recently, in a blog by sean renaud, he asked whether there are some crimes that merit the death penalty. that got me musing on my own views re: capital punishment, and consequently, this installment in the series.
i have mixed feelings about capital punishment. the vast majority of people i know either support or oppose it, but me, i’m sorta on the fence. i said in a comment to sean’s blog that on principle i oppose capital punishment, and yet i’m still on the fence so i wanted to take this opportunity to sort through my feelings about the matter.
capital punishment is the most severe punishment any court of law can mete out. in the US, capital punishment is legal but it’s dependent upon the citizens of each state to determine whether or not it’s a power they wish for the courts to possess.
in general terms, criminal sentences are given in order to punish the offender. offenders are incarcerated in order to punish. beginning in the late 19th century societies have increasingly elected to emphasize rehabilitation so that when a criminal’s sentence is served, he or she can rejoin society, get a job, etc.
in the US, federal law permits the death penalty for one crime: treason. various state laws will also allow capital punishment for murder. in this respect, we are largely alone among developed nations: certainly, the matter is a constant source of friction with the EU specifically.
the usual arguments pro capital punishment w/ which i am familiar generally are: 1) it is the ultimate punishment and some crimes are so terrible that taking that person’s life is completely warranted and 2) there is no chance the criminal will ever re-offend.
the usual arguments con capital punishment w/ which i am familiar generally are: 1) the power for a government to kill its citizens is philosophically not a power that we should be interested in granting it, 2) in cases where the accused is wrongly convicted, there is no way to make amends or restitution , and 3) the way in which US courts hand down the death penalty appears to skew disproportionately against minorities as many studies seem to illustrate.
i had the opportunity to study capital punishment in a philosophy class in college. one of the interesting things we learned in that course was that in general, capital punishment appears to have no value as a deterrent: it just means that a prospective murderer will plan out how to get away. if you were planning a murder, you would be foolish not to work out ways in which you could get away with it. indeed, planning “the perfect crime” is a subject that has interested many people strictly as an intellectual exercise, even spawning several films over the years. this is why i do not list deterrence of other crimes as a pro argument for capital punishment: it doesn’t appear to work.
the disproportionate sentencing against minorities is a problem in how we might try to use the tool but doesn’t speak to whether the idea itself is any good: IMHO, it just means that our current processes are not working properly.
i happen to agree that certain crimes are so terrible that taking the offender’s life is warranted, and it’s pretty clear someone who’s been executed won’t ever break the law again.
having said that: i keep coming back to the fact that if the system gets it wrong and convicts someone wrongfully, there’s absolutely nothing that can be done to set this right. we know that with new investigative tools (e.g., DNA evidence), convictions can be overturned, and a number were..
ultimately this is the reason to which i keep returning against capital punishment, and it is always in conflict w/ my belief that in cases like jeffrey dahmer or jesse timmendequas, the death penalty should be an option available to a judge. generally speaking, my libertarian impulse is to restrict the power of the government when there’s any doubt. yet at the same time, we pay taxes to government in exchange for services they provide, chief among them being to keep us safe.
i’m still on the fence about the death penalty. philosophically, the removal of people from society is for me a good thing, but for me it’s completely balanced by the risk of punishing the wrong person. while columnist marilyn vos savant, who has among the highest IQs ever tested* reluctantly concludes that having a death penalty is a less bad stance because the removal of some people is sadly worth the occasional wrongful conviction, i’m not as certain. what about you?
so what’s your feeling about capital punishment, pro or con? or are you on the fence like i am? what are your reasons for your stance? if you’re religious, how does that play a role in your stance, if at all? comment and let me know.
ed
*yes, i’m aware that IQ tests are notoriously unreliable much beyond the 160-170 range, but it’s still her claim to fame.
silverwhisper posted on Mar 13, 2007
| views: 552
Comments
-
bloc said on Mar 13, 2007....
I'm fundamentally opposed to capital punishment. the most powerful argument against it is this.
Killing wrongly convicted people is a terrible offense. Keeping people in prison for life (and I mean life) keeps us equally as safe and we will never kill an innocent person.
-
beyondtheveil said on Mar 13, 2007....
Although I have always been for capital punishment for certain offenses, the possibility of convicting the wrong person has also always been a hang-up for me. The introduction of DNA and other technological advances has lessened that somewhat. Some crimes just scream for the death penalty, especially grevious crimes against children.On the matter of deterrent, punishment is meted out for commiting an offense or series of offenses. Deterrent, if any, is gravy.I am all for allowing juries to decide if the death penalty is warrented for each case. -
bloc said on Mar 13, 2007....
There are a few problems with DNA.
1. labs can screw up in various ways
2. People can lie. There have been many documented cases of experts lying about evidence for all kinds of different reasons.
Admittedly these things are rare, but it goes back to my main point. Keeping them in prison for life keeps us equally as safe.
-
silverwhisper said on Mar 13, 2007....
bloc: am i correct in assuming that you subscribe to the idea of letting a hundred guilty men go rather than killing one innocent? and while i'm no fan of ethical algebra, is there a point at which you would accept such a thing? and those are both good points re: forensics and testimony.
beyond: the question becomes one of what cases warrant such a penalty?
ed -
bloc said on Mar 13, 2007....
That's a false choice. We don't have to let anyone go in order to stop killing the innocent person. We can keep all the convicted criminals in prison AND not kill the innocent person (or many innocent people as we found in IL).
-
moonriver said on Mar 13, 2007....
i'm with bloc here. and for now, i will just repeat my comment on seanrenaud's blog on the same topic:i am opposed to capital punishment on point of principle. i would rather see the worst criminals rot behind bars and suffer the worst possible jail program for the rest of their miserable lives. BUT, under certain special conditions (which are too detailed to explain here), i remain open to imposing the death penalty on the most incorrigible and unrepentant perpetrators of the worst crimes against humanity. -
silverwhisper said on Mar 13, 2007....
bloc: have you seriously never heard that expression before?
moon: i'm curious about those certain special conditions. ?
ed -
bloc said on Mar 14, 2007....
I think i misunderstood something. -
moonriver said on Mar 14, 2007....
sw -- in my mind, some of the most important conditions should be:- an international treaty establishing death penalty standards, enjoining all states that still impose the death penalty to sign the treaty and follow its standards.
- on points of substance: limiting capital punishment to heinous crimes vs humanity and the person, some of which are defined by several international instruments recognized by most states. giving extra weight to aggravating factors such as the element of conspiracy, abuse of power, defenselessness of the victim. i would certainly include genocide and massacres in this category of crimes punishable with death.
- on points of procedure: aside from the appeal process that reaches the highest courts, there must be an additional appeal process that can invoke international legal institutions under un auspices. there must also be a long mandatory period, 10 years or more, before the penalty is imposed. meanwhile, rigorous reinvestigation and review of the whole trial process.
- the state must also institutionalize social processes that provide a more broadly-defined closure to all parties involved, a closure that doesn't start and end with the official taking of a convict's life. it is of utmost importance that the whole of society becomes a witness -- if only vicarious and virtual -- to understand how the crime happened, and why the state must take another life to serve justice.
- an international treaty establishing death penalty standards, enjoining all states that still impose the death penalty to sign the treaty and follow its standards.
-
moonriver said on Mar 14, 2007....
btw, the death penalty is already abolished in almost the whole of europe, and the eu is actively campaigning for its abolition worldwide.
-
beyondtheveil said on Mar 14, 2007....
Ed- Regardless of which cases, the arguments of you, bloc, and moon remain and they are good arguments. I would not be totally against elimination of the death penalty.My problem is when acts are perpetrated that make my blood boil. Case in point- Jessica Lunsford.I could execute this man. -
silverwhisper said on Mar 14, 2007....
bloc: it's a quotation (can't place the source) but essentially, the notion is that it's better that 100 guilty men go free than an innocent man be imprisoned. i was just adapting the quotation to suit the discussion. my meaning was that it's best to err on the side of caution for you.
moon: interesting, but why is it important to have an international standard? in certain muslim countries, a lot of stuff merits death that would horrify you or me. are you concerned about local despotism? also: i thought elimination of capital punishment was a prerequisite for joining the EU?
beyond: i see your jessica lunsford and raise you megan kanka. happily, kanka's rapist/murderer was, IIRC, executed already.
ed -
bloc said on Mar 14, 2007....
"the notion is that it's better that 100 guilty men go free than an innocent man be imprisoned."
Yes, I've heard it before. Yes, I think it's better to err on the side of caution in most causes. Having said that, your adaptation of the quote was a false choice. We wouldn't have to let anyone go in order to stop killing the innocent or to err on the side of caution.
-
silverwhisper said on Mar 14, 2007....
bloc, that isn't a false choice b/c the idea being presented doesn't have a causal relationship b/n the two, which your responses presume.
ed -
bloc said on Mar 14, 2007....
ok, i get it now :)
I was thinking of it in the context of my previous comment. I can't really answer it because it depends on the nature of the people that would be let go. Are we letting out drug users or serial killers?
However, I must say that the question has no bearing on reality. It's sort of like the ticking time bomb scenario being used to justify torture at abu ghraib. In certain narrow circumstances I would probably be ok with mistakes being made that lead to innocent death, but I don't believe that such a case represents the reality of our criminal justice system.
So yes, in the abstract, I'd be ok with it in some cases.
-
silverwhisper said on Mar 14, 2007....
bloc: yeah, i understand your reticence but it wasn't some kind of rhetorical trick. it was an honest to goodness question. i know, such things can be as scarce as hen's teeth, as the old saying goes. :> and i agree re: the ticking time bomb bullshit.
ed -
bloc said on Mar 14, 2007....
No worries, I know you're a man of integrity. I jsut wanted to make it clear to anyone reading since it was easy to conflate it with the earlier comments as I did at first. -
lambovet said on Mar 14, 2007....
Sw&b- hmmm... Like SW I debated cap pun in sociology. My position was pro. After debate in class (I won) I editorialized and told class that thru my research my personal position had changed and I was against cap pun. I think that when a person commits a violent act upon another, your right of citizenship ends immediately. Further, the penal system needs to be revamped. No A/C, TV, ...none of the luxuries we have available. I am talking only about violent offenders. No body building- the last thing I need is some recidivist who can bench 500lbs coming angrily after me. Prison should be just that. It should be spartan and slightly uncomfortable. If we spent as much money on education as we do on prisons we might have a better place to live. -
CreativeWoman said on Mar 15, 2007....
I am against capital punishment with every fiber of my being.
CW
-
moonriver said on Mar 16, 2007....
sw -- there is need to adopt international standards in penal law (esp on the issue of death penalty), in the same spirit that there are int'l standards in humanitarian law and laws of war (cf. protocol ii of geneva conventions). i am concerned against all types of despotism, since they are the worst implementors of capital punishment. and, yes, abolition of the death penalty is a must for joining the eu. (which is not the same as all of europe.)
cw -- i agree with you. the conditionalities i suggest are but a first step forward, hopefully towards its full abolition among all states.
-
silverwhisper said on Mar 16, 2007....
moon, you don't really agree w/ CW. you approve of the death penalty in theory, in some circumstances. CW's position is much simpler.
ed -
moonriver said on Mar 16, 2007....
sw -- i do agree with cw. read my first comment, where i said "i am opposed to capital punishment on point of principle." i also said i'm open to imposing the death penalty under certain special conditions, which are inexistent right now, and which -- if it wasn't too obvious the first time i said it -- should lead step by step towards its abolition.
-
silverwhisper said on Mar 16, 2007....
moon, the way i read CW's statement, she wouldn't accept it under any circumstances, existent or not. surely you can see that there's a difference in what she said and what you said?
ed -
moonriver said on Mar 16, 2007....
sw -- yes obviously there's a difference, and yet i agree with her. if you can't see how that can be, then sorry 'bout that... :-)
-
CreativeWoman said on Mar 16, 2007....
ed and moon,
I think it is barbaric. It is not a deterrent to crime. The appeals process makes it ludicrous to begin with.
Innocent people do die. I could never ever support that.
I never see it as an appropriate punishment for anything. I would rather see the criminal rot a long miserable life in the pen. It's one taxpayer's expense I'm willing to pay.
CW
-
silverwhisper said on Mar 16, 2007....
moon: well, i'll chalk it up to the vagaries of trying to get to know someone's thinking processes online. :>
CW: that seems pretty darned clear. :>
ed -
CreativeWoman said on Mar 16, 2007....
ed,
It is just a topic I have always felt strongly about. When I was in college, I did my speech final on capital punishment. I must say that I created a small buzz on campus with my stance against it. People who weren't even in the class were coming up to me and commenting on my speech. I suppose it was my 15 minutes of campus fame.
Now if I could transfer some of that determination into other areas of my life...
CW
-
silverwhisper said on Jan 16, 2008....
CW: i realize i never replied to this. :> i wish there was a tape of that speech. :>
and it seems to me that you've indeed transferred that determination. :>
ed
Comment on "on the nature of capital punishment"
Related Posts:
hottips4u
posted 4 days ago
| views: 111
|
Pretty good, steal and register other peoples ideas ....even the name....soulcast ! For crying out loud !....... read entire post
Gardeninggal
posted on Nov 11, 2008
| views: 42
|
My friend told me how to get Revenge. The instructions were to pour a quart of oil on their windshield and that would keep them busy for awhile... read entire post
Gardeninggal
posted on Nov 11, 2008
| views: 31
|
When do we stop turning over our personal power and responsibility to liars?... read entire post