# Think Tank > Political Philosophy & Government Policy >  What do you think of the death penalty?

## donnie darko

Does the state have a right to take a life?

Also - what about personal/privatized revenge murder?

----------


## Anti Federalist

Opposed.

----------


## A Son of Liberty

> Opposed.


//

----------


## Cabal

> Does the state have a right to take a life?


The State has no rights at all.

----------


## phill4paul

> Opposed.





> //


//

----------


## angelatc

> //


//

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Nice theory, doesn't work in practice due to abuse by establishment and the often impossible task of truly discovering guilt.

----------


## Working Poor

When I was younger I was in favor of the dp. Now I oppose it.

----------


## Antischism

Always have, always will oppose it.

----------


## jllundqu

I am ok with the death penalty if I am the injured person who gets to exact revenge.  Not OK with the government deciding who lives and who dies.

----------


## Cutlerzzz

> //


//

----------


## JK/SEA

Death penalty for a mundane?...against.

Death penalty for a political traitor?....i'm open to discuss.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> Opposed.


//

----------


## CaptUSA

> When I was younger I was in favor of the dp. Now I oppose it.




Um... nevermind.

----------


## dannno

> When I was younger I was in favor of the dp. Now I oppose it.





> Um... nevermind.


//

----------


## Cabal

> I am ok with the death penalty if I am the injured person who gets to exact revenge.  Not OK with the government deciding who lives and who dies.


So it's right for you to kill for revenge. But it's not right for others to kill in the name of revenge for you. Doesn't seem very consistent.

The effect is that someone is being killed for the sake of vengeance. What does it matter who does the killing if you've already conceded that the killing in the name of vengeance is righteous?

Also, what about equability? If you've only been injured, and apparently not injured enough to such an extent that you can't carry out the vengeance killing, why is it right for you to kill in retaliation?

----------


## Keith and stuff

I cannot trust the government with this type of power. Abolish the government death penalty. 

That's Ron Paul's position, BTW. I completely agree.

----------


## V3n

Opposed.  Too much room for error, and too easy to abuse.




> Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.

----------


## 69360

For it, but with a very high standard of proof only.

----------


## MelissaWV

Opposed to the death penalty.  Of course, assuming there are still human mediators and jurors, if you kill someone who has wronged you, you are welcome to gamble your freedom on garnering enough sympathy to sway someone.

----------


## CaseyJones

any government that can legally kill you will never respect your rights

----------


## GunnyFreedom

We ought to have a death penalty, but there is no human government on Earth that is not far too corrupted to administer it.

----------


## puppetmaster

Not by the state or feds

----------


## eduardo89

100% for it in cases of first degree murder, certain types of rape (especially of a child), for abortionists, and for those who traffic in women and children.

----------


## Occam's Banana

Opposed - on both moralistic and pragmatic grounds.

----------


## VIDEODROME

The only place for Execution is during wartime for the crime of Treason.  I'm not talking about our bull$#@! interventions, I mean a situation where we are attacked domestically such as Pearl Harbor.  An American aiding the enemy under those conditions should be shot.  

During peacetime I see no place for it.

----------


## donnay

> Opposed - on both moralistic and pragmatic grounds.


//

----------


## RickyJ

I am not for torture until a person confesses to mass murder just like the Jews did to the Nazis. Oh you were talking about the death penalty, my bad. What is worse, the death penalty or making a prisoner your slave for life? Most prisoners would choose death over that. I am for a reasonable punishment, if that happens to be death, so be it, though in most cases it is not reasonable.

----------


## green73

> Does the state have a right to take a life?
> 
> Also - what about personal/privatized revenge murder?


The state does not have a right to exist. In a private law society, victims of murder should have the option of a tooth for a tooth, plus another tooth. 

http://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/m...how-to-punish/

----------


## RickyJ

> 100% for it in cases of first degree murder, certain types of rape (especially of a child), for abortionists, and for those who traffic in women and children.


I think it should be decided on a case by case basis for first degree murder and rape. I agree with you on those that traffic in women and children and abortionists though.

----------


## RickyJ

> Also - what about personal/privatized revenge murder?


The only time private killing is justified is in self-defense. If it isn't in self-defense or defense of others, then it shouldn't be done.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> 100% for it in cases of first degree murder, certain types of rape (especially of a child), for abortionists, and for those who traffic in women and children.


That way of thinking is less pro-liberty than Cooch, who isn't even pro-liberty himself. The US could greatly use many 1000s of addition doctors and you want to murder 1000s of the current doctors in the US in cold blood? Get over yourself already.

I'm not sure if the OP was trolling or not but there are certain issues where the vast majority of liberty folks take 1 side on but some liberty lovers take another side on. For example, same-sex government marriage, the death penalty and preemptive wars. You not only take the extreme minority side, but you go 5 steps further.

I am sorry but the is the USA, 1 of the most, if not the most, pro-choice places on Earth. Murdering the very few doctors we have in cold blood isn't going to solve any problems, especially if you are a fiscal conservative, since it costs substantially more to use than death penalty on a criminal than it costs to not use the death penalty. You are advocating for massive tax increases. For massive increases in the debt. Perhaps even slavery to pay for this. Not to mention the potentially 100,000s of women that will be subject to make I jibes or death every year if they get back alley abortitions.

----------


## phill4paul

> 100% for it in cases of first degree murder, certain types of rape (especially of a child), for abortionists, and for those who traffic in women and children.


  This list contains names of people who were found guilty of capital crimes and placed on death row, and were later found to be wrongly convicted. Some people were exonerated posthumously.

19301939[edit]
1937
1. Willie Roberson, Olen Montgomery, Eugene Williams, and Roy Wright Alabama. Convicted 1931.
19701979[edit]
1973
1. David Keaton, Florida (Keaton v. State, 273 So.2d 385 (1973)). Convicted 1971.
1974
2. Samuel A. Poole, North Carolina (State v. Poole, 203 S.E.2d 786 (N.C. 1974)). Convicted 1973.
1975
3. Wilbert Lee, Florida (Pitts v. State 247 So.2d 53 (Fla. 1971), overturned and released by pardon in 1975). Convicted 1963.
4. Freddie Pitts, Florida (Pitts v. State 247 So.2d 53 (Fla. 1971), overturned and released by pardon in 1975). Convicted 1965.
5. James Creamer, Georgia (Emmett v. Ricketts, 397 F. Supp 1025 (N.D. Ga. 1975)). Convicted 1973.
6. Christopher Spicer, North Carolina (State v. Spicer, 204 SE 2d 641 (1974)). Convicted 1973.
1976
7. Clarence Norris, Alabama. Convicted 1931.
8. Thomas Gladish, New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
9. Richard Greer, New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
10. Ronald Keine, New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
11. Clarence Smith, New Mexico. Convicted 1974.
1977
11. Delbert Tibbs, Florida. Convicted 1974.
1978
12. Earl Charles, Georgia. Convicted 1975.
13. Jonathan Treadway, Arizona. Convicted 1975.
1979
14. Gary Beeman, Ohio. Convicted 1976.
19801989[edit]
1980
15. Jerry Banks
16. Larry Hicks
1981
17. Charles Ray Giddens
18. Michael Linder
19. Johnny Ross
20. Ernest (Shuhaa) Graham
1982
21. Annibal Jaramillo
22. Lawyer Johnson, Massachusetts (Commonwealth v. Johnson, 429 N.E.2d 726 (1982)). Convicted 1971.
1985
23. Larry Fisher
1986
24. Anthony Brown
25. Neil Ferber
26. Clifford Henry Bowen
1987
27. Joseph Green Brown. He was re-arrested in 2012 and charged with another murder in North Carolina.[2]
28. Perry Cobb
29. Darby (Williams) Tillis
30. Vernon McManus
31. Anthony Ray Peek
32. Juan Ramos
33. Robert Wallace
1988
34. Richard Neal Jones
35. Willie Brown
36. Larry Troy
1989
37. Randall Dale Adams, Texas (Ex Parte Adams, 768 S.W.2d 281) (Tex. Crim App. 1989). Convicted 1977.[3][4]
38. Robert Cox
39. James Richardson
On April 8, 2010, former death row inmate Timothy B. Hennis, once exonerated in 1989, was reconvicted of a triple murder, thereby dropping him from the list of those exonerated.[5] Sentenced to death by military court-martial 15 April 2010.
19901999[edit]
1990
40. Clarence Brandley, Texas (Ex Parte Brandley, 781 S.W.2d 886 (Tex. Crim App. 1989). Convicted 1981.
41. John C. Skelton
42. Dale Johnston
43. Jimmy Lee Mathers
1991
44. Gary Nelson
45. Bradley P. Scott
46. Charles Smith
1992
47. Jay C. Smith, Pennsylvania. Convicted 1986.
1993
48. Kirk Bloodsworth, Maryland. Convicted 1984. Exonerated 1993; first prisoner to be exonerated by DNA evidence. Serving life in prison when exonerated, as earlier death sentence was overturned.
49. Federico M. Macias
50. Walter McMillan
51. Gregory R. Wilhoit Oklahoma. Convicted 1987. Along with Ron Williamson, Wilhoit later became the subject of John Grisham's 2006 non-fiction book The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town.[6]
52. James Robison
53. Muneer Deeb
1994
54. Andrew Golden
1995
55. Adolph Munson
56. Robert Charles Cruz. (Cruz disappeared in 1997. His remains were found in 2007.[7])
57. Rolando Cruz
58. Alejandro Hernández
59. Sabrina Butler
1996
60. Joseph Burrows. Joseph Burrows was released from death row after his attorney Kathleen Zellner persuaded the real killer to confess at the post-conviction hearing, and Peter Rooney, a reporter for the Champaign-Urbana News-Gazette, obtained a recantation from a key witness.[8] The Burrows case was the subject of a book by Rooney titled Die Free: A True Story of Murder, Betrayal and Miscarried Justice.
61. Verneal Jimerson
62. Dennis Williams
63. Roberto Miranda
64. Gary Gauger
65. Troy Lee Jones
66. Carl Lawson
67. David Wayne Grannis
1997
68. Ricardo Aldape Guerra
69. Benjamin Harris
70. Robert Hayes
71. Christopher McCrimmon
72. Randall Padgett
It is later revealed, through additional research by Prof. Samuel Gross of the University of Michigan, that though James Bo Cochran was acquitted of murder, he did plead guilty to a robbery charge in an agreement made with prosecutors prior to his release. Therefore, Cochran is no longer on the list of those exonerated from death row.[9]
1998
73. Robert Lee Miller, Jr.
74. Curtis Kyles.
1999
75. Shareef Cousin, Louisiana (Louisiana v. Cousin, 710 So. 2d 1065 (1998)). Convicted 1996.
76. Anthony Porter, Illinois. Convicted 1983.
77. Steven Smith
78. Ronald Williamson, Oklahoma. Convicted 1988. Along with Gregory R. Wilhoit, Williamson later became the inspiration for and subject of John Grisham's 2006 non-fiction book The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town.[6]
79. Ronald Jones
80. Clarence Dexter, Jr.
81. Warren Douglas Manning
82. Alfred Rivera
20002009[edit]
2000
83. Steve Manning
84. Eric Clemmons
85. Joseph Nahume Green
86. Earl Washington, Virginia (pardoned). Convicted 1994 (1984, without life sentence).
87. William Nieves
88. Frank Lee Smith (died prior to exoneration)
89. Michael Graham
90. Albert Burrell
91. Oscar Lee Morris
2001
92. Peter Limone
93. Gary Drinkard
94. Joachin José Martínez
95. Jeremy Sheets
96. Charles Fain
2002
97. Juan Roberto Melendez-Colon, Florida. Convicted 1984.
98. Ray Krone, Arizona (State v. Krone, 897 P.2d 621 (Ariz. 1995) (en banc)). Convicted 1992.
99. Thomas Kimbell, Jr.
100. Larry Osborne
2003
101. Aaron Patterson
102. Madison Hobley
103. Leroy Orange
104. Stanley Howard
105. Rudolph Holton
106. Lemuel Prion
107. Wesley Quick
108. John Thompson
109. Timothy Howard, Ohio. Convicted 1976.
110. Gary Lamar James, Ohio. Convicted 1976.
111. Joseph Amrine.
112. Nicholas Yarris, Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania v. Yarris, No 690-OF1982, Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County, September 3, 2003. Order vacating conviction). Convicted 1982.
2004
113. Alan Gell
114. Gordon Steidl
115. Laurence Adams
116. Dan L. Bright
117. Ryan Matthews
118. Ernest Ray Willis
2005
119. Derrick Jamison
120. Harold Wilson
2006
121. John Ballard
2007
122. Curtis McCarty
123. Michael McCormick
124. Jonathon Hoffman
2008
125. Kennedy Brewer Mississippi. Convicted 1995.
126. Glen Edward Chapman, North Carolina. Convicted 1995.
127. Levon "Bo" Jones,[10] North Carolina. Convicted 1993.
128. Michael Blair, Texas.
2009
129. Nathson Fields, Illinois. Convicted 1986.
130. Paul House, Tennessee. Convicted 1986.
131. Daniel Wade Moore, Alabama. Convicted 2002.
132. Ronald Kitchen, Illinois. Convicted 1988.
133. Herman Lindsey, Florida. Convicted 2006.
134. Michael Toney, Texas. Convicted 1999. (Toney later died in a car accident on October 3, 2009, just one month and a day after his exoneration.)[11]
135. Yancy Douglas, Oklahoma. Convicted 1997.
136. Paris Powell, Oklahoma. Convicted 1997.
137. Robert Springsteen, Texas. Convicted 2001.
20102012[edit]
2010
138. Joe D'Ambrosio, Ohio. Convicted 1989. (While he was freed in 2010, but not yet exonerated, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by the state of Ohio challenging the unconditional writ of habeas corpus and bar to D'Ambrosio's re-prosecution on January 23, 2012, nearly 2 years later, making D'Ambrosio the 140th death row exoneree since 1973.[12])
139. Anthony Graves, Texas. Convicted 1994.
2011
140. Gussie Vann, Tennessee. Convicted 1994.
2012
141. Damon Thibodeaux, Louisiana. Convicted 1997.
142. Seth Penalver, Florida. Convicted 1994.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...#United_States

----------


## Brett85

> That way of thinking is less pro-liberty than Cooch, who isn't even pro-liberty himself. The US could greatly use many 1000s of addition doctors and you want to murder 1000s of the current doctors in the US in cold blood? Get over yourself already.
> 
> I'm not sure if the OP was trolling or not but there are certain issues where the vast majority of liberty folks take 1 side on but some liberty lovers take another side on. For example, same-sex government marriage, the death penalty and preemptive wars. You not only take the extreme minority side, but you go 5 steps further.
> 
> I am sorry but the is the USA, 1 of the most, if not the most, pro-choice places on Earth. Murdering the very few doctors we have in cold blood isn't going to solve any problems, especially if you are a fiscal conservative, since it costs substantially more to use than death penalty on a criminal than it costs to not use the death penalty. You are advocating for massive tax increases. For massive increases in the debt. Perhaps even slavery to pay for this. Not to mention the potentially 100,000s of women that will be subject to make I jibes or death every year if they get back alley abortitions.


I think that the death penalty should generally only be used in rare circumstances, but if we're going to have the death penalty at all, it should certainly apply to abortionists.  They're responsible for a Hitler-like Holocaust of millions of innocent American children.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> This list contains names of people who were found guilty of capital crimes and placed on death row, and were later found to be wrongly convicted. Some people were exonerated posthumously.
> 
> 1930–1939[edit]
> 1937
> 1. Willie Roberson, Olen Montgomery, Eugene Williams, and Roy Wright Alabama. Convicted 1931.
> 1970–1979[edit]
> 1973
> 1. David Keaton, Florida (Keaton v. State, 273 So.2d 385 (1973)). Convicted 1971.
> 1974
> ...


Not to mention the other likely 1000s of other innocent people the state has used the death penalty to murder over the years. The state loves to kill innocent people. Tax 'em. Cage 'em. Or murder 'em. That's the MO for the state.

----------


## eduardo89

> That way of thinking is less pro-liberty than Cooch, who isn't even pro-liberty himself. The US could greatly use many 1000s of addition doctors and you want to murder 1000s of the current doctors in the US in cold blood? Get over yourself already.


An abortionist is not a doctor, he is a murderer. A doctor heals, pregnancy is not an illness, murdering an unborn child is not healing the mother of any illness. The deliberate murder of an innocent human being deserves the death penalty. I don't give a $#@! if you consider that "anti-liberty," your version of "liberty" has no respect for human life.




> I think that the death penalty should generally only be used in rare circumstances, but if we're going to have the death penalty at all, it should certainly apply to abortionists.  They're responsible for a Hitler-like Holocaust of millions of innocent American children.


+rep

40+ million murders of unborn children sanctioned by the state since Roe v Wade.

----------


## RickyJ

> An abortionist is not a doctor, he is a murderer. A doctor heals, pregnancy is not an illness, murdering an unborn child is not healing the mother of any illness. The deliberate murder of an innocent human being deserves the death penalty. I don't give a $#@! if you consider that "anti-liberty," your version of "liberty" has no respect for human life.


I think the only exception should be due to the life of the mother. All other cases are outright murder, no doubt about it.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> This list contains names of people who were found guilty of capital crimes and placed on death row, and were later found to be wrongly convicted. Some people were exonerated posthumously.
> 
> [snip long list]


And those are just the ones that are known about ...

----------


## eduardo89

> I think the only exception should be due to the life of the mother. All other cases are outright murder, no doubt about it.


I don't think the mother should be punished in a case like that, and probably not in the case of incest or rape. But I do think the abortionist should be punished.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> And those are just the ones that are known about ...


Yup, it could be 1000 or so in just the USA alone. Who knows how many in the history of the world. The government just cannot be trusted. Not now. Not never.

----------


## Neil Desmond

> Does the state have a right to take a life?


If this question is regarding someone getting the death penalty for committing first degree (premeditated) murder, it's pretty simple to me: if someone does not commit first degree murder, then they should not get the death penalty.  The state does not automatically have the right to take any life; but when someone commits first degree murder - the way I see it: by doing so, they granted the state the right to take their life.

If I'm on a jury and someone rapes then kills his rape victim (to silence the victim, destroy evidence, etc.), you can rest assured that I'm gonna say "off with his friggin' head!"  To me, in this case, it doesn't make a difference whether it's a mob or something done under the decoration of the state; either way, people are going to want to hunt down such individuals and kill them for doing such crap.

On the other hand, let's say there is no state and in this stateless society you get pissed at another person for a petty reason (they smashed your car windshield with a brick while it was parked on the side of the road, they gave you a dirty look when they walked by you one time, etc.) and you want to kill that person.  Without the state, you could probably easily get away with it, and I consider that kind of thing unacceptable.  Taking the life of someone for breaking something that can easily be replaced or for rude behavior is unreasonable, whether it's the state or a pissed off individual.  So no, the state does not have the right to take a life, in that kind of case.




> Also - what about personal/privatized revenge murder?


I do not consider personal or privatized murder or any kind of killing for revenge purposes to be acceptable.  However, let's say someone tried to set your house on fire while you & your family were asleep in it.  if the state in effect says "we'll lock this person up for life if you agree not to kill them for setting your house on fire", but the person escapes from prison (or the state in effect reneged on such a deal), then I would hardly be inclined to blame you if you decided to hunt that person down, shoot them on sight, or even hire someone to capture or kill them yourself.

I'm not against the state per se, but I can and will be if it fails or sucks at handling its responsibilities.

----------


## Root

> The State has no rights at all.





> The state does not have a right to exist. In a private law society, victims of murder should have the option of a tooth for a tooth, plus another tooth. 
> 
> http://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/m...how-to-punish/


Agree.

----------


## Prog Snob

Up until recently I was for it, but I thought long and hard about it and eventually changed my mind. I forget who said this but I believe the quote was something like, " better to have 100 guilty men go free, than one innocent man wrongly convicted."  I firmly agree with that statement. Besides, there is no punishment with the death penalty.  You're dead, so the only people suffering still are the victims and their families.

----------


## phill4paul

> Up until recently I was for it, but I thought long and hard about it and eventually changed my mind. I forget who said this but I believe the quote was something like, " better to have 100 guilty men go free, than one innocent man wrongly convicted."  I firmly agree with that statement. Besides, there is no punishment with the death penalty.  You're dead, so the only people suffering still are the victims and their families.


  That would be Blackstone's formulation....




> "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer",


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation

----------


## Cleaner44

> I cannot trust the government with this type of power. Abolish the government death penalty. 
> 
> That's Ron Paul's position, BTW. I completely agree.


I agree as well.  Liberty Defined convinced me to drop my support for the death penalty.  The government makes too many mistakes to be trusted with this power.

----------


## Prog Snob

> That would be Blackstone's formulation....
> 
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone's_formulation


Thank you!

----------


## buenijo

> Does the state have a right to take a life?
> 
> Also - what about personal/privatized revenge murder?


The "state" doesn't exist. It is merely an abstraction. There are individuals who ostensibly represent the "state" by enacting and enforcing laws. I believe it's important to make this distinction as it provides clarity. These individuals who represent the "state" have no rights that supersede the rights of any other individual. Therefore, a means to clarify your first question can be had by rephrasing the question as follows: Does an individual have a right to take a life? 

The second question is a derivative of the first.

NOTE: I have no interest in agreement. I am interested only in clarity. However, I think you will find that, with clarity, agreement often follows.

----------


## cajuncocoa

> I don't think the mother should be punished in a case like that, and probably not in the case of incest or rape. But I do think the abortionist should be punished.


Playing devil's advocate here:  why spare the mother, if abortion is cause for the death penalty?  It's not like the doctor dragged the woman into the clinic and performed the abortion against her will...the mother sought the abortion, so why spare her?

----------


## libertygold

Against because it increases the power of government.

----------


## eduardo89

> Playing devil's advocate here:  why spare the mother, if abortion is cause for the death penalty?  It's not like the doctor dragged the woman into the clinic and performed the abortion against her will...the mother sought the abortion, so why spare her?


Because I feel a little more compassion for a rape victim than I do for a 'doctor' who wilfully carries out a third party's request to murder an unborn child and charges for it. I don't think that the woman should be let off scott free, but I don't think the death penalty is an appropriate punishment for a rape victim who aborts. I think the death penalty is the only appropriate penalty for abortionists, though.

----------

