what do you think of death penalty?

It's a bad idea for practical reasons.

>>67247013
if the world runs on an eye for and eye a tooth for a tooth then everyone is blind and nobody can speak correctly or eat so no its not a very good idea

>>67247070
What do you mean?

Not really. The death penalty is better for criminals than the next worst possible punishment (lifetime in solitary confinement.)
For example, if you murder 20 people and get caught, would you rather stay 1-2 months in jail and then get executed, or would you spend the rest of your life locked into a cell with no chance of ever having a normal life again?
But then again, keeping a prisoner alive for that long (without them doing anything "productive" like in American prisons that offsets the cost of running a prison) might be more expensive than just executing them.
I'd still say lifetime in jail is a better deterrent than a death penalty.

>>67247102
Are you serious?

>>67247013
yes, bullet to the head is cheaper than lifetime in prison eating food that the victims family is paying for just like everyone else who has not committed a crime

No way.

>>67247307
but merika sempai seem to shot terrorists or the suspects of shooting incident without a doubt. It's cool af.

>>67247013
>tfw my State abolished it because Chicago cops are too corrupt to keep innocents off Death Row
This is why we can't have nice things.

In any case, it's probably not going to be ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS anytime soon now that Trump has won and can thus appoint the tiebreaker for it.

>>67247198
>>67247280
Deportingis cheaper because all gaijins are criminals.

>>67247519
And if they're a native, then what?
Dump them in the middle of the ocean?

>>67247198
>>67247280
Haven't they shown the death penalty costs more than giving someone a life in prison?
You also got cases where the man in question turns out to be innocent to think about.

>>67247013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dshl188YsQk
Kill them all.

>>67247013
It's bad.
I don't want money going for them to live behind the bars but at the same time I feel like there are uncalled victims that are guilt-free.

I think the best way is making them work in prison for lifetime and produce more than the cost it needs to feed them.

>>67247438
It is also wrong af and sinful af

>>67247831
it costs more if you give them the full treatment of last meal, champagne and the magic juice from the magic syringe
if you just shoot them in the head the cost will just be of the bullet and the janitor who will wipe the floor clean of blood

>>67247957
No, it costs more because of all the appeals courts and legal process (in freedom land)

>>67247957
another thing is hanging. it's very environmentally friendly. rope is organic and reusable. yes i believe hanging is the superior choice.

>>67248072
ok, well they do have a completely bullshit legal system there so it's their own fault

I don't like it, because the government shouldn't have the power to kill its own citizens.

Maybe assisted suicide should be offered to criminals to quench the blood thirst of the populace.

>>67248107
But what happens if the person in question turns out to be innocent?

>>67248187
Giving criminals the option of killing people who already want to die will probably only cater to a very small percentage of them who want to kill people just for the sake of killing them with no deeper motives/perverse reasons.
In other words, those who want to kill unsuspecting victims (and do other things to their body before or after they murder them) won't be satisfied with just killing the occasional person who wants to die.

>>67248220
admit you made a mistake and move on to find the one really responsible followed by the hanging of

>>67248257
I think the Hussite meant that the criminals in question would be offered to commit suicide.

>>67248187
government and court are two entities separated from each other... or is it not the case in chile?

>>67248294
But won't it piss a lot of people off to kill those that are innocent, even if very seldom?

>>67248486
i'll bounce back the question: wouldn't it piss even more people off to not kill those that are not innocent?

>>67248486
Depends on what you mean by "seldom"; most people in Texas don't necessarily seem to mind one innocent in a sea of 1,250 guilty executed, while Illinois's death row in the late 1990s was found to be around 10% innocent, leading to eventual abolition >>67247500. As said before, with a Trump presidency and SCOTUS nomination, constitutional challenges to it won't be going anywhere anytime soon.

>>67247198
>For example, if you murder 20 people and get caught, would you rather stay 1-2 months in jail and then get executed, or would you spend the rest of your life locked into a cell with no chance of ever having a normal life again?
Because being in jail is a punishment you dumb nigger, it's not supposed to be pleasant or about what the prisoner prefer.

>>67248709
I never said anything about life being "pleasant" in prison or anything like that.
I was saying that if you can commit a crime and basically don't need to worry about being punished for real because they'll just give you the death penalty, then it's not a good enough deterrent.
If instead you're sent to jail for life you have much more to lose and have to suffer much more if you commit a crime worth lifetime in jail.

>>67248852
But "for life" isn't for life here, as we both know.

>>67248374
Well the State I mean.

>>67248852
In the US Capital Punishment is discretionary, and mandatory death sentences are unconstitutional. That would arguably further your point in that if you commit a capital crime there's a chance of you receiving a lesser sentence, thus reducing its deterrent effect.

>>67248974
Capital punishment has been shown time and time again to have virtually no positive effect on deterrence whatsoever. As a matter of fact, most European countries have lower crime rates than the US despite enjoy much milder punishments.

>>67247013
test prisoner: if he is suicidal - lifetime punishment, if he's not - death penalty by whatever you find "civil" way.

before an eye for an eye people would be killed for theft, eye for an eye means that the punishment should be proportional to the crime

>>67247013
No, because it's immoral.

No, you should have higher aspirations.

I oppose it because the life of an innocent man is worth more than the lives of 10.000 criminals.

>>67248545
I think it's a bigger difference between killing an innocent and locking him up to let him up with some pay when proven to be innocent in people's mind than there is between not killing a criminal and keeping him jailed for life.

>>67258001
That being sad, a life sentence needs to be a life sentence unless proven innocent.