Does he deserve mercy??

[akhilis2cool]

Ok, first off I’ve got to say that I’m not familiar with this case, or with the death penalty in India.


However I’d like to argue that the death penalty is not a suitable deterrent to crime in a just society.

why not??? its the fear of death that stops several people from doing criminal activities.

1. In the US the average cost of executing a prisoner is more expensive than the average cost of keeping one incarcerated for life. This is mainly due to the appeals process which is necessary to minimise the risk of executing an innocent (see 2), and so is necessary in any just society.

maximum no. of executions happen in the US...83 last year

If the state uses the death penalty, there is no way to guarantee that no innocents will be killed (there will always be mistakes)If the state DOES kill innocents, an injustice will have been done. The argument against the death penalty that I will put is that the second injustice (i.e. that of the state executing an innocent person) is a greater injustice than the first injustice (that of the state NOT executing a guilty person).

In india a DP is used in rarest of rare cases.... the last person was executed abt 8-9 yrs back...and this guy in Q has been in jail for the last 14 yrs....so u can see it is not very often that a DP is used in India

When you add this to the cost of executing the DP correctly (far more than the cost of life imprisonment, this money could be used to add extra police on the streets, education, and other things that would cut crime), I believe that the death penalty is wrong.

unlike the US in India there isnt much of a variety when it comes to executing people....as far as I know Hanging till death is used most often...hence there isnt much of a cost involved

[marko]

hi akhilis2cool,



first off, my statement that the death penalty isnt a suitable deterrent to crime in a just society was supposed to be supported by what comes after, rather than be taken as my entire arguement.



secondly, it doesn't matter how many executions a country (US or India) performs in a given year, on a long enough timescale the probability of executing an innocent person approaches 1, as long as you're prepared to concede that that chance is there at all.



Thirdly, it isn't the method of death that causes the cost, it's the appeals process that must be gone through for the sake of keeping things as fair as possible, and minimising the chance of executing an innocent. In any fair system this can take years and you know how much lawyers cost.

The only way to keep the cost down is to cut out the due process, and thats a very hard position to support.

[akhilis2cool]

for a moment u sounded like a NHRC (national human rights commission) representative.....always think abt the person who is going to be punished and not abt the families of the victim who was raped/mudered....



for u the substitute to execution is life improsnment.... u tell me how do u make sure that people will stop committing crime in such a case and how does it make sure that innocents are punished.....whether innocent people are hanged or imprisoned for life it is an injustice....how does one make sure that only the real criminals are executed....



lastly i feel that if people committing heanious crimes are given anything other than a DP it will b an injustice to the society.

[Lucifer]

for a moment u sounded like a NHRC (national human rights commission) representative.....always think abt the person who is going to be punished and not abt the families of the victim who was raped/mudered....

for u the substitute to execution is life improsnment.... u tell me how do u make sure that people will stop committing crime in such a case and how does it make sure that innocents are punished.....whether innocent people are hanged or imprisoned for life it is an injustice....how does one make sure that only the real criminals are executed....

lastly i feel that if people committing heanious crimes are given anything other than a DP it will b an injustice to the society.

A word of advice, akhilis2cool: Never argue with idiots. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience!

[marko the merciless]

for a moment u sounded like a NHRC (national human rights commission) representative.....always think abt the person who is going to be punished and not abt the families of the victim who was raped/mudered....

I'm sorry but i'm not talking about a specific case, as i said if it was i relative of mine i'd want to kill the bastard myself. Just because someone deserves to die doesn't mean that person should be killed.

for u the substitute to execution is life improsnment.... u tell me how do u make sure that people will stop committing crime in such a case and how does it make sure that innocents are punished.....whether innocent people are hanged or imprisoned for life it is an injustice....how does one make sure that only the real criminals are executed....

the person will stop commiting crime as they will be in jail for the rest of their lives. It has already been stated earlier on this thread that imprisonment for life isn't as bad as death, so this would be less of an injustice to the innocent.

lastly i feel that if people committing heanious crimes are given anything other than a DP it will b an injustice to the society.

and i agree with you! however I believe it's a bigger injustice for an innocent to be killed accidentally.





I know what i've wrote reads as if a large amonut of death row inmates are innocent, and this probably isnt the case, but if even 1 in 100 is innocent then my point is made.



This is what happened in the UK. A horrible crime was commited, a person was caught, and executed. People were delighted, gleefull. Then the real murderer was caught. There hasn't been an execution here since.

[marko the confused]

for a moment u sounded like a NHRC (national human rights commission) representative.....always think abt the person who is going to be punished and not abt the families of the victim who was raped/mudered....

for u the substitute to execution is life improsnment.... u tell me how do u make sure that people will stop committing crime in such a case and how does it make sure that innocents are punished.....whether innocent people are hanged or imprisoned for life it is an injustice....how does one make sure that only the real criminals are executed....

lastly i feel that if people committing heanious crimes are given anything other than a DP it will b an injustice to the society.

A word of advice, akhilis2cool: Never argue with idiots. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience!

Luci, explain to me how my argument is idiotic.

[Lucifer]

Luci, explain to me how my argument is idiotic.

Pray, what makes you think that was targetted at you?

[marko]

Luci, explain to me how my argument is idiotic.

Pray, what makes you think that was targetted at you?

The way you quoted akhilis2cool in your message. anyhow, sorry if i was snappy, i tend to take myself too seriously when i start arguing about things i care about.

[azazel]

im gonna have to agree with Akhil on this one.. thats how even i would've placed my argument.. but, one point raised by Marko also rings a bell.. what if an innocent man is executed?? who'll be at fault then.. well, for that sake, i'll say only after guilt has been proven beyond doubt should the sentence be carried out..

[akhilis2cool]

We cannot let killers/rapists scott free just for the fear of punising the innocents.



as far as punishing the innocents is concerned well thats the job of the investigtive agency...and as az says...Use DP when the guilt is proven beyond any doubt.

[marko]

We cannot let killers/rapists scott free just for the fear of punising the innocents.

Nobody in their right mind would ever allow that, please re-read my posts. I've already said that they deserve death, do i really sound like a soft touch? Jail for Life, no parole, as they do in the states on occasion.

as far as punishing the innocents is concerned well thats the job of the investigtive agency...and as az says...Use DP when the guilt is proven beyond any doubt.

In the US and the UK, the only way you can imprison someone is when their guilt is proven "beyond doubt". If there's doubt about the persons guilt in the mind of the jury, they have to acquit.

Despite this, there have been many, many cases of imprisonment overturned in later appeals.

Call me a sceptic but i think that people being people, there's bound to be a f*ck up somewhere along the line. In the case of the DP, that f*ck up cannot be fixed.

[azazel]

Jail for Life, no parole, as they do in the states on occasion

the problem is Jail for life sounds tough but for degenerates or someone who's habituated to visits to the cell..it may not be much.. in any case, there is hope for them to be free and if they get out noone can assume safely that they wont commit the crime again.. thats why its better to rid of such a$$holes rather than let someone else suffer at their hands.. esp. in the states where ive heard of sentences of 200 years being passed at some.. well, wtf?!?! a shot in the back of the head would suffice duncha think??

[marko]

Jail for Life, no parole, as they do in the states on occasion

the problem is Jail for life sounds tough but for degenerates or someone who's habituated to visits to the cell..it may not be much.. in any case, there is hope for them to be free and if they get out noone can assume safely that they wont commit the crime again.. thats why its better to rid of such a$$holes rather than let someone else suffer at their hands.. esp. in the states where ive heard of sentences of 200 years being passed at some.. well, wtf?!?! a shot in the back of the head would suffice duncha think??

I appreciate where you're coming from and I agree that these people deserve to die, they deserve worse than that. but you still havent touched on the problem of the state killing innocent people. No-one can argue that there is no chance of this happening, as the evidence to date shows that it has happened in the past.



Another side to this. Consider DNA evidence. Since the early 90's, when DNA evidence was first introduced in the US (sorry to keep coming back to the US) there have been 12 people acquited from death row due to DNA evidence submitted after the original court case proving their innocence. If DNA evidence had been discovered 10 years later, these innocent people would have been executed.

If it had been discovered 10 years earlier, a similar number might have been saved.

[azazel]

dude, thats why i keep saying carry out the sentence only when the guilt is beyond doubt.. DNA evidence has surely saved a lot of innocents from being locked up n it has also helped in the arrest n condemnation of criminals who were caught in certain instance a coupla decades after the crime!! i agree, the possibility will exist for innocent ppl ending up at the scaffold but we can minimize that if the investigators do their job well.. in the cases of proven guilt, which is the case mostly..whats the point in not carrying out the sentence??

[marko]

dude, thats why i keep saying carry out the sentence only when the guilt is beyond doubt.. DNA evidence has surely saved a lot of innocents from being locked up n it has also helped in the arrest n condemnation of criminals who were caught in certain instance a coupla decades after the crime!! i agree, the possibility will exist for innocent ppl ending up at the scaffold but we can minimize that if the investigators do their job well.. in the cases of proven guilt, which is the case mostly..whats the point in not carrying out the sentence??

my point is that even when guilt is proven there is a large margin for error.

you said that proven guilt is the case mostly, it should be the case ALL the time, or the system isnt just, however proven guilt still leaves room for mistakes.

[marko]

i agree, the possibility will exist for innocent ppl ending up at the scaffold but we can minimize that if the investigators do their job well.

A straight question, requiring a yes/no answer.



Do you believe that the right of an innocent person to live is outweighed by the need to execute killers?

[azazel]

my point is that even when guilt is proven there is a large margin for error

i dont understand it dude.. when the guilt is proven without a shadow of a doubt.. where's the room for error??? i can accept, if the conviction's based on circumstantial evidence, that there is a chance of erring.. but when the evidence is strong, the case is open n shut.. there's no chance of any errors creeping in..

Do you believe that the right of an innocent person to live is outweighed by the need to execute killers?

its not that simple as a YES or NO.. no time to answer now..shall get back to this..

[The Rainmaker]

i dont understand it dude.. when the guilt is proven without a shadow of a doubt.. where's the room for error???

i agree. marko, the best punishment for inhuman beings is... Death

[Alexis]

Im all for Capital Punishment too.

[CtrlAltDel]

i am for capital punishment...only if proved "beyond reasonable doubt" that the chap in question is guilty....incl any DNA tests etc...

[azazel]

see dude, ive got some support on this issue.. what i'd like u to do is to have a look at things from my point of view too.. thats all i ask.. i did see ur P.o.V , n i did agree with one of ur points.. if u can look thru wht ive said n just think for a sec.. im sure ull find sense there.. if u still cant.. then there's no point arguing anymore.. ne case.. no hard feelings..

[The Rainmaker]

i'd like to propose a change in the name of this thread, Az! the new title i have in mind :



>> Does MARKO deserve mercy? <<

[CtrlAltDel]

i'd like to propose a change in the name of this thread, Az! the new title i have in mind :
>> Does MARKO deserve mercy? <<

:lol:...oh cummon....he's expressing his views here against Death Sentence. he has some valid points too, tho we may disagree with other points of his. he is welcome to his views.

[azazel]

>> Does MARKO deserve mercy? <<

:lol:...oh cummon....he's expressing his views here against Death Sentence. he has some valid points too, tho we may disagree with other points of his. he is welcome to his views.

hehe RM.. CAD's right on this one.. Marko had a very good point to make here, i agreed with him on tht n gave him my side of the argument.. perhaps, the only real discussion ive had on the boards in quite sometime..

[marko]

>> Does MARKO deserve mercy? <<

:lol:...oh cummon....he's expressing his views here against Death Sentence. he has some valid points too, tho we may disagree with other points of his. he is welcome to his views.

hehe RM.. CAD's right on this one.. Marko had a very good point to make here, i agreed with him on tht n gave him my side of the argument.. perhaps, the only real discussion ive had on the boards in quite sometime..

hey, thanks guys. I realise in an issue like this nobody's going to change their mind, but i wanted to give you the strongest anti-DP argument and see how you would respond. now i know.