Why I'm against the death penalty:

[conuly]

1. It seems rather hypocritical. Killing people is wrong. Killing people who've killed people... is wrong. But if you're the state, killing people who've killed people is all right?
1a. Going along with that, the put inmates on death row on suicide watch. That's just petty... does it really matter at whose hand they die?

2. It does not seem to do anything about the crime rate, the US simultaneously has one of the highest per capita violent crime rates AND one of the highest per capita execution rates in the world. If it does not act as a deterrent, what is the point? I do not believe it is up to the state to exact vengeance on criminals. Again, petty.

3. It is nearly impossible to fully determine guilt in most cases. Even a small error risk is too great when dealing with life and death. If you imprison someone falsely, you can let them out. You can never resurrect the dead.

4. This is not my actual reason, but it'll do in a pinch... The death penalty is not meted out fairly. If you are black, you have a disproportionate chance of being executed as compared to white people. If you're Texan, you are at a greater risk than a New Yorker. Crimes against minorities are less severely punished. And so on. However, even if that were fixed, I'd still be against the death penalty.

Comments

[conuly]

No country is more polite than the country where everyone is armed. (Okay, that was a joke... but it's technically true.)

I don't believe it is. Japan is considered to be a very polite nation, and they have virtually no guns. The US is considered, often, to be a very rude nation, and we have a very high number of weapons.

[maladaptive.livejournal.com]

But EVERYONE is this country is not armed. How many times do you think people openly carrying a Glock are attacked? (I don't mean in manners, I mean in actual violence level).

It's the same reason the Cold War was a stand-off, we and the Russians knew and understand that the other was armed.

[xiggaroo.livejournal.com]

My dad owns rifles and it doesn't make the stupid bastard any more polite.

In fact he's a beer drinking redneck who likes to fiddle with his Luger when he's shitfaced.

[xiggaroo.livejournal.com]

I'd like the point out that he isn't the exception among northern Minnesotan men. He actually belongs to a hunting club that, besides hunting and drinking simultaneously, raises birds and does the 'shake down' method to make them pass out, then they're planted in the fields, for people to have their dogs go 'flush them up' and shoot them. The ONE time I went 'hunting' with my father, the bird was dead when we got to it.

Polite eh.

[maladaptive.livejournal.com]

....It's philosophical, based on the idea that even if you're armed, you're not going to chase down someone else who is (most people, anyway). I'm not suggesting we give everyone guns.

[conuly]

I don't think it works in real life, though. I doubt that the ownership of weapons has anything to do with the behaviour of individuals... and, while the proliferation of nuclear weapons may have kept the cold war, um, cold, I'm not altogether certain that this is the best way to prevent wars.

[maladaptive.livejournal.com]

....It was a metaphor.

[conuly]

*sighs*

Why did you use a metaphor that has no relevance? And then say it was true?

[maladaptive.livejournal.com]

Diplomatically, it's true. When you know someone else is armed, you tread lightly. It's a diplomatic thing. And I DID say that it was a joke.

[georgiapeachy.livejournal.com]

There are rednecks with guns, but there are also people from the "upper crust" who as they live by the rules of ettiquette with follow a similar honor code wiht hunting. I've been with these people and they almost never catch anything on fox hunts of anything, but they regard it as the chase being more important and guns are basically ceremonial. Now i'm not pro hunting, but these people are polite to a fault of seeming snobbish. Too bad they are the minority, at least in the US, most owner gun owners i've known are drunken rednecks.