Capital Punishment - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Crime and prevention thereof. Loopholes, grey areas and the letter of the law.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732865
Why should or should not there be the death penalty as an option for crimes?
I would like to see the reasoning for the death penalty.
How should it be carried out?
By Donald
#14732867
Thomas Aquinas on capital punishment:

Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good . . . . ST IIa-IIae, q. 64, a. 2.

It is permissible to kill a criminal if this is necessary for the welfare of the whole community. However, this right belongs only to the one entrusted with the care of the whole community -- just as a doctor may cut off an infected limb, since he has been entrusted with the care of the health of the whole body. ST IIa-IIae, q. 64, a. 3.


My view is more or less the same.
User avatar
By AFAIK
#14732871
Some people are incapable of being reformed and rehabilitated. If a society has the resources and compassion to keep such a person imprisoned for the rest of his natural life then they can do so. If they prefer to execute such a person I wouldn't object although I feel standards of evidence should be higher in order to acquire a death sentence. An imprisoned criminal can be pardoned or exonerated at a future date but a condemned criminal cannot so reasonable doubt should be narrower for capital offenses.
By anasawad
#14732873
It would ultimatly depend on the context and the society in hand.

Fighting crime is usually and best handled by two main ways first is education and strengthing the social structure, and second fear of punishment and strict laws.
With the focus shifting between them depending on the spread of crime and type of society and culture in hand.

For example, to compare 2 countries in one catagory of crimes and what the solution for each.
Switzerland has the lowest crime rates in the world, even in the sexual crimes in the world, and has very strong and considerably unified social structure and peaceful culture as of the recent decades.
In case of switzerland education on one hand and social programs are the thing to focus on in fighting crimes and establishing a rehabilitation program for criminals as the probability of rehabilitation is very good.


On the other hand, you have countries like Egypt, where in the catagory of sex crimes like rape, sexual assault, and harassment, is one of the highest in the world with vast spread and unbelievable number of women being vcictims of such crimes.
In the same time, Egyptian culture among youth in many areas has turned into a very violent and aggressive one specially against women. Making a focus on long term educational and cultural reformation programs risky to say the least as by the time a slight result start showing, 10s and maybe 100s of thousands of women will fall victims to these crimes, and possibly more.
That means you have to introduce a strong justice system that will make anyone thinking about commiting such crime not only afraid of the punishment for it but also be certain that he'll be caught for it. That includes death penalty not only introduced for serious crimes but also low grade crimes in the same catagory, with educational nd cultural reformation programs coming only after the situation is contained.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732876
anasawad wrote:That means you have to introduce a strong justice system that will make anyone thinking about commiting such crime not only afraid of the punishment for it but also be certain that he'll be caught for it. That includes death penalty not only introduced for serious crimes but also low grade crimes in the same catagory, with educational nd cultural reformation programs coming only after the situation is contained.

There is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime.
By anasawad
#14732884
Depends on what type of death penalty you're talking about.
'm talking about public ones. Where fear will be spread among those who consider doing the given crime.


It worked quite well in Jordan when king Hussein did it, where after a somewhat of a rape academic, rapists became to be hanged in public in the capital center.
Crime fell down greatly, until that was cancelled with the idiot, king Abdullah, and the same epidemic is starting again in many areas.

In Lebanon, Beqa' and south this is also the case, where crimes like rape and sexual assault is punished by authorities there with death penalty.
With population of over 4 million people living in those regions, only 9 rapes accured with this year, with 7 of them done by refugees.

Iran has the same thing in most areas, east of Iran atleast for higher grade crimes. the east is due to that much safer, has much less crimes rates of all types, and needs far less spending on local security.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732891
anasawad wrote:Depends on what type of death penalty you're talking about.
'm talking about public ones. Where fear will be spread among those who consider doing the given crime.

There is no evidence, and there probably can't be.
In the U.S., states that have abolished the death penalty have consistently had lower murder rates on average.
There are many factors, but the death penalty hasn't been shown to make up for most of the difference.
#14732892
GlobalBuddy wrote:There is no evidence, and there probably can't be.
In the U.S., states that have abolished the death penalty have consistently had lower murder rates on average.
There are many factors, but the death penalty hasn't been shown to make up for most of the difference.

Explain the USSR and Italy.
By anasawad
#14732896
we use it and it works greatly along side other factors,
you don't use it and the number of crimes per year is larger than the population of many small countries.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732897
anasawad wrote:we use it and it works greatly along side other factors,
you don't use it and the number of crimes per year is larger than the population of many small countries.

The death penalty isn't the deciding factor with whether there will be mass murders.
Averages on homicide rates in countries with and without the death penalty have shown that countries that abolished the death penalty have lower homicide rates overall.
By anasawad
#14732898
and does those studies of yours compare homicide rates between stable countries and countries in internal conflicts and conclude that the ones without death penalty who happen to be stable countries have lower crime rates than those with death penalty but on a side happen to be in an ongoing conflict or instability ?

Because those are the ones usually shown and quoted.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732899
@Tewodros III
If you mean lower crime rates with strict and strong punishments in the USSR, that may depend on the way it was implemented. However, I am focusing on modern day and the way it is commonly carried out.
If the state had mass arrests and executions, crime can go down (the U.S. mass imprisonment is likely one of the factors behind the decreasing crime), but the U.S. has only executed about 1440 people since 1976 and requires a longer process of investigation which costs more than a 40 year imprisonment. Other countries without capital punishment have lower homicide rates than the U.S., and U.S. states that abolished the death penalty consistently have lower murder rates than the states that still have it.

The USSR also had more egalitarian distributions of resources, which may be a large factor into their crime.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732901
anasawad wrote:and does those studies of yours compare homicide rates between stable countries and countries in internal conflicts and conclude that the ones without death penalty who happen to be stable countries have lower crime rates than those with death penalty but on a side happen to be in an ongoing conflict or instability ?

Because those are the ones usually shown and quoted.

It compares almost all countries, including Honduras (which has no death penalty, but the highest homicide rates).

At this point, you concede your point on capital punishment being a requirement for lower crime.
In the end, it turns out that there is more to crime than whether executions take place.
By anasawad
#14732902
No, there are many factors, however as i said in my first post, when situation get out of hand, enforcing death penalty and public executions along stricter laws and punishments has so far worked to contain high crime rates everytime.

So as i said in my first post, countries like switzerland don't need death penalty because it already passed all the steps to reach that stage.
Countries like egypt needs the death penalty because it reached incredably high rates in all sorts of crimes and cant be contained by any other means.


And yes, all those studies which people arguing about this topic and keep posting all does the same thing.
They disregard stability and political and economic status of the countries, which means its by all means incomplete and shows nothing but hot air.
User avatar
By GlobalBuddy
#14732908
anasawad wrote:They disregard stability and political and economic status of the countries, which means its by all means incomplete and shows nothing but hot air.

That isn't their point anyways.

The death penalty isn't necessarily going to lower the crime in high crime rate countries, it doesn't have nearly as much of an effect as the social and economic conditions in a place at a given time. Therefore, a place having a high homicide rate is really irrelevant to whether they should implement capital punishment.
Last edited by GlobalBuddy on 05 Nov 2016 07:07, edited 1 time in total.
By anasawad
#14732912
@GlobalBuddy
That isn't their point anyways.

Anyone who looks at crime rates without those factors is either a 5 year old or simply an idiot.

The death penalty isn't necessarily going to lower the crime in high crime rate countries, it doesn't have nearly as much of an effect as the social and economic conditions in a place at a given time. Therefore, a place having a high homicide rate is really irrelevant to whether they should implement capital punishment.


Read what i write for once.
Countries like egypt needs the death penalty because it reached incredably high rates in all sorts of crimes and cant be contained by any other means.


Thats why you have things like martial law, and death penalty. When things get out of control or crime rate sky rockets, you need to use the very last thing to push crime down, and that is fear.
Is it tried before ? Yes, countless times, and in our age, i already mentioned that we already used it and it worked, in 3 different countries.

There are no predetermined "stages" a society goes through in behavior.

There are stages for all reformation programs to go through, and its long term.
Thats why when you have conditions like in Egypt, long term will mean you'll have a few million victims on your hand before you're done with preparing basic needs for any supposed program.
That, as you might imagen, is a stupid solution to wait for without doing any short term and direct action, which is usually by applying strecter and harder laws and more security to prevent crime.
Trump's Dumb Economics

Look @blackjack21 If I want to discuss anything […]

apparently KSA and USA are both paper tigers their[…]

Part 2 of 3 Which is also a sign of how far t[…]

How rich are the Rotschilds realy

Here a clip explains how the FED works https://ww[…]