Death Penalty

Is it moral?

Now, see MJ. You go and make the question complicated. There are probably only certain instances where it is "moral", however our law does state that killing is Illegal..

Basically, Moral is really being able to tell the difference between right and wrong, now as it being equal, the death penalty could be equal if the person(s) deliberately took the life of another without a doubt 1st degree murder/homicide.

This really is a complicated question, but my opinion is being against the death penalty basically because it's saying well "Killing is WRONG".. and yet, we won't hesitate to stick the needle into somebody.

Well, what is "moral" is relative to one person or another. There is no universal morality.

So, in my opinion, I'm against the death penalty, for the same reason as D3v. I don't think that killing someone to teach the lesson that you shouldn't kill other people makes a whole lot of sense. I think there are better ways to go about just about any situation other than killing someone. I can't think of anything that I think the punishment for should be death.

However, if someone is threatening the life/lives of another person or multiple people, I'm not against using lethal force if necessary, but I think that's bordering on another topic.

Well, what is "moral" is relative to one person or another. There is no universal morality.

It could be argued that transcendental moral facts exist. Not that I would argue it, but just saying.

However, if someone is threatening the life/lives of another person or multiple people, I'm not against using lethal force if necessary, but I think that's bordering on another topic.

Just to clarify for others, I don't mean lethal force in the face of imminent danger. By death penalty, I mean an execution.

It could be argued that transcendental moral facts exist. Not that I would argue it, but just saying.

Oh it most definately can. It's an argument that's been going on for ~3000 years now, probably longer. I'm up for debating it in another thread, but this thread will go way off topic if we get into that

It could be argued that transcendental moral facts exist. Not that I would argue it, but just saying. Just to clarify for others, I don't mean lethal force in the face of imminent danger. By death penalty, I mean an execution.

I think life in Prison is just as effective, if NOT worse, most people that do multiple killings are at the end up their lifespan anyways, mentally atleast... so by killing somebody I'm going to stand by the statement that it isn't justifiable to kill somebody for killing somebody, it's just hypocritical... and Immoral.

But you voted opposite of what you're saying.

Morally, no, I don't believe there are cases where it's moral. Justified, however, that all depends on personal beliefs. I believe there are rare cases where it's justified...id est mass murderers, child rapists and such.

However, that still doesn't mean it's moral, even to a person who may find it justified.

Personally, I don't believe that Morality and Justification should be paired with each other to begin with.

Like Jessifer said, it all depends on your viewpoint of what is moral and unmoral.

But in some cases, it is very justified. This is a true story: A postal worker had been fed up with his job, life, etc and decided to take it out on people that were of a different race, color than him. He went on a killing spree in his truck shooting and killing people that were minding their own business, ie: a Korean grocery store clerk, a couple of black guys walking down the road, etc etc.

This guy definitely deserved the death penalty. If you think you're that high and mighty that you can make the ultimate decision and take somebody's life, really the ONLY thing a person has, you deserve the same upon you. An eye for an eye.

Whether that is justified is in fact an opinion.

By your logic, you should deserve the death penalty because "you think you're that high and mighty that you can make the ultimate decision and take somebody's life."

By your logic, you should deserve the death penalty because "you think you're that high and mighty that you can make the ultimate decision and take somebody's life."

I thought the same thing.

Umm.. no? I would never take somebody's life, therefore excluding me from the death penalty. I wouldn't be pulling the switch, either. I said an eye for an eye.

You think it's alright for you to make that decision, though.

There are times where morality has to take a backseat, hence the phrase "necessary evil".

There are people who cannot be rehabilitated, and their continued existence is a threat to others.

There are times where morality has to take a backseat, hence the phrase "necessary evil". There are people who cannot be rehabilitated, and their continued existence is a threat to others.

I can not endorse the idea that the ends justify the means, especially in this case. Also, I don't see how someone's continued existence in a jail cell makes him a threat to society.

I can not endorse the idea that the ends justify the means, especially in this case. Also, I don't see how someone's continued existence in a jail cell makes him a threat to society.

Well, there are different cases.

If they're in solitary confinement, they're a danger to themselves (sometimes), but definitely others. Someone who is such a danger is 100% wasting society's resources by keeping them away from us. These persons are typically not able to be rehabilitated (no honest statistics to back this statement up, it was something I read long ago).

In my opinion, if you kill another human being in cold blood, you have forfeited your right to govern your own life once you're caught.

Well, there are different cases. If they're in solitary confinement, they're a danger to themselves (sometimes), but definitely others. Someone who is such a danger is 100% wasting society's resources by keeping them away from us. These persons are typically not able to be rehabilitated (no honest statistics to back this statement up, it was something I read long ago).

I think that a human life, no matter how depraved, is at least worthy of mere existence. If a marginal fraction of society's resources need to go towards his continued existence, I think it's a cost that's more than justified.

Also, I think the evidence suggests a different motive for the death penalty. I think it's a facade that the death penalty is in place to protect society. There is no evidence that I have seen that the death penalty acts as a deterrent, or that there are lower rates of murder in states that have imposed a death penalty.

Furthermore, we don't kill people for protection. We kill people so we feel that we have the right to pass moral judgment on them. For instance, he who is declared mentally insane, with no hope of rehabilitation, is allowed to live, albeit in a mental facility. He has no hope, as far as we know, to be rehabilitated. He is more of a danger to society on the outside than a mentally competent person who let his emotions get the better of him. Yet he's kept alive.

Furthermore, we don't kill people for protection. We kill people so we feel that we have the right to pass moral judgment on them. For instance, he who is declared mentally insane, with no hope of rehabilitation, is allowed to live, albeit in a mental facility. He has no hope, as far as we know, to be rehabilitated. He is more of a danger to society on the outside than a mentally competent person who let his emotions get the better of him. Yet he's kept alive.

Warfare is a perfect example of how we kill people for protection, especially in defense. Your mental facility conjecture isn't quite accurate as it doesn't suggest that the insane person had ended another's life. I also would believe in a lesser punishment for a 'crime of passion' as you describe instead of a first-degree murder, but this can be easily exploited.

I also am a believer in that a person should have the right to determine the time and manner of their death, if they so choose. I suppose I'm a little more cavalier regarding human life than others.

In my opinion, if you kill another human being in cold blood, you have forfeited your right to govern your own life once you're caught.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

+1 for that.

Repeat offenders are a danger and burden to society and should be executed. I feel as though you're a murderer, a rapist, a pedaphile, or any number of heinous crimes like that then execution should be an option.