4 ms·

I'm going to step outside the political fight about whether or not the state should be able to kill people. I don't want to get into that. So, whether or not ca

I'm going to step outside the political fight about whether or not the state should be able to kill people. I don't want to get into that. So, whether or not capital punishment should exists depends mostly on your theory of incarceration. If you believe prison and the law exists to remedy a wrong inside the person committing the crime, via rehabilitation, capital punishment serves no purpose. If prison exists as a holding cell (ha) until individuals within the system are rehabilitated and provided with supports to reintegrate into society, killing them serves zero purpose. If you believe prison and the law exists to remedy wrongs by punishing the person who committed the crime and allowing victims legal means of retribution/revenge, then capital punishment is absolutely necessary for some crimes. I'm not honestly sure where I fall on that scale. I believe we (the US) is failing in our duty to individuals who are in prison, via piss-poor rehabilitation services. But I also believe some crimes deserve the death penalty. Not sure what to do with that.

havblue 3y ago
There are more justifications for punishment though as deterrence and incapacitation are also discussed in the model penal code. Now, some certainly argue that deterrence isn't effective but I think it's a better justification than retribution.
dfxm12 3y ago
FWIW, keeping prisoners on death row is also more expensive for tax payers than even life imprisonment. This money can be put to better use than pumping it towards lawyers and legal fees, for sure, whether it's prison reform, or anything. allowing victims legal means of retribution/revenge, then capital punishment is absolutely necessary for some crimes How can you be so sure? Dennis Shepard famously didn't want the death penalty for his son's murderer. You also hear of stories of the families of victims not getting any closure after a convict is put to death. The victims themselves are often dead and can't obtains things like retribution or revenge. It's not as "absolutely necessary" as you're painting it here.

havblue 3y ago

There are more justifications for punishment though as deterrence and incapacitation are also discussed in the model penal code. Now, some certainly argue that deterrence isn't effective but I think it's a better justification than retribution.

dfxm12 3y ago

FWIW, keeping prisoners on death row is also more expensive for tax payers than even life imprisonment. This money can be put to better use than pumping it towards lawyers and legal fees, for sure, whether it's prison reform, or anything. allowing victims legal means of retribution/revenge, then capital punishment is absolutely necessary for some crimes How can you be so sure? Dennis Shepard famously didn't want the death penalty for his son's murderer. You also hear of stories of the families of victims not getting any closure after a convict is put to death. The victims themselves are often dead and can't obtains things like retribution or revenge. It's not as "absolutely necessary" as you're painting it here.