What would bother you more?

[jayem]

59 innocent people killed by a mass murderer, or
59 killers executed for committing murder?

It seems to me by the consensus on these boards regarding the death penalty that people would be bothered more by the death of criminals than the death of innocent people at the hands of criminals, as if these deaths are a more serious societal problem. Am I correct in assuming this

IMO, the important difference is that one is an action of an individual, and the other is an action of government. It's bad enough when one person kills another. But those opposed to capital punishment believe it's worse when government is given that power. Certainly to me, it's not an absolute opposition. No rational person would oppose police officers using lethal force to stop an active shooter, or hostage holder, or anyone immediately threatening other persons. (And defensive war may be justifiable at times.) But once a killer is apprehended and no longer an imminent threat, then it's a different situation. The feeling is that for everyone's protection, government should be held to a much higher standard. And its power over life and death should be very strictly limited.

 

[miamited]

The problem with "deterrence" is that most criminals don't think they will be caught, while a few just don't care. The DP does deter them from committing more crimes however, and that alone would justify it.

Hi OWG,

I agree that deterrence doesn't work for everyone. Hence God's law did go ahead and say that a murderer should be put to death, but...

As I concluded, it would be interesting to see if more regular use of that penalty for the crime of murder wouldn't stop some from committing their first murder. It would absolutely stop those who commit a murder after having gone to prison for their first. It's worth checking out the numbers of murderers who murder more than once and after having done some prison time for a first murder.

There is little hard data that I could find on the subject of murderers who serve prison time, but murder again after release. A study done in California of 988 released murderers says that none of them were ever charged with murder again, although many were arrested later for less serious crimes. Another report out of the U.K. chronicles 12 convicted murderers who murdered again after release. The site: prodeathpenalty.com gives a snapshot of a number of killers who killed again after being released from prison for their first murder. So, it would seem that it's not an avalanche, but there are people who would be alive today if their murderers had received the death penalty for their first murder.

However, repeat offending isn't the main point of my argument. My main point is whether the surety of receiving the death penalty for the crime of murder would have any effect on whether or not some might hold back murdering someone if they knew pretty surely that they would be put to death for doing so. There's really only one way to find out if it would and I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

After all, many people obey the speed limit and I believe that many of them do so because they know the likely consequence of not doing so. I remember someone telling me once that I shouldn't speed on a toll road that uses tickets for ingress and egress. He went on to say that the tickets were time stamped and they could convict me of speeding if I checked out to soon at my exit. I don't know if that's true or not, but it obviously made some difference to him that he was being clocked and shouldn't speed because of it. Would it make a difference to someone, in the moments before they were contemplating murdering someone, that they were pretty much committing their own suicide in doing so?

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[Strathos]

I'd be more upset about 59 murderers existing than one murderer existing.

 

[brinny]

Ezekiel 33:11
Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live.

God is the God of the living, not of the dead. He does not like death, period. Regardless of whether it is so-called "innocents" (we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, so there are no innocents) or hardened killers.

And we are admonished to have our minds transformed to be like Christ's. Subjection fo the morality of death (as Stringfellow calls it) takes us in the opposite direction.

God abhors the shedding of innocent blood.

There are seven things God hates (yes, hates).

Do you know what they are?

 

[PreviouslySeeking...]

Hi PS,

You wrote:


I also agree with that and also agree that we need to be somewhat more aggressive in applying the death penalty. Some states have taken such possibility out of the equation altogether. I agree that's a bad idea.

One of the problems with the death penalty being applied so hit or miss is that it really doesn't have the deterrent effect that I believe was God's purpose in making such a law to begin with. I believe that God gave such law so that for such crimes people need to know that they were going to die for doing such things. I believe that if our entire society knew without a doubt that killing someone else would surely bring about their own death, that many might think twice before committing such an act. But the law against murder that we have here in the U.S. doesn't provide that deterrent effect. Most everyone knows that if they commit murder they might have to do a few years in prison and even that depends on the capabilities of their attorney. According to 'straightdope. com, the average time spent in prison in the U.S. for the crime of murder is 71 months. That's about 5 years. So it becomes a roll of the dice. Commit murder, and if I get caught, I'll likely wind up doing a few years in prison.

It would be interesting to me to see what happens to our murder rate if capital punishment were the nearly universal sentence for murder. Further, if we were consistent in applying the death penalty, we would at least stop a single offender from committing more murders upon their release from prison. There are actually quite a few people who are found guilty of murder, do their time, and repeat that same offense after release.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

I don't know that I believe the death penalty was ever a deterrent. I just believe that prison should be about rehabilitation and some crimes are such a violation of the social code that rehabilitation is neither possible nor is reintroduction into the social fabric.

 

[Dawnhammer]

59 innocent people killed by a mass murderer, or
59 killers executed for committing murder?

Well, 59 people killed by a lunatic is a failure of the invidual, 59 people killed by the justice system could be a symptom of something far worse.

 

[Halbhh]

59 innocent people killed by a mass murderer, or
59 killers executed for committing murder?

It seems to me by the consensus on these boards regarding the death penalty that people would be bothered more by the death of criminals than the death of innocent people at the hands of criminals, as if these deaths are a more serious societal problem. Am I correct in assuming this?

Certainly the first is far worse. I'd even guess if you asked a person directly you think believes the 2nd is worse, you'd find out they do not think so!

But, don't stop there. We additionally know that the 2nd is very risky for us to endorse just by itself without any qualifications, because we have learned that sometimes innocent men have been executed for crimes they did not commit -- the Innocence Project can tell you more on that. Because of this continuing flaw of innocents sometimes being convicted of murders they did not do, because of that, I think it is better to instead make many of them do life in prison without parole instead, just to avoid the risk of sometimes having the state execute an innocent. As a Christian I go further though. I believe we need to reach even those who are guilty (or innocent) in prison, and try to convert them to Christ, and utterly change their lives.

 

[Monna]

I know this. I've even quoted this myself. And I know that I am sinful myself. But it is the easiest thing to preach on Mercy when our loved ones are not the ones who were killed. I know that my attitude is completely wrong. But I am putting myself in their shoes. So that's what I am doing. I'm emphasizing with the people who lost loved ones. If my mom was the one who got killed, I wouldn't want to sit there and hear about how everyone is sinful and we all deserve death. I know all of this too well.

It wasn't an attack on you personally. I apologise if you felt it was. But it doesn't change the truth that God wants and is able to transform our minds to conform to his. Bad things happen to good people. God sees this and knows it. He is angry at the intransigence of people (like me) that insist on claiming the right to judge others, and even condemn them to death - if not actual death in reality, at least death in our hearts and minds. That doubles the victory of evil, by corrupting my heart. I also know that I cannot transform myself, I need him. But the transformation can only show itself in what we think, say and do at precisely such moments. Our model is Jesus himself, who while being nailed to the cross asked his Father to "forgive them, they don't know what they're doing."

If you feel I was pointing my finger at you, I'm sorry. I'm the one that's conscious that if and when I do so, I have three pointing at myself.

When you wrote "emphasizing" I assume you meant "empathising."

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Hi OWG,

I agree that deterrence doesn't work for everyone. Hence God's law did go ahead and say that a murderer should be put to death, but...

As I concluded, it would be interesting to see if more regular use of that penalty for the crime of murder wouldn't stop some from committing their first murder. It would absolutely stop those who commit a murder after having gone to prison for their first. It's worth checking out the numbers of murderers who murder more than once and after having done some prison time for a first murder.

There is little hard data that I could find on the subject of murderers who serve prison time, but murder again after release. A study done in California of 988 released murderers says that none of them were ever charged with murder again, although many were arrested later for less serious crimes. Another report out of the U.K. chronicles 12 convicted murderers who murdered again after release. The site: prodeathpenalty.com gives a snapshot of a number of killers who killed again after being released from prison for their first murder. So, it would seem that it's not an avalanche, but there are people who would be alive today if their murderers had received the death penalty for their first murder.

However, repeat offending isn't the main point of my argument. My main point is whether the surety of receiving the death penalty for the crime of murder would have any effect on whether or not some might hold back murdering someone if they knew pretty surely that they would be put to death for doing so. There's really only one way to find out if it would and I don't expect that to happen any time soon.

After all, many people obey the speed limit and I believe that many of them do so because they know the likely consequence of not doing so. I remember someone telling me once that I shouldn't speed on a toll road that uses tickets for ingress and egress. He went on to say that the tickets were time stamped and they could convict me of speeding if I checked out to soon at my exit. I don't know if that's true or not, but it obviously made some difference to him that he was being clocked and shouldn't speed because of it. Would it make a difference to someone, in the moments before they were contemplating murdering someone, that they were pretty much committing their own suicide in doing so?

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

There is no way to determine if the DP deters anyone. That's why I regard it only as a fitting punishment for certain crimes.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Well, 59 people killed by a lunatic is a failure of the invidual, 59 people killed by the justice system could be a symptom of something far worse.

Don't forget the 59 murderers.

 

[Dawnhammer]

“An eye-for-eye and tooth-for-tooth would lead to a world of the blind and toothless.”

 

[OldWiseGuy]

“An eye-for-eye and tooth-for-tooth would lead to a world of the blind and toothless.”

That's funny, but what that actually means is "let the punishment fit the crime". Very fair, very just.

 

[Dawnhammer]

Very fair, very just.

Drunken driver paralyzes someone in car accident and they break his spine for that so he can be invalid as well ?

Only people with no imagination see the world as black and white.

 

[Audacious]

I can't answer the question in the OP -- not with a "this one or this one" kind answer, anyway. My feelings from either event would be different for a lot of reasons.

I would be upset from a mass shooting, because lots of random, innocent people lose their lives. The grief, and the tragedy, and the awfulness of it all is just... almost inconceivable.

I would be upset from a mass execution, because I am against any executions. I am absolutely against the death penalty, and I don't think it's right to kill people when everyone (in my opinion) deserves the chance to be redeemed. Executions are, in my opinion, one of the very worst ways in which governments misuse and abuse their powers.

I couldn't pick one from between the two. Because we're all sinners in God's eyes and we all make mistakes, and we all deserve to be loved and valued. I don't think a person's actions, no matter how angry or disgusted they make me, can take that away from them.

Side note: I've never seen the point in "justice" the way some people talk about it. I don't want to punish anyone. I want to make the world a better place; and you don't do that by needlessly increasing a person's misery.

 

[Introverted1293]

It wasn't an attack on you personally. I apologise if you felt it was. But it doesn't change the truth that God wants and is able to transform our minds to conform to his. Bad things happen to good people. God sees this and knows it. He is angry at the intransigence of people (like me) that insist on claiming the right to judge others, and even condemn them to death - if not actual death in reality, at least death in our hearts and minds. That doubles the victory of evil, by corrupting my heart. I also know that I cannot transform myself, I need him. But the transformation can only show itself in what we think, say and do at precisely such moments. Our model is Jesus himself, who while being nailed to the cross asked his Father to "forgive them, they don't know what they're doing."

If you feel I was pointing my finger at you, I'm sorry. I'm the one that's conscious that if and when I do so, I have three pointing at myself.

When you wrote "emphasizing" I assume you meant "empathising."

Please forgive me for going off on you.

I know that you are right I don't have the right to judge people to death. I just feel angry sometimes towards people that inflict these kinds of pains on people. I know that it is wrong for me to wish the death penalty on such people. And I know that I deserve death myself.

And yes I met empathizing.

I was upset. And I put myself in their shoes. I thought long and hard of how to respond if it happened to my family. And I probably would have been angry and wanted to kill the people that hurt my family. But I know that that would be wrong. It's just hard not to wish the death penalty on people who would inflict pain on other people like that. But I know that it is wrong for me to wish them dead.

 

[Monna]

Please forgive me for going off on you.

You are forgiven ... (as if I have the authority to forgive..) Your feelings are entirely natural. Anger at injustice (the 'innocents' that are murdered), indignation over evil (the act of violence, of hate, of murder), are feelings I believe God shares. A paraphrase of Paul's words might be - "it's OK to get angry (at these things), just don't let your anger lead you to sin." It's that next step where I generally lose it - I think of revenge, of recrimination, maybe even of rage at the unfairness of it all... and I decide that I know the best way to deal with these monsters. I cease to see them as human beings, I cease to see and admit that the rage I am feeling against them, is maybe the same rage that has been working in them over some perceived (real or not) injustice they have been subjected to.

I've had a life full of God's blessings, in spite of some rough times. Yet I know all too well, that had it not been for God's grace, I could have ended up just as evil in my behaviour as the guy who murdered 58 people in Las Vegas. I condemn the act, but I must feel deep pain for this man, loved of God, who commited the heinous deed. Not because I am a better person, but because it could have been me, had in not been for Jesus Christ working 'overtime' in my life.

 

[Nithavela]

59 innocent people killed by a mass murderer, or
59 killers executed for committing murder?

It seems to me by the consensus on these boards regarding the death penalty that people would be bothered more by the death of criminals than the death of innocent people at the hands of criminals, as if these deaths are a more serious societal problem. Am I correct in assuming this?

Both bother me roughly the same, but if I had to choose, I'd take the 59 innocents. They might die, but before that, they don't have to suffer and live in fear for decades.

 

[miamited]

There is no way to determine if the DP deters anyone. That's why I regard it only as a fitting punishment for certain crimes.

Hi OWG,

I agree that it would be very difficult to offer any proof as to whether or not a law creates an attitude of deterrence in one's mind. However, God only gave it as a fitting punishment for certain crimes. I agree with both Him and you in that.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[Tanj]

59 innocent people killed by a mass murderer, or
59 killers executed for committing murder?

It seems to me by the consensus on these boards regarding the death penalty that people would be bothered more by the death of criminals than the death of innocent people at the hands of criminals, as if these deaths are a more serious societal problem. Am I correct in assuming this?

Well, it's worth pointing out the two times you were right on this board were so unprecedented you decided to start a thread celebrating the rightness for each occasion. Based on this I'll go out on a limb and suggest no, you are not correct.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Well, it's worth pointing out the two times you were right on this board were so unprecedented you decided to start a thread celebrating the rightness for each occasion. Based on this I'll go out on a limb and suggest no, you are not correct.

I appreciate your input.