not know that suicide was prohibited. I think that it should be allowed -- after all, it just means less tax dollars in supporting them. It's bizarre that the "forcing them to live out their sentence sentiment" would override the benefit of that. I wonder why.

Part of the reason - I think - is the "righteous attitude" that the inmate deserves his punishment and should be forced to fulfill the sentence. Somehow people think the punishment should fit the crime - right? How they got to this perspective is beyond my ken.

I remember arguing vehemently with my father a long time ago about capital punishment and how it was wrong. HE thought that by killing a man for his crime - it would deter others from doing the same crime. Perhaps people think the same way about being locked up for 15 years without freedom. It turns out - it does not deter crime.

Another part of the reasoning as to why no suicide is allowed is due to Money. In the US - most of the large prisons are run by corporations. Imagine a world where the corporations put money in the pockets of lawmakers - and then the lawmakers make up more laws for people to break. Imagine a situation where it is decided that young males of color are too abundant in society with nothing to do. So the lawmakers pass laws that directly affect those young men. They make it a crime to smoke crack for example - and then they make it where you spend years and years in a prison for doing it. The cops sweep up the young males of color - put them in prison - and the corporations make $21,000/year while those young men rot in jail. While at the same time - if a person was caught doing cocaine - the penalty was minimum.

It's interesting because crack is a just a poor man's form of cocaine. It's essentially the same drug - right?

So the rich were left alone while the poor were jailed. And in the meantime the working class is funding all of this with their taxes.

See....you have to understand that corporations don't care if the middle class falls apart whiling paying taxes which end up going to them. They don't care where the money comes from... Just as long as they have it.

This was finally challenged in court a few years back and many young men were freed when laws were forced to be changed.

The US is a cruel arrogant nation.

 

[Gaze]

Although I'm not saying it's a cure all but I agree with those who said, labor should be an option. I am not sure how being in prison with other dangerous inmates or being in solitary confinement benefits the rehabilitation of a criminal, deters them from crime, or helps society feel better about their preparedness for the outside world just in case they have to return to it someday.

 

[ChadKarding]

killing in defense of self or family is the only way i can see it as being justifiable.
it's never ok. just justifiable.

This is pretty much my opinion on the subject.

 

[Rcs6r]

This is something a majority should vote on. Like in Texas it's considered fine but the here in northeast it's not really. Personally.... I don't even have an answer for this. I don't know if it is okay or not. Just leave me out of it......

 

[Rferraris]

Yes it's ok to kill someone. What deserves death, not sure. Killing something else deserves death. Causing great harm to others might deserve death. But I'm INFJ so pretty extreme in my judging. Might want to ask some other type of you're looking for a different answer.

 

[ZcM4xzkjgzCjytBc]

Only I could make a correct decision on this.

 

[j654dgj7]

There is a common belief in our culture that killing people because they're bad or because they've killed someone is acceptable and justifiable.

I hate to rehash old played out arguments, but this one will forever ring true to me: When society kills a person, it justifies the method as a way of solving an issue. When the state kills a person, it does it on behalf of every citizen of the country, and it makes every member of the country a killer, in a very real sense. If you want to bring down violent crimes, ceasing to be violent yourself is a very useful resource.

Many of these reasons are "justified" according to various views:

1) Self defense (protect self or others)

How are you not safe when the murderer becomes incarcerated? Killing the person right away would only feed your emptiness after immediate loss, it won't make it go away.

2) punishment of crimes against humanity

Punishing crimes against humanity via a crime against humanity is baffling to me.

3) potential to harm (although that reason may be questionable)

Questionable to me too. How much harm can one person do while in a box surrounded by bars?

Look, I think murderers and criminals in the eyes of society should be thrown in jail for as long as they are dangerous. No question about it on my end. But when you kill that person, you have taken a persons life. It should go against every bone in your body as the "good guy" in society. Killing is for desperate people, who have no means to express punishment in a better way. Not for society as a whole!

 

[Tin Man]

[MENTION=1451]Billy[/MENTION] There is no way around it if we are to do anything about it. Any sort of intervention is taking
away freedom.

Whatever the motive is, there is death involved. Unless they explicitly ask to be executed, we are obligated to keep them alive so they have a chance to sort things out in their head.

How can someone who rapes and kills little children, a person who is unrepentant and without a single ounce of remorse sort things out in their heads. It is possible, we will one day have the technology to stem these behaviours in people and have them become productive members of society. Until that day however, death is the only way to insure they harm no one else.

 

[j654dgj7]

It is possible, we will one day have the technology to stem these behaviours in people and have them become productive members of society. Until that day however, death is the only way to insure they harm no one else.

Unless you just, you know, keep them in jail. Why the need to kill them?

 

[Tin Man]

Unless you just, you know, keep them in jail. Why the need to kill them?

First of all, it's quite a large drain on society. Secondly, even in jail those type of people can cause harm. I watched a documentary where they were discussing the most violent inmates. One had just murdered a fellow prisoner and another had attacked and badly hurt a guard.

 

[j654dgj7]

First of all, it's quite a large drain on society.

And keeping people for 15-20 years on death row while the investigations go isn't?

Secondly, even in jail those type of people can cause harm. I watched a documentary where they were discussing the most violent inmates. One had just murdered a fellow prisoner and another had attacked and badly hurt a guard.

Point taken, but that problem can be fixed internally in the prison system by either putting dangerous inmates in solitary confinement, or simply cracking down more often and consistently when they aren't following the rules.

I just still don't see the need for a state mandated killing. Assholiness of the criminals considered.

 

[Tin Man]

And keeping people for 15-20 years on death row while the investigations go isn't?

I believe that the death penalty should only be used in dire circumstances. I'm talking about people who's guilt is obvious, who say they enjoy the killing and will do so again. You don't need to spend 20 years investigating Ted Bundy to see if he really did kill all those people.

Point taken, but that problem can be fixed internally in the prison system by either putting dangerous inmates in solitary confinement, or simply cracking down more often and consistently when they aren't following the rules.

I just still don't see the need for a state mandated killing. Assholiness of the criminals considered.

People are flawed, until the prison system is run by machines, there will be mistakes.

Putting prisoners in solitary confinement for the rest of their life is incredibly cruel. There are numerous articles that detail how inmates can undergo varying psychosis while in that state. Many have tried to kill themselves.

 

[j654dgj7]

People are flawed, until the prison system is run by machines, there will be mistakes.

I don't believe that to be the case. A lot of prisons have their sh*t together. It's just a matter of sorting out the ones that take in the worst inmates.

Putting prisoners in solitary confinement for the rest of their life is incredibly cruel. There are numerous articles that detail how inmates can undergo varying psychosis while in that state. Many have tried to kill themselves.

1) Agreed, putting people in solitary confinement for long stretches of time is incredibly cruel, and I'm not advocating it. But short term usage can be beneficial, as a means of punishment within the prison walls.

2) Killing people isn't cruel?

 

[Kmal]

How can someone who rapes and kills little children, a person who is unrepentant and without a single ounce of remorse sort things out in their heads. It is possible, we will one day have the technology to stem these behaviours in people and have them become productive members of society. Until that day however, death is the only way to insure they harm no one else.

We should give them the chance. Killing them because they killed someone else is exacerbating the problem and making killing 'alright' if someone deserves it, like the killer thinks the victim does. Rather, they should stay alive and wallow in it or come to terms with it. They may never be fully integrated into society again, but damnit they will be useful to society in one way or another through community help programs. If they are completely uncooperative then we will both wait each other out, him draining our resources in solitary confinement and us waiting for him to be cooperative or elect to be executed. The vast majority of people arent that fucking crazy, they will be slowly be reintegrated into society through community help programs and develop some compassion towards their fellow humans.

What is the problem here? The offenders own motives of punishment; and are we to reinforce that? We have power and we should show mercy. If they are to be destroyed, let them destroy themselves through noncooperation and hate rather than us killing again in hate. Their life is no less valuable than yours, but they (include exceptions) can correct their human impact if given the chance.

 

[Billy]

How can someone who rapes and kills little children, a person who is unrepentant and without a single ounce of remorse sort things out in their heads. It is possible, we will one day have the technology to stem these behaviours in people and have them become productive members of society. Until that day however, death is the only way to insure they harm no one else.

Not the "only" way.

 

[Tin Man]

Not the "only" way.

All right then. Suggest another method that would cause less pain, less time and less money.

We should give them the chance. Killing them because they killed someone else is exacerbating the problem and making killing 'alright' if someone deserves it, like the killer thinks the victim does. Rather, they should stay alive and wallow in it or come to terms with it. They may never be fully integrated into society again, but damnit they will be useful to society in one way or another through community help programs. If they are completely uncooperative then we will both wait each other out, him draining our resources in solitary confinement and us waiting for him to be cooperative or elect to be executed. The vast majority of people arent that fucking crazy, they will be slowly be reintegrated into society through community help programs and develop some compassion towards their fellow humans.

What is the problem here? The offenders own motives of punishment; and are we to reinforce that? We have power and we should show mercy. If they are to be destroyed, let them destroy themselves through noncooperation and hate rather than us killing again in hate. Their life is no less valuable than yours, but they (include exceptions) can correct their human impact if given the chance.

I agree, the vast majority of killers can be rehabilitated. I'm not talking about your regular murderer. A man or women who's in a bad place in life, needed money and ended a person's life by mistake. A person who's addicted to heroin and will do anything to get their next fix or a man who killed his wife in jealous rage can be reintegrated into society. Prisons are the worst place those people should be. They belong with psychiatrists and counsellors, in clinics coming to terms with what they've done.. I talking about the kinds of people who feel no regret over killing an innocent. Those like Ted Bundy and Charles Mansion are incapable of empathizing with another. I can't say for certain that there's no way to help them but it's foolish to let them live.

We wouldn't be killing out of hate, their deaths wouldn't be an act of retribution. It would be one of logic, even sympathy.

I don't believe that to be the case. A lot of prisons have their sh*t together. It's just a matter of sorting out the ones that take in the worst inmates.



1) Agreed, putting people in solitary confinement for long stretches of time is incredibly cruel, and I'm not advocating it. But short term usage can be beneficial, as a means of punishment within the prison walls.

2) Killing people isn't cruel?

Is it worth taking the risk. Many inmates would have a better chance with the most violent elements removed. Prison guards are also putting their lives on the line when these people are around. Is it better to spare our conscience and let a mass murderer live when it could cause the death of a guard.

1) Even short term solitary confinement can be damaging. There have studies which have shown that even three days in that atmosphere can be very traumatic.

2)It's far less cruel than keeping them locked up in a cell for the rest of their lives

 

[CindyLou]

I think that I would be able to get around the sensitivity issue by just making sure they know its going to be coming and preparing them in the years before hand whats to come. I would especially make any of my daughters do this...I wrote this out on FB too and my sister was like "omg what about the girls?! my daughter would be so upset" I almost wanted to be like well that's because you raised her for weakness and cowardice. Which is harsh, but not untrue. I am and have always been a very sensitive person, which is why I think shit like this up. I remember as a kid feeling strange about wondering where the meat was coming from, I researched it and watched all the videos on slaughter houses etc and it really fucked with my head, especially the sick horrible industrialized process of forcing these animals through valleys of steel and misery... Over time I came to accept death and understood that life feeds on life, it never bothered me, but it DID bother me being separated from the process. So I befriended a hunter (family friend) and made him take me deer hunting and I killed my 1st deer. And I cried for what I had done, but that's where I am sensitive, I was willing to accept that pain for what I have done and wore it on my soul like a badge in honor of the deer I had killed. It was the least I could do, accept that pain and guilt for my actions. It made me respect and accept reality for what it is. I think it was a very important lesson. I dont pretend that death is sterile and try to hide from it, its all around us, I embrace it, its the only sure fire way to exist in this world in an honest fashion IMO. We are raising generations of weaklings who are scared to hell of death, we insulate our children with pink and blue fuzzy stuffed animals and feed them meat that doesnt look like it was once alive... for christs sake have you ever seen how they make a chicken mcnugget at mcdonalds? The entire process is so revolting I will never eat that shit again. I dont believe telling them and letting them watch is enough... if animals are good enough for us to eat, then we should be good enough to get our hands dirty. Sensitive or not.

You make a great point, and I'm not even going to try to tell you that you're wrong or how to raise your kids. My thinking was your more sensitive kid might resent you because he/she was forced against his/her will to learn that before he/she was ready as I think being forced by a parent to take an animal's life (instead of wanting to do it on your own). Kids don't process things like adults to and resentment sometimes doesn't stay were it's supposed to.

I do think the lesson itself is great and most parents don't care about raising their kids into an adult with character, they worry more about grades and sports and don't even touch on decency, ethics, and character. I can already tell you'd make a great father so I won't attempt to change your thinking. If the father of my daughter said that to me, I would probably be swayed to agree depending on her age.

 

[Reon]

I did not read all of the posts in this thread but I'd like to pitch a few points

- The death penalty is ultimately more expensive than keeping a person alive, in prison. The death penalty, with appeals included, is costly because of court costs for the state, media exploitation, and various things.

- Prison is a penance and most individuals do not care if a person is cured. Prison as a place for a cure is a long lost idea. Prison should be a place of rehabilitation but it is not. Once someone goes to prison, you're a prisoner for the rest of your life (loss the right to vote, reduced job opportunities).

- Solitary is brain changing and personality changing.

I personally am not against the death penalty. I feel that solitary is ultimately brain changing and I also feel that the individuals in prison also have a right to some form of safety which is often lackluster due to innately violent criminals that were taught by society (to be full of rage and hate) and then disregarded into jail. Personally, I'd like to see a more intense rehabilitation program for prisons before I see the increase in the death penalty but, with that being said, I also feel that if a prison is consistently endangering the lives of prison guards and other prison inmates, I'm not against killing that individual. Unless someone was quantifiable a mass killer, without a doubt in science and law, I would not assert that people should go INTO prison with a death penalty hanging over their head but they can earn it from repeated attacks and killings in prison. I think sticking someone into solitary can make an individual quite a bit worse than what they went in with. Ultimately, it's not a perfect world.

 

[Rferraris]

People who argue against death confuse me. Regardless of what in terms on money it costs. Who cares really. The point is they die, are gotten rid of, forgotten. That's what I hope for.
Might not close a hole. But more peaceful knowing they aren't breathing.
Just the way I feel about it.