Can Christians support the death penalty?

[Vision]

the death penalty is controversial for those who view things thru a gray lens. The criminals beg for mercy after creating mayhem....the court systems flounders to meet out appropriate judgement for beginner criminals allowing them to escape justice for lesser crimes allowing for more criminal behavior without consequences....and then we wonder why so many violent offenders are running around everywhere...we now have poverty as a mitigating factor for many crimes in some cities..we don't even prosecute for property crimes. Vigil anti justice is frowned upon and is criminal but where is the justice for those who have been wronged? So basically when someone who has committed a serious crime like murder gets convicted, we are just supposed to say as a society that we will now take care of this person for the rest of their natural life with our tax dollars...society will be responsible for all their physical needs while they sit in incarceration living very limited productive lives.....what is the point of that? What value does a serial criminal murderer or someone who has been convicted of being criminally insane, who will never recover,, really have in society? They will never be free again and we have to pay for all their necessities. I don't think it's cruel to allow the state to punish convicted murderers who have had due process and are proven guilty by their peers to be put to death. The murderer who has killed multiple people can never repay their debt anyway...and they only have one life to give.....whether they truly repent of the act or not is really not an issue to me, as I believe that God will ultimately allow justice to be served.....without the death penalty what is the deterrent for people to not kill others? as we move to a more secular society the biblical teachings we are all familiar with and that are written into our law may be removed...I think it is a Christian thing to have the death penalty as it may deter some from acting upon their darkest impulses. Of course death penalty cases only include the most heinous of murderers....so people who are convicted of lesser crimes still won't actually pay a life for a life. What good did it do for Charlie Manson to be held for forty years behind bars? I mean all he did was exude evil to all he was around. He probably did heinous crimes inside the prison system that the public has no idea about....what about Jeffrey Dahmer? What value do these types of psychopath killers have that we as a society decide we want to provide everything they need behind bars?

You left out politicians who start wars that kill millions of citizens.

[TheDuke]

You left out politicians who start wars that kill millions of citizens.

FYI this has nothing to do with the OP or farmerchicks comments?
The op is about people killing not society and it surely wasn't focused on politicians first or making a claim that war is murder. Though one may infer that killing in war isn't held as murder. But thanks for trying to derail the quite good OP.

[Vision]

You left out politicians who start wars that kill millions of citizens.

FYI this has nothing to do with the OP or farmerchicks comments?
The op is about people killing not society and it surely wasn't focused on politicians first or making a claim that war is murder. Though one may infer that killing in war isn't held as murder. But thanks for trying to derail the quite good OP.

So a guy(politician) has other's kill for him, that isn't murder.

So a guy(gang leader) has other's kill for him, that is murder?

I guess I'm really clueless in the nuances of killing other humans.

[h_p]

So a guy(politician) has other's kill for him, that isn't murder.

So a guy(gang leader) has other's kill for him, that is murder?

I guess I'm really clueless in the nuances of killing other humans.

It's a big deal with lots of reasons behind it, which means there are lots of nuances. This is why we have homicide, justifiable homicide, negligent homicide, manslaughter, murder, capital murder... It's probably the most scrutinized crime under the law with very fine differences between them.

[farmerchick]

the death penalty is controversial for those who view things thru a gray lens. The criminals beg for mercy after creating mayhem....the court systems flounders to meet out appropriate judgement for beginner criminals allowing them to escape justice for lesser crimes allowing for more criminal behavior without consequences....and then we wonder why so many violent offenders are running around everywhere...we now have poverty as a mitigating factor for many crimes in some cities..we don't even prosecute for property crimes. Vigil anti justice is frowned upon and is criminal but where is the justice for those who have been wronged? So basically when someone who has committed a serious crime like murder gets convicted, we are just supposed to say as a society that we will now take care of this person for the rest of their natural life with our tax dollars...society will be responsible for all their physical needs while they sit in incarceration living very limited productive lives.....what is the point of that? What value does a serial criminal murderer or someone who has been convicted of being criminally insane, who will never recover,, really have in society? They will never be free again and we have to pay for all their necessities. I don't think it's cruel to allow the state to punish convicted murderers who have had due process and are proven guilty by their peers to be put to death. The murderer who has killed multiple people can never repay their debt anyway...and they only have one life to give.....whether they truly repent of the act or not is really not an issue to me, as I believe that God will ultimately allow justice to be served.....without the death penalty what is the deterrent for people to not kill others? as we move to a more secular society the biblical teachings we are all familiar with and that are written into our law may be removed...I think it is a Christian thing to have the death penalty as it may deter some from acting upon their darkest impulses. Of course death penalty cases only include the most heinous of murderers....so people who are convicted of lesser crimes still won't actually pay a life for a life. What good did it do for Charlie Manson to be held for forty years behind bars? I mean all he did was exude evil to all he was around. He probably did heinous crimes inside the prison system that the public has no idea about....what about Jeffrey Dahmer? What value do these types of psychopath killers have that we as a society decide we want to provide everything they need behind bars?

You left out politicians who start wars that kill millions of citizens.

ya I'm thinking thats not really related..although it's a fact.......I think we can all agree most politicians are above the law, corrupt and prolly deserve the death penalty for something but not what we were discussing....I guess you could rationalize since politicians can kill people by starting wars, that we should just have mayhem on our streets with killers running rampant since everything is so corrupt....then I would say that vigil antis would also be on the streets and there would be a life for a life for a life for a life into perpetuity.....so we wouldn't be having this discussion it would already be taken care of and there would be no need for jails. That would mean every time you encountered another person it may be the last time. I'm thinking corrupt politicians, police and courts do have a place in our imperfect society.

[NeveR]

for murder (first degree), yes. Death is the only answer. Not only from a gospel point of view, but also as a deterrence against committing it. If there is no death penalty then there is little reason to fear the justice system. BTW I would add (first degree or intentional) rape and child molestation. Again for these if evil intent is shows, repentance is inexistent. They have no place in society. If so, people will stop.

Crazy as it sounds, the prospect of being executed does not deter people from murdering other people.

The US has always had one of the highest murder rates per capita in the world, far higher than countries such as the UK, Canada etc that have no death penalty.

Both points are wrong. It is a deterant studies show it. And while I cannot compare to Canada, murder is not worse in US that other countries. Statistics lie when collected for a reason. You sound like an anti-US person, I'd say move to the better country. I've been to many, few have any more peace, few publish their dirty laundry like US does. Please show your backup for both of these statements.

Here's a link that shows the murder rate in US states that DON'T have the death penalty is consistently lower across the board than it is in states that DO have the death penalty.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and- ... lty-states

In international terms the US (according to one site) has a murder rate of 4.9 per 100k.

That compares with 1.2 for the UK and France, 1.7 for Canada.

More figures here --
https://worldpopulationreview.com/count ... by-country

According to another site that number is 6.52, giving the US the 28th highest murder rate in the world, and the 4th highest incarceration rate.

"The United States has a murder rate of 6.52 homicides per 100,000 people which ranks the country twenty-eighth across the globe. The U.S. has seen an overall decrease in violent crime over the past few decades, but its murder rate remains disproportionately high compared to other industrialized countries..."
https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/ ... y-country/

Is it ok if we don't leap to snap condemnation judgments on each other based merely on whether we agree about things? It's nice to keep things friendly. I certainly am NOT an "anti-US person", and you have no reason to think I am. I was born and raised here. It's my home. It has many great and unique qualities. But it does have a very high murder rate compared with many other wealthy first world nations. This is just fact.

We certainly don't present a great argument for the death penalty as a deterrent - which is the subject we are discussing.

[CaptainM]

I hate to be the one to bring it up, BUT there is an elephant in the room. Hopefully it won’t mess up the discussion, but knowing our right to speak is under attack, I want to present some statistics. It may not have anything to do with anything, but here it is:

https://www.brighteon.com/1d08c674-720a ... 4c6574e207

In Christ. Best wishes…

[Niemand]

Both points are wrong. It is a deterant studies show it. And while I cannot compare to Canada, murder is not worse in US that other countries. Statistics lie when collected for a reason. You sound like an anti-US person, I'd say move to the better country. I've been to many, few have any more peace, few publish their dirty laundry like US does. Please show your backup for both of these statements.

The statistics vary wildly within the USA itself. Even on the smaller scale. I was watching a documentary on the Wire, and it was pointing out that while Baltimore has an extremely high murder rate that the murders almost always happen within a very small zone of several streets. If you get one or two blocks outside this zone then then the murder rate falls sharply.

[NeveR]

Both points are wrong. It is a deterant studies show it. And while I cannot compare to Canada, murder is not worse in US that other countries. Statistics lie when collected for a reason. You sound like an anti-US person, I'd say move to the better country. I've been to many, few have any more peace, few publish their dirty laundry like US does. Please show your backup for both of these statements.

The statistics vary wildly within the USA itself. Even on the smaller scale. I was watching a documentary on the Wire, and it was pointing out that while Baltimore has an extremely high murder rate that the murders almost always happen within a very small zone of several streets. If you get one or two blocks outside this zone then then the murder rate falls sharply.

True, but the mere fact that the overall murder rate is around four times higher than in countries that have no death penalty and that US states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than states without it pretty much kills the idea that capital punishment is a useful deterrent.

It ought to be, if people were rational, of course, but the stats show it isn't.

Besides isn't arguing for deterrence just way of avoiding the moral argument?

[NeveR]

I just found this video on YT. I think it brings some useful perspectives to the question.

I was wondering how I would feel if some guy murdered my children.

Pretty sure I'd want him dead, tortured even, and be prepared to do it myself...

Wanting vengeance is understandable and natural. But is it ok for the criminal justice system to encourage and exploit it?

Isn't there a reason that the statue of Justice on the roof of the Old Bailey in London is blindfold? State -dispensed judicial judgment is supposed to be impartial and objective and to have nothing to do with vengeance.

Right?

And ultimately are these suffering people, who already went through so much, going to be best served by watching the state kill the murderer, rather than by seeking inside themselves for some form of forgiveness as Christ asked us to do.

I say that in full humility - knowing I probably would never be capable of finding forgiveness in their place, but being also aware that those who can do so seem to have the best outcomes in coping with traumatic loss longterm

[nightlight]

I just found this video on YT. I think it brings some useful perspectives to the question.

I was wondering how I would feel if some guy murdered my children.

Pretty sure I'd want him dead, tortured even, and be prepared to do it myself...

Wanting vengeance is understandable and natural. But is it ok for the criminal justice system to encourage and exploit it?

Isn't there a reason that the statue of Justice on the roof of the Old Bailey in London is blindfold? State -dispensed judicial judgment is supposed to be impartial and objective and to have nothing to do with vengeance.

Right?

And ultimately are these suffering people, who already went through so much, going to be best served by watching the state kill the murderer, rather than by seeking inside themselves for some form of forgiveness as Christ asked us to do.

I say that in full humility - knowing I probably would never be capable of finding forgiveness in their place, but being also aware that those who can do so seem to have the best outcomes in coping with traumatic loss longterm

How the family of a murder victim feels is not the point of why society enacts the death penalty imo

Someone who murders forfeits the right to live. Period.

Keeping someone in a cage the rest of their life until they die is somehow more righteous?

It's nonsense.

[NeveR]

I just found this video on YT. I think it brings some useful perspectives to the question.

I was wondering how I would feel if some guy murdered my children.

Pretty sure I'd want him dead, tortured even, and be prepared to do it myself...

Wanting vengeance is understandable and natural. But is it ok for the criminal justice system to encourage and exploit it?

Isn't there a reason that the statue of Justice on the roof of the Old Bailey in London is blindfold? State -dispensed judicial judgment is supposed to be impartial and objective and to have nothing to do with vengeance.

Right?

And ultimately are these suffering people, who already went through so much, going to be best served by watching the state kill the murderer, rather than by seeking inside themselves for some form of forgiveness as Christ asked us to do.

I say that in full humility - knowing I probably would never be capable of finding forgiveness in their place, but being also aware that those who can do so seem to have the best outcomes in coping with traumatic loss longterm

How the family of a murder victim feels is not the point of why society enacts the death penalty imo

Someone who murders forfeits the right to live. Period.

Keeping someone in a cage the rest of their life until they die is somehow more righteous?

It's nonsense.

Your first sentence is exactly the point I was making, which is why victim-statements in court and the presence of the victim's family at executions seems problematic to me. Punishment should not be about satisfying the victim's family's desire for vengeance, however understandable that desire might be.

The anti-death penalty argument is not about whether people deserve death. Of course many people do. It's about whether fallible humans have the right to impose it when their judgment is imperfect and the act of killing can't be undone if it's found to be in error.

God can impose death because his judgment is perfect and he can also give life.

If He thinks a person deserves death, can't we assume he will see that it happens?

[Silver Pie]

If you were asked to push the button, pull the rope or fire the gun on a person whom the courts deemed guilty of a heinous crime, would it be satisfying your anger or would you be doing it for God, upholding righteous principles?

If I was asked to do it and did, it would be for the safety of society, not in anger or rage against the person. If I had rage or anger against them, I would need to decline.

[Silver Pie]

Both points are wrong. It is a deterant studies show it. And while I cannot compare to Canada, murder is not worse in US that other countries. Statistics lie when collected for a reason. You sound like an anti-US person, I'd say move to the better country. I've been to many, few have any more peace, few publish their dirty laundry like US does. Please show your backup for both of these statements.

A while back, I read a book called How to Lie with Statistics. Totally opened my eyes, and now I don't trust people spouting "statistics" because now I know how statistics can be twisted.



https://www.pdfdrive.com/how-to-lie-wit ... 17885.html



https://www.pdfdrive.com/how-to-lie-wit ... 25657.html

[Cruiserdude]

Not claiming one way or the other, just sharing a scripture that may have to do with this topic.

0329581e7211d5e193733c20416a90d0.jpg (57.75 KiB) Viewed 229 times

[Silver Pie]

I think that is not referring to those who are a danger to society and who must be eliminated for the safety of society. One is not "unforgiving"; one is protecting future men/women/children/babies.

Not claiming one way or the other, just sharing a scripture that may have to do with this topic.
0329581e7211d5e193733c20416a90d0.jpg

[Cruiserdude]

I think that is not referring to those who are a danger to society and who must be eliminated for the safety of society. One is not "unforgiving"; one is protecting future men/women/children/babies.

Not claiming one way or the other, just sharing a scripture that may have to do with this topic.
0329581e7211d5e193733c20416a90d0.jpg

If it's about the safety of society, would locking up for life, thus eliminating their ability to be a part of society, accomplish the same as killing them? In both scenarios they are no longer part of public society.

[Silver Pie]

If it's about the safety of society, would locking up for life, thus eliminating their ability to be a part of society, accomplish the same as killing them? In both scenarios they are no longer part of public society.

When they are locked up, even if it's for life, they are required to request parole at some point. They might escape. Also, it's a huge waste of taxpayers' money (they are being rewarded for being murderous and satanic). Also, people locked up in prison usually come out worse than when they went in.

And if I had a choice to be locked in a cage for 20 or 50 or more years vs being sent to my maker, I think I'd prefer to meet my maker.

And, to borrow a bit from Fred, some people are just too bad to live. I stand by my opinion that certain murderers, rapists, and child rapists should have the death penalty. The only caveat would be that all doubt that they did it is gone. They are genuinely guilty.

[Niemand]

Both points are wrong. It is a deterant studies show it. And while I cannot compare to Canada, murder is not worse in US that other countries. Statistics lie when collected for a reason. You sound like an anti-US person, I'd say move to the better country. I've been to many, few have any more peace, few publish their dirty laundry like US does. Please show your backup for both of these statements.

The statistics vary wildly within the USA itself. Even on the smaller scale. I was watching a documentary on the Wire, and it was pointing out that while Baltimore has an extremely high murder rate that the murders almost always happen within a very small zone of several streets. If you get one or two blocks outside this zone then then the murder rate falls sharply.

True, but the mere fact that the overall murder rate is around four times higher than in countries that have no death penalty and that US states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than states without it pretty much kills the idea that capital punishment is a useful deterrent.

It ought to be, if people were rational, of course, but the stats show it isn't.

Besides isn't arguing for deterrence just way of avoiding the moral argument?

Japan and China both have the death penalty (the latter frequently), but I gather have a relatively low murder rate outside of organised crime and state corruption.

[NeveR]

Both points are wrong. It is a deterant studies show it. And while I cannot compare to Canada, murder is not worse in US that other countries. Statistics lie when collected for a reason. You sound like an anti-US person, I'd say move to the better country. I've been to many, few have any more peace, few publish their dirty laundry like US does. Please show your backup for both of these statements.

The statistics vary wildly within the USA itself. Even on the smaller scale. I was watching a documentary on the Wire, and it was pointing out that while Baltimore has an extremely high murder rate that the murders almost always happen within a very small zone of several streets. If you get one or two blocks outside this zone then then the murder rate falls sharply.

True, but the mere fact that the overall murder rate is around four times higher than in countries that have no death penalty and that US states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than states without it pretty much kills the idea that capital punishment is a useful deterrent.

It ought to be, if people were rational, of course, but the stats show it isn't.

Besides isn't arguing for deterrence just way of avoiding the moral argument?

Japan and China both have the death penalty (the latter frequently), but I gather have a relatively low murder rate outside of organised crime and state corruption.

Yes, exactly - some countries with the death penalty have low murder rates and some have high murder rates. Some countries without the death penalty have low murder rates and some have high murder rates. There's virtually no correlation between the two.

Take a look at places that had the DP and then abolished it. Was there a sudden increase in the murder rate once the "deterrent" was gone?

Was there a sudden decrease in the murder rate in places that reintroduced the DP?

[Juliet]

6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
Genesis 9:6

[h_p]

Take a look at places that had the DP and then abolished it. Was there a sudden increase in the murder rate once the "deterrent" was gone?

Was there a sudden decrease in the murder rate in places that reintroduced the DP?

Since there are so many other factors driving crime rates, I think this is really the only valid comparison you could use to determine cause and effect. And even that could be difficult because the other factors would still be affecting it, too.