Death Penalty

[Free Spirit]

Do you think death penalty should be allowed, after all a human has his rights to live without anyone taking his life! And even if death penalty exists I just keep asking myself who gives the man rights to take someones life because the judge believes death penalty fits his crimes?
I truly believe death penalty is taking away what you have not right to do no matter what you committed. It's also like taking the easy way by death penalty instead of dealing with problems. It's not like people were born as criminals! But when I look at the humans as one, then the human race could have their own place in jail! :ph34r:

[RedAnarchist]

Its wrong. Very wrong.

The death penalty is one of the many "eye for an eye" events that will turn the whole world blind. Its just legalised murder and you cannot take a life for a life.

[__ca va?]

People have the right to live! In fact I think this is our most essential right. And what could somebody say on behalf of the death penalty? That it prevents people from committing serious crimes? No fact shows this. And living your entire life in jail seems to be more cruel to me than death.

[Hampton]

The American death penalty is is pretty flawed. It was found out that more than two-thirds of convictions are so flawed that they are overturned on appeal. The biggest part of that is th legal system itself which is garbage and needs to be thrown out. It is more than obvious that those with money will get off while the poor get stuck with public defenders and who cannot afford to get their evidence tested by an outside and independent source, such things like DNA testing and ballistics cost a lot of money, which the average person does not have.

Not to mention that the cost of the death penalty is pretty obscene. The estimated costs for New York?s death penalty, which was reinstated in 1995: $160 million, or approximately $23 million for each person sentenced to death, with no executions likely for many years. Not to mention that a capital trial costs $116,700 more than an ordinary murder trial and that in Texas, a death penalty case costs taxpayers an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years.

Disgusting.

Link. (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=45&did=385#sxn3)
Link. (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7#From%20DPIC)
Link. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/787416.stm)

[Free Spirit]

And living your entire life in jail seems to be more cruel to me than death.


I agree with you, it's torture towards humans psychically... at least you might get free when you die!

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

the movie, 'Dead man Walking' has a good line, when the lady states :

"We're killing somebody to prove that killing is wrong."

It really is debatable. I believe that capital punishment is horrible, and proves nothing more then the lengths gov'ts will go to show crime 'doesnt pay'. Again, they'd obviously kill a serial killer first, before a wall street CEO who looted millions from shareholders.

It's very biased. Isn't Mumia facing capital punishment as well?

[redstar2000]

To ask whether the death penalty is "right or wrong" is meaningless by itself.

You have to specify the "initial conditions".

As Hampton has rightfully pointed out, both the death penalty and the prison/jail system in capitalist America are horrendously unjust...and thoroughly racist to boot.

Everything the ruling class does is horrible, period.

But that says nothing about the issue with regard to communist society...where the "initial conditions" would presumably be entirely different.

If you just want to yap about "morality", fine. But if you want to talk about the real issues, then you must be specific.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[PRC-UTE]

What about people who are crazy and won't stop hurting others? I mean as in sociopaths and the like. They exist, so what about those people?

However as capital punishment exists now, it's basically a conveyor belt for black men.

[h&s]

I find it funny (well I don't, but you know what I mean) how people like George W. and other 'devout' right-wing Christians are the biggest supporters of the death penalty, yet I could swear it says in the Bible, 'thou shalt not kill.'

But that says nothing about the issue with regard to communist society...where the "initial conditions" would presumably be entirely different.

Do you mean during the initial period of instability that would inevitably follow a revolution?

[redstar2000]

Do you mean during the initial period of instability that would inevitably follow a revolution?

Well, that's one example of a specific situation.

Another is the situation of a developed communist society...what do we want it to be like?

Do we want an elaborate prison/labor camp system...with all that implies?

Do we want people who've demonstrated their willingness/proclivity to inflict violence on those who are vulnerable to be allowed to do it again?

This is one of those "hard questions" that many would prefer not to think about; the choices are "painful" and who wants that? It's a lot "easier" to think of communism as "heaven" where everybody is "really nice" to each other.

It's not going to be "heaven" and real choices will have to be made.

So, like it or not and sooner or later, you'll have no choice but to seriously think about this stuff.

Sorry about that.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Citizen X]

Do we want an elaborate prison/labor camp system...with all that implies?

I'm not certain that it's wise to conflate these ideas as if joining them is inevitable. Though that may be the condition (and conclusion) in a bourgeois society, it's not necessarily the condition of a socialist society.

Also, your moral relativism is a bit strange, for if you deny an absolute morality (or any piece or part thereof), then what is the point in championing a socialist morality (of distribution) over a capitalist morality? In other words, how can moral relativism lead one to believe that the working class should have control of the means of production and the method of distribution in a society should decrease rather than increase income disparity? I'm not talking about methodology here, of course, only the judgment that leads one away from Western capitalism and liberal democracy in the first place.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2004, 06:56 AM
What about people who are crazy and won't stop hurting others? I mean as in sociopaths and the like. They exist, so what about those people?

However as capital punishment exists now, it's basically a conveyor belt for black men.
People like that are insane, and should be treated as such, which means in my view, they should be treated, not punished.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Since people are not born as criminals and are changeable, it wouldn't be fair to not to put effort in changing them. Let them continue their life as valuable citizens instead of killing them as criminal.

I am all in for rehabilitating and intensive support and guidance for the criminal and victim.

A more interesting issue would be pedophiles who abuse children. People are born as pedophiles and thus unchangeable. So letting them out again, is out of the question to me. Remaining; live long imprisonment and death sentence.

Also what to do when knowing that someone is a pedophile, but hasn't commited abused yet?

[person]

I believe capital punishment is wrong. I kind of consider myself a Communist right now though I still have lots to learn. I have one question though...

Communists believe it is ok to take the lives of people don't they? Revolution? So why do they believe capital punishment is wrong too? Is being against capital punishment like an official Communist doctrine or no? Thanks.

[redstar2000]

Also, your moral relativism is a bit strange, for if you deny an absolute morality (or any piece or part thereof), then what is the point in championing a socialist morality (of distribution) over a capitalist morality? In other words, how can moral relativism lead one to believe that the working class should have control of the means of production and the method of distribution in a society should decrease rather than increase income disparity?

It can't.

It's not a "moral" question.

To the master, slavery is "moral".

To the slave, slavery is "immoral"...self-evidently.

So it is not a matter of struggling for communism because it is "morally right" -- it's a struggle for liberation from wage-slavery.


Since people are not born as criminals and are changeable, it wouldn't be fair to not to put effort in changing them.

Actually, we don't know that. There may be a genetic predisposition to violence in some people.

Worse, even if it's all environmental, we don't know how to change violent people into not being violent...at least with any degree of reliability.


Let them continue their life as valuable citizens instead of killing them as criminals.

As slave-laborers?

And if you just release them into the general population, what stops them from doing it again?


People are born as pedophiles and thus unchangeable.

Indeed? It's difficult to imagine a reproductive advantage to be gained by having sex with pre-pubescents. I think it's very unlikely that pedophilia is genetic.


Also what to do when knowing that someone is a pedophile, but hasn't committed abuse yet?

How could that be known? Telepathy? :lol:


Is being against capital punishment like an official Communist doctrine or no?

No.

There's really no such thing as "official Communist doctrine".

Fortunately. :D

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

If environment is a big factor, then change their environment. Take away the children of problematic families, because there is a big chance that their children would turn into criminals. And since the hoods will disappear, we won't be troubled by that.


As slave-laborers?

And if you just release them into the general population, what stops them from doing it again?

No not as slave-laborers. What I mean is that criminals are not contributing to society, thus invaluable citizens, when rehabilitated they turn into valuable citizens Al tough the word value isn't very well chosen.


How could that be known? Telepathy?

If you could, be my guest. But admittance would be a possibility.


And if you just release them into the general population, what stops them from doing it again?
In the first few years intensive support and guidance by social workers. But after that it's merely a matter of fingers crossed.

That's the risk of rehabilitation, sooner or later you have to release them.


Communists believe it is ok to take the lives of people don't they? Revolution? So why do they believe capital punishment is wrong too? Is being against capital punishment like an official Communist doctrine or no? Thanks.

There isn't The Communist answer to Capital Punishment. Some do believe that criminals and reactionaries should be executed. Others are for imprisonment and rehabilitation. You do the thinking for yourself.

I, love the irony of locking the former elite and leadership into labourcamps instead of the ease of execution.

Edit: Spelling faults

[redstar2000]

In the first few years intensive support and guidance by social workers. But after that it's merely a matter of fingers crossed.

That's the risk of rehabilitation, sooner or later you have to release them.

Yet those who do the releasing are (usually) not at risk.

You're "rolling the dice" for one or more unknown persons who have no idea that they're at risk.

Have we the right to do that?

And would people be willing to accept that?


I love the irony of locking the former elite and leadership into labour camps instead of the ease of execution.

"Irony" there is, no doubt. But it's a two-edged sword.

Labour camps require guards and overseers. What kind of people are attracted to that sort of "work"? What does doing that kind of "work" turn you into?

Can you say fascist thug?

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[h&s]

This is a deep question;

Do we want an elaborate prison/labor camp system...with all that implies?
No, I have always had reservations on the ethics of keeping a fellow human detained without their permition, but I also have to think - what is the alternative?


Do we want people who've demonstrated their willingness/proclivity to inflict violence on those who are vulnerable to be allowed to do it again?


Definitly not, but then that goes against what I have just said.

I also raise the question to myself; If we were to be in a communist society, with no state or rulers, who would decide that the death penalty, or even imprisonment, would be a suitable punishment? For such a big decision, someone needs to be there to decide, yet a true communist society would have no such people. If a soviet makes this decision, what is there to stop others from declaring it to be murder?

[Rex_20XD6]

My problem with imprisonment is that it doesn’t reform the inmates. Sure, it gets them out of society but prison dose nothing for them mentally.

[DaCuBaN]

Interesting discussion...


So, like it or not and sooner or later, you'll have no choice but to seriously think about this stuff.


Indeed - my own thoughts have led me to a conclusion that I wholly dislike, and neither will you: I cannot justify forcing another to kill in the name of 'justice' - that does not sit well with me. If the given crime is agreed by whatever judicial means a specific society has enacted, the solution is neither imprisonment nor exectution: It's much more cruel, as it's both.

Lock them in a cage, bury them alive: If the crime fits.

I did say you wouldn't like it ;)

[redstar2000]

If we were to be in a communist society, with no state or rulers, who would decide that the death penalty, or even imprisonment, would be a suitable punishment?

Well, I like the old Athenian system: pick out 500 people by lottery, let them hear the arguments and see the evidence, and then let them decide...

1. Acquittal.

2. Probation.

3. A jail that would be "warm" and "comfy"...a place that would have the "look and feel" of an ordinary apartment building except you couldn't leave. Jail sentences of no more than three years and most of only one year. Emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegrating the offender back into society.

4. Permanent Exile (if practical).

5. Painless execution. Executioners could also be chosen by lottery (with the option to decline if they wished) or the victim of the violent crime (if still alive) could administer the lethal dose (also if they wished).

In other words, no prison/labor camp apparatus, no "profession" of prison guard or labor overseer, no hellhole prisons where people die "by inches" over decades, no gang-rapes, no racial gangs, etc.

Even the "guards" at the "warm, comfy jail" should be volunteers and be rotated regularly and frequently...we don't want to create that kind of "mind-set" in communist society.


If a soviet makes this decision, what is there to stop others from declaring it to be murder?

Not a thing. There'll always be some exceptionally kind-hearted folks who are against executions as a matter of principle.

But that's where exile may become appropriate: a soviet that feels another soviet is committing "murder" can always volunteer to take the miscreant "into their own bosoms".

This may happen with some frequency in the first century of communism...but then, I suspect, the practice will die out.


Lock them in a cage, bury them alive.

Gratuitous cruelty is uncivilized.

So you're right; I'd be against it.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Redstar, are you referring to a post-dictatorship of the proletariat society? I hope so. I wouldn't want to have to resort to locking up a guy like Rupert Murdoch in an apartment just because we can't prove that he directly killed or injured people.

I have no qualms with getting rid of people like that by any means necessary.

In a ruling class-free society, I guess I'd pretty much agree with you. But there's really no telling how things are gonna be by that time, is there?

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Have we the right to do that?

And would people be willing to accept that?

So, do you want to lock up people for ever or something?

Often people from criminal enviroments do not know anything else, but criminal life. Rehabilitation learns them a new lifestyle, new skills and that stealing is wrong.

In the current system, people are locked up for a while and then released. Merely resulting in creating more skillfulled criminals and new contacts. It's often said that prisons are the highschool of crime.

In The Netherlands, there was a project, in which they rehabilitated and intensivly supported and guided criminals. I can't find any sources on it, but it was on the news and as I remember quite succesfull. A couple of the detained criminals did fall back in crime, but most of them didn't.

People have been accepting the current system, so why not accept a better one?

[refuse_resist]

Capital punishment is something that is very imhumane and pointless. I do believe everyone is entitled to live, but at the same time it's something that really needs to be thought out. Rehabilitation would be the best alternative though.


In the current system, people are locked up for a while and then released. Merely resulting in creating more skillfulled criminals and new contacts. It's often said that prisons are the highschool of crime.
That's very true, especially with how corrupt the prison system is. There have been situations where prison gaurds will go around and make bets on which one of the prisoners will get killed first and would even try to provoke their deaths.

[redstar2000]

Redstar, are you referring to a post-dictatorship of the proletariat society?

Obviously.


So, do you want to lock up people forever or something?

It's kind of embarrassing to have to quote my own post...especially when it's on the same page.


Well, I like the old Athenian system: pick out 500 people by lottery, let them hear the arguments and see the evidence, and then let them decide...

1. Acquittal.

2. Probation.

3. A jail that would be "warm" and "comfy"...a place that would have the "look and feel" of an ordinary apartment building except you couldn't leave. Jail sentences of no more than three years and most of only one year. Emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegrating the offender back into society.

4. Permanent Exile (if practical).

5. Painless execution. Executioners could also be chosen by lottery (with the option to decline if they wished) or the victim of the violent crime (if still alive) could administer the lethal dose (also if they wished).

So no, I don't want to "lock people up forever or something".

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Citizen X]

I don't know how to use all of this "quote" stuff when citing two users, so I'll do it the old-fashioned way:


Redstar2000 quoted me from and earlier post:

Also, your moral relativism is a bit strange, for if you deny an absolute morality (or any piece or part thereof), then what is the point in championing a socialist morality (of distribution) over a capitalist morality? In other words, how can moral relativism lead one to believe that the working class should have control of the means of production and the method of distribution in a society should decrease rather than increase income disparity?

And then wrote in response:

It can't.

It's not a "moral" question.

To the master, slavery is "moral".

To the slave, slavery is "immoral"...self-evidently.

So it is not a matter of struggling for communism because it is "morally right" -- it's a struggle for liberation from wage-slavery.

My response:

I have to strongly disagree with redstar2000 about this, for I believe his thinking is deeply flawed.

While he states that there is "a struggle for liberation from wage-slavery," which is true, he denies that there is a moral component to communism, but if this is the case, then why would any worker seek communism (or socialism, I prefer the term Marxism, but whatever) rather than the class mobility of capitalism wherein he could become the "master," that is, the capitalist? For it is certainly true that there is a great deal of class mobility in the USA, whether we like it or not. That's not an issue.

When a worker struggles to save money and then becomes an entrepeneur, he is no longer a wage-slave. That's self-evident. In fact, he may be in a position to hire others and make them wage-slaves. He is, then, a capitalist exploiting the proletariat, as I think we'd all agree. And yet, his movement from wage-slavery, that is, his personal liberation, did not involve a choice for communism at all, in any way.

Communism (or socialism or Marxism) involves more than just the liberation from wage-slavery because there is a social component involved. It states that not only should I not be a wage-slave, but it makes a moral judgment and goes further, saying that no one should be a wage-slave, ever. That's clearly a moral judgment and shows the moral component of communism. I can't say why redstar2000 chose to ignore my initial comment by denying its basis when, quite obviously, the basis is there, but I hope that this has shed some light on the topic.

[Hate Is Art]

I like that Atenian system, sometimes people we have to make descisions for criminals. I would lose no sleep in the execution or exile of a member of the Bourgeosie or for a Traitor and I would like to think none of you would either.

An old saying goes;

The good invented justice because they could not see how people could commit crimes, they should be punished for them.

The evil invented mercy, because someday someone would be punishing them and they would need mercy

A Prison system is a waste of time, reform without prisons or execution.

[comrade_mufasa]

If you try to kill me I have the right to kill you. If you try to kill or kill some one I love or care about then I will kill you. I don't think the goverment has the right to say who should live or die.

[Freedom Writer]

Dont know about "right and wrong" because its for the inviduals to decide, but way I see it, its useless. I dont believe in court in afterlife or anything so I think a better punishment would be few years in jail.

[h&s]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2004, 11:12 PM
If you try to kill me I have the right to kill you. If you try to kill or kill some one I love or care about then I will kill you.
Why? You say that it would be wrong for someone trying to kill you, then surely it would be wrong for you to try and kill them? I just don't understand this argument - it is wrong to kill, so as a punishment we will kill you. Hypocrsy or what?

[comrade_mufasa]

The fact is would you kill me knowing that you will die beocuse of it. To my its the law of nature and the idea of respect. I know someone will say something like "do you respect people who use a gun to solve problems" my ansewer is if they were taking care of buisness for there family and life then yes if you lost in a game of cards or becouse you stoll my ride then no.

[insurgency03]

the death penatly is no more than a way of republicans expressing their ignorance in a form that actually might look like truth to so many ignorant bastards out there. Its pretty ironic isnt it, killing someone for the sake of ending street violence. Furthermore i think the whole prision system is a joke. ive never heard of anyone being saved by a prision, the american prision system is no better than the one say in, pakistan or some other far right winged governemnt, the answer is psychological rehabilitation, and its probaly less exspensive too. plus it opens up a whole new feild of skilled jobs, rather than prisions where many of the guards become inmates themselves

[ComradeIvan]

Death Penalty is a absolute must.
The enemies of the state must be done away with.

[h&s]

The enemies of the state must be done away with.
I thought you were a Communist? If you were you would be an enemy of the state, and you would be saying that the state must be 'done away with.'

[ComradeIvan]

Yes... Iam A Communist.
Iam not saying the state must be destroyed. But criminals to the state.
So they must die.
Myself not being a criminal, I wouldn't be saying that I am to die.

[fuerzasocialista]

Rehabilitation should be the principal purpose of the justice system. But we have to be honest, some criminals are not capable of rehabilitation. So then what do we do? Redstar has pointed out the methods used by the Athenians. However, if painless execution was to be carried out by the victim or a victim's family in the case of murder, they would want to inflict the same pain have suffering that they have felt. There are some justifications for capital punishment in today's world but I feel that as we progress into a communist society, these justifications will lose their foundations and capital punishment for the most part will be a thing of the past.

In the US, capital punishment is used as a hypocritical deterrent. Instead of reserving it for the most heinous of crimes in which guilt is undeniable and the verdict is unanimously agreed upon BY PEERS OF THE DEFENDANT, its use is almost "liberal" in a sense. Especially when it pertains to minority defendants.

Not enough emphasis is placed on rehabilitation and as was previously stated, the criminals that are released who went in with a diploma in crime now come out with a Ph.D. There are educational courses being offered in todays prisons but very few take advantage of it. Its my feeling that in an environment like that found in America's prisons, you have to spend every waking moment watching your back thus making it pretty hard to focus on something else...

[h&s]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 02:37 AM
Yes... Iam A Communist.
Iam not saying the state must be destroyed. But criminals to the state.

Why do you believe that the state shouldn't be destroyed? The state is at the very heart of the oppression of the Proletariat by the Borgeiose. A society can only be Communist if it has no state.

[Militant]

What makes the criminals (murderers, rapers, class enemies) worth the time, energy, and materials to re-educate or "heal"? We are all told from a young age that its wrong to kill/rape, yet these people go out and do it. Life is not a baseball game. If the mistake is small, you might get more then three strikes, if its big mistake, 1 strike and your out!

The punishment of the criminal should be carried out by the community, or group of people affected by the misbehavior. Whatever they choose, is consider justified by society at large.

For some reason I doubt it will every be rehabilitation.

Will your arguements make sense, they are completely abstract and slanted in the criminals favour. In real life there are victims and friends and family of victims, a whole variable almost everyone of you failed to factor in. And I think it is these people who should decide the criminals fate, because when you really think about a murder is not against the "workers state", its againsta family or community.

[comrade_mufasa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 08:15 PM
We are all told from a young age that its wrong to kill/rape, yet these people go out and do it.
not everone learned this as a kid. Some people didnt have parents or a good mentor when they were growing up so they had no one to tell them that "no ou shouldnt go and hurt people". Its called growing up on the streets.

[Militant]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 01:56 AM
not everone learned this as a kid. Some people didnt have parents or a good mentor when they were growing up so they had no one to tell them that "no ou shouldnt go and hurt people". Its called growing up on the streets.
I hope communism ends "growing up on the street". Communism is the context in which I'm talking about the death penalty

[Hate Is Art]

not everone learned this as a kid. Some people didnt have parents or a good mentor when they were growing up so they had no one to tell them that "no ou shouldnt go and hurt people". Its called growing up on the streets.


If you can't tell that raping someone is wrong you should be shot.

[Freedom Writer]

Originally posted by The Arcadian [email protected] 7 2004, 08:01 PM
If you can't tell that raping someone is wrong you should be shot.
So people that are sexually abused in the past - that become rapists/phedophiles (?) - should be shot?

Umm. :huh:

If you think so, you should really watch movie "mystic river" it has some great views on this and the movie makes you think.

[XYZYX]

As far as the death penalty is concerned I think it should have no place in any society. To me, no crime would warrant the death of an individual. I think that rehabilitation should be the main goal on any office in charge of criminals.