Euthanize rapists and pedophiles?

[Frater Sisyphus]

How's that for a paradox?

Legally murdering the murderers because it's illegal?


And if you think otherwise, how is it not murder?

 

[PureX]

No one has the right to take a life, in my book (with the possible exception of warfare, and even then, only under extreme circumstances).

I agree, and I believe this is true even in instances of warfare, or self-defense, as well.

But although we do not have a right to take anyone else's life, we do not live in a world where doing right is always going to be possible. Thus, even though it's wrong, it is also occasionally going to be necessary to take a human life for the greater (though imperfect) good. Which is why whenever such a circumstance occurs, and we must do what must be done, we should never consider ourselves justified. Because when we do that, we presume unto ourselves a power and wisdom that we do not rightly possess.

 

[Derek500]

What was the other option?

For all those people found guilty of crimes they didn't commit, it's life-ending.

 

[Derek500]

How's that for a paradox?

Legally murdering the murderers because it's illegal?


And if you think otherwise, how is it not murder?

I'm sorry, I cant read the yellow stuff. Could you please type it in black on white?

 

[HonestJoe]

Just wondering what the consensus is here.

It depends very much on the practical details of implementing such a policy. You could be talking about the “100% certainly of guilt” some people mention (which is technically impossible of course) and only the most serious and vicious crimes committed by the most unrepentant monsters, which would mean a tiny number of people and would have pretty much zero impact on society what-so-ever. You could be talking about anyone accused of a sexual offence and anyone who admits to having inappropriate sexual attraction being immediately subject to sub-judicial “euthanasia”, which I think would have a very negative impact on society.

One of the major reasons that we don’t have such laws and that the death penalty in general has been eliminated in many places around the world is the impossibility of striking that balance and the questionable notion that there is ever a number of people we could kill that would somehow make the world a better place.

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

I'm sorry, I cant read the yellow stuff. Could you please type it in black on white?

"Legally murdering the murderers because it's (murder) illegal"

 

[Jumi]

I think the doctor of the US gymnast team cut some lives shorter with his sexual abuses and should receive punishment accordingly.

 

[Shaul]

There is no way to tell how many of the more than 1,450 people executed since 1976 may also have been innocent. Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead. Defense attorneys move on to other cases where clients' lives can still be saved. Some cases with strong evidence of innocence include:

Carlos DeLuna: Texas — Conviction: 1983, Executed: 1989
Ruben Cantu: Texas — Conviction: 1985, Executed: 1993
Larry Griffin: Missouri — Conviction: 1981, Executed: 1995
Joseph O'Dell: Virginia — Conviction: 1986, Executed: 1997
David Spence: Texas — Conviction: 1984, Executed: 1997
Leo Jones: Florida — Conviction: 1981, Executed: 1998
Gary Graham: Texas — Conviction: 1981, Executed: 2000
Claude Jones: Texas — Conviction: 1989, Executed: 2000
Cameron Willingham: Texas — Conviction: 1992, Executed: 2004
Troy Davis: Georgia — Conviction: 1991, Executed: 2011
Lester Bower: Texas — Conviction: 1984, Executed: 2015
Brian Terrell: Georgia — Conviction: 1995, Executed: 2015
Richard Masterson: Texas — Conviction: 2002, Executed: 2016
Robert Pruett: Texas — Conviction: 2002, Executed: 2017

Executed But Possibly Innocent | Death Penalty Information Center

Your argument boils down to this: unless the death penalty is infallible and innocent people are never executed it shouldn’t be practiced. A retort is that a death penalty made as robust against such innocent people being executed as possible, but knowing the rare cases as collateral deaths may happen, nonetheless it is an unfortunate but acceptable price to have the deterrent of the death penalty.

Innocent people die as part of the price of having organized societies, with or without capital punishment. It is sad but true.

 

[dfnj]

Your argument boils down to this: unless the death penalty is infallible and innocent people are never executed it shouldn’t be practiced. A retort is that a death penalty made as robust against such innocent people being executed as possible, but knowing the rare cases as collateral deaths may happen, nonetheless it is an unfortunate but acceptable price to have the deterrent of the death penalty.

Innocent people die as part of the price of having organized societies, with or without capital punishment. It is sad but true.

I disagree with your OPINION. I do not believe it is acceptable to allow one single innocent person to die because people from Texas are stupid a holes. Life in prison is the answer. It has nothing to do with the criminal. It has everything to do with the government committing murder of innocent people. The Bible says killing is wrong.

 

[Poisonshady313]

As someone who supports the death penalty, i can't go along with sentencing rapists to death simply because it would incentivise rapists to murder their victims.

I have no problem letting rape and/or pedophilia be considered aggrivating factors in a 1st degree murder case.


But also, i believe that any person sentenced to a sentence of metaphorical length (300 years, multiple life sentences, etc) should be put to death. Either he's going to be free one day, or he's not. And the power to declare "not" is the power to declare death.

 

[1137]

Just wondering what the consensus is here.

I've seen the suffering pedophiles and rapists go through harassed and beat up in prison. They are unhappy, miserable, lonesome, despised, depraved creatures. Why pay all the tax payers dollars to pro long their agony if they could be comfortably put out of their misery?

It could also protect the innocent.

They deserve to be unhappy, miserable, and despised. They are depraved. Instead of just killing them off the easy way, why don't we do thinks like test medications or products on them, human guinea pigs? Theyre the ones who wanted to be animals.

 

[metis]

The death penalty is overly brutal in a civilized society since there are alternatives. Secondly, it is built on the idea that people cannot change, which we know is fallacious. Thirdly, just in the last two decades alone we've seen numerous people released from death row when d.n.a. tests show that it was not them.

And finally, "why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong"?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That's encouraging to see such conviction coming from conscience rather than Dogma . It shows people have a moral compass even without Religion

Such a conscience is actually quite easy to come by -- try it yourself (you could even cite Christ, if you cared to).

My point is simply that there is much that we don't understand about human psychology -- what makes a paedophile, or a murderer, or a mathematical genius, or a Shakespeare. But while we may approve of some of those, and need to protect ourselves against others, killing somebody who does not wish to be killed is always wrong, and is in direct contradiction to the very words of Jesus himself.

Yes, it may be necessary, for the protection of society's children, to keep a serial paedophile locked up. It may even be expensive. But at the moment we humans decide we have the right to decide who lives and who dies -- we usurp the role (as the religious generally see it) of God.

And that's not for us to do!

 

[lewisnotmiller]

How much is a human life worth?

Some? 2/5 of bugger all. The hard part is working out which are which.

 

[Euronymous]

I think we should only euthanize the imprisoned rapists and child molesters if they are willing to do so, which would probably be the best choice for them at this point.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

They deserve to be unhappy, miserable, and despised. They are depraved. Instead of just killing them off the easy way, why don't we do thinks like test medications or products on them, human guinea pigs? Theyre the ones who wanted to be animals.

"Wanted to be".

 

[Ultimatum]

Actually, the death penalty is, on average, considerably more expensive to the taxpayer than a life sentence.

Yes, because of Government intervention.