I fully support the death penatly as a form of justice, deterrence, and retribution. However, only in the most extreme cases and where there is no doubt of the guilt of the criminal. For example, the four gunmen who gunned down innocent civilians in Moscow deserve nothing less than the death penalty.
Should Canada bring back the death penalty?
- Thread starter stinkynuts
- Start date
I have to disagree. There is always a chance of innocence.
However I do agree that there are very real sociopaths in this world incapable of being rehabilitated. And they do need to be removed from society.
However I do agree that there are very real sociopaths in this world incapable of being rehabilitated. And they do need to be removed from society.
there are some animals that should be put down
Paul Bernardo comes to mind
That said there will not be widespread support for the death penalty in Canada
and the possibility of the state executing an innocent person is just sickening
No matter how heinous the crime, the death penalty should never be brought back.
The state should not have a right to execute citizens because:
a) Killing someone is not justice. Pronouncing them guilty is. So they could very well just be locked up instead of being killed.
b) The death penalty does not deter crime. Just look at the US.
c) It is not for the state, to indulge in retribution on behalf of someone else. The state is not the citizens henchman.
On the other hand, the ability of the state to kill its citizens is fundamentally oppressive, even if said citizen is an incorrigible and untreatable psychopath. I mean for people worried about big govt. does it get any bigger? lol.
I also consider steps to move away from the death penalty as a step toward being a more civilized people. I wouldn't want to see a regression on that front if that makes sense.
The state should not have a right to execute citizens because:
a) Killing someone is not justice. Pronouncing them guilty is. So they could very well just be locked up instead of being killed.
b) The death penalty does not deter crime. Just look at the US.
c) It is not for the state, to indulge in retribution on behalf of someone else. The state is not the citizens henchman.
On the other hand, the ability of the state to kill its citizens is fundamentally oppressive, even if said citizen is an incorrigible and untreatable psychopath. I mean for people worried about big govt. does it get any bigger? lol.
I also consider steps to move away from the death penalty as a step toward being a more civilized people. I wouldn't want to see a regression on that front if that makes sense.
Locking them up costs taxpayers a lot of $.
Instead, ship them to a deserted island up north and let them try to survive.
Like...waaaay up north.
Instead, ship them to a deserted island up north and let them try to survive.
Like...waaaay up north.
Where is the evidence of the benefits of incarceration and rehabilitation of convicted murderers? I've never seen any. I think our society shifted away from capital punishment when social workers and psychiatrists began claiming that no person was irredeemable. They haven't produced proof of their claim yet.
Even the ultra-liberal Star Trek warned against the claim that psychopaths could be reformed:
Even the ultra-liberal Star Trek warned against the claim that psychopaths could be reformed:
I voted no. I agree with all of @Kautilya 's points.
So explain to me how you can put all this in a very nice statement but also say Hamas actions on October 7 were justified....
But how will those businesses who provide food and clothing to the jails survive? Who will pay the salary of those keeping "guard"?
Not a good example. How can we even be sure that the arrested are the same people that were in Moscow? Let alone that they were tortured and therefore somewhat useless as witnesses.
True, especially in Putin's Russia. There was no way that nobody would be found, even if it meant arresting innocent scapegoats. Putin was humiliated when he couldn't prevent the attack, and sure as hell wouldn't tolerate them not being found. Perhaps some of them were just "convenient" to arrest because of the way they look.
In the US, I've heard of so many black men who were executed or exonerated from death row due to DNA evidence. Those who are not given a death sentence sometimes spend years behind bars before they are freed because they are found guilty, but at least they have a second chance.
Last edited:
I never said that. I always said it was not justified and a terror attack.
Those numbers are very small.
What percentage of the jailed population would be candidates for execution?
I would argue that we haven't done much to rehabilitate murderers or criminals. First, let's make sure we're talking about the same thing. Dudes like Bernardo or Clifford Olson are sick and cannot be fixed. They should spend the rest of their lives in prison, and likely will.
Murderers should spend the time they've been sentenced to, and face a difficult time when they are eligible for parole. Not all murders are the same, obviously. There are first-degree, where there was pre-thought and planning, and then murders of passion, as well as manslaughter.
In my opinion, some of these people would never do anything like this again. But, they have literal blood on their hands, and should spend a long time away. But, that doesn't mean they shouldn't have opportunities to work on themselves, like anger management counseling, or get an education.
For them and other types of criminals, there are studies showing that those who get an education are significantly less likely to re-offend. And, considering the cost of incarcerating people, this could be a much cheaper alternative.
I would argue that psychiatrists would not make the claim that every person is redeemable. We know that isn't true, and so do they. Why do you think they recommend some convicts have dangerous offender status like Bernardo. They know they are damaged and would likely hurt people if they were released. They no psychopaths and sociopaths, and know the risks. But, they would also likely agree that not all convicts should be locked up forever.
As for capital punishment, the old saying rings true: It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. And, considering the number of people who've had serious convictions overturned (for several reason, unreliable eye witnesses, police/prosecutors ignoring exculpatory evidence, DNA clears them, etc.), I think this still rings true.
Capital punishment in Canada dates back to Canada's earliest history, including its period as a French colony and, after 1763, its time as a British colony. From 1867 to the elimination of the death penalty for murder on July 26, 1976, 1,481 people had been sentenced to death, and 710 had been executed. Of those executed, 697 were men and 13 women. The only method used in Canada for capital punishment of civilians after the end of the French regime was hanging. The last execution in Canada was the double hanging of Arthur Lucas and Ronald Turpin on December 11, 1962, at Toronto's Don Jail. The militaryprescribed firing squad as the method of execution until 1999, although no military executions had been carried out since 1946.
The death penalty was de facto abolished in Canada in January 1963 and de jure in September 1999. In 1976, Bill C-48 was enacted, abolishing the death penalty for murder, treason, and piracy. Some service offences under the National Defence Actcontinued to carry a mandatory death sentence if committed traitorously, although no one had been executed for that since 1945. Canada eliminated the death penalty for these military offences on September 1, 1999
So if someone is beyond rehabilitation, do you favour the death penalty in those cases? What is the public benefit in allowing those particular criminals to live?
Why does a murderer deserve a chance to "work on themselves"? Murder victims don't get a second chance at anything!
The death penalty is by far the cheapest alternative.
There are many ways our legal system could reduce the chance that people could be wrongly convicted. Letting murderers live seems a drastic way of addressing deficient quality control in our legal system.
State sanctioned executions are problematic for the reasons I pointed out. There is a VERY good chance that several people have been executed who were innocent. So, no, I do not support the death penalty at all. Period. There is no public benefit, but in reality, our penal system doesn't really offer many benefits period, besides getting some people off the streets for a period of time. Do they come out better? Probably not.
As mentioned, there are different levels of murder. But, at the end of the day, these people are eventually released. Wouldn't you want them better prepared to live in society than not? I mean, if you look at the data, it is cheaper to educate them than re-incarcerate them if they continue criminal actions.
According to a study by the state of Nevada, it actually is more expensive, all things considered: Nevada Study
Now, keep in mind that death row inmates typically spend 15 years before their execution in high security cells. Plus, they have many appeals to exhaust before the deed can be done. That all costs money!
I'm sorry that you buy into the eye for an eye mindset. However, a majority of Canadians do not agree with you, nor do they want to see the return of capital punishment.
