MovieChat Forums > Dead Man Walking (1996) Discussion > D. PENALTY IS ABOUT REVENGE NOT JUSTICE ...

D. PENALTY IS ABOUT REVENGE NOT JUSTICE - OWN UP


What disgusts me about the whole death penalty issue is that many people try to persuade you that capital punishment is about justice. Justice?? How can justice equates to death? who has the right to decide over the life of another man in a calculated, institutionalised and cold-blooded manner? No one. Death penalty is really about REVENGE.
I am not condoning any criminals (I think that crimes such as killing, raping and so on are abhorrent) but I'd rather lock a man up for the rest of his life in order to make him think about what his actions.
violence leads to more violence, intolerance leads to more intolerance. In the end we will live in a world in which there will be only two opposite dimensions: right and wrong, black and white, good and evil.
we can do better

reply

Sure it's about revenge. And if somebody murdered my son, daughter, wife, mother, or any other loved one I'd be out for revenge too. That's just human nature.

reply

[deleted]

You're kidding me right? How high and mighty you sit, assuming what the families and friends of murder victims go through and how they spend their day. Of course they are full of grief. They have every right to be. And how we as a society, by executing those who have caused such grievious harm, can bring some peace to those suffering. It's not a matter of revenge. It's a matter of paying for the crimes one has committed.

Up until Sharon Tate's mother fought, and won, criminals with life sentences were able to receive conjugal visits. The man who participated in the murder of her daughter, Charles Watson, married and fathered children while in prison! Now that must have been a bitter pill to swallow - he had taken a life and was happily ensconced in his prison, creating new lives!! For shame! People on death row are granted an automatic appeal. The trial and evidence is reviewed in infinite detail. They usually linger on death row a minimum of ten years before being executed. Some have been on death row up to twenty three years. What a travesty of justice. I have no doubts that there are innocent men and women in prison, and when one is faced with losing one's life when convicted, it should be ascertained with as much surety as possible that they are truly guilty. My heart breaks for those wrongly convicted and even more so for those who may have been wrongly executed. I'm BY NO MEANS saying oh well, I wish those types of situations could be avoided at all costs. However, we as a people, at least in the state of California, have said we want the death penalty to be enforced and I think it should be. I don't think we should support those who have committed heinous crimes for the rest of their lives, which they can maintain to some degree of comfort, in prison.

And, your little timeline of a day in the life of the victims family is demeaning and demoralizing. You so blythely state that they should be swayed by the pleas for mercy from the offender's families, when clearly the offenders themselves ignored the pleas for mercy I'm sure they heard from their victims. Also, the word victim does not just apply to the murdered person, it also applies to those left behind, friends and families, of the deceased and yes, even the friends and family of murderer. They are all victims as well. Why is it that justice/sympathy/forgiveness are always being sought for the one who has murdered? What about justice/sympathy not revenge but rather retribution for the victims?

Walk a mile in the shoes of those who have been affected by murder and then come back and post your thoughts. You might sing a different song. I am grateful to God that I have not had to experience such a loss.

Come on little pup, get back on the porch and let the big dogs play.

reply

[deleted]

I think that absolutely nobody on this earth has a right to take the life of any other human being. I think people are de-sensitized to this because there is a GAPING lack of respect for human life in society, but that doesn't mean that it's okay just because it's common.
Killing and murder is wrong, and the government killing in return isn't the best way to send out the message that killing is wrong. If they can kill someone who goes against the law, then why can't a someone kill somebody who steals their car or cheats with a spouse? If life were to go on like this, the world would be very empty.

An eye for an eye is ancient code, and if we are such an advanced and modern civilization as we say we are, then we surely can think of a better method of justice.

reply

[deleted]

Revenge is the basis of justice. Someone steals from another, if the victim of that crime never wanted revenge then no one would have ever come up with a punishment for that crime and it would just be a normal thing. If it weren't for the want of revenge then no one would know that something was bad to begin with. When someone commits an act that we consider to be an attack on our basic rights as people then we get angry and want revenge. If it weren't for this instinct then law and justice would never have come to be. So justice and revenge is one in the same. And I don't give a sh*t for anyone who murders someone. You kill someone you get a needle in your arm. Yes we can make exceptions for accidents, self defense, or insanity (I only accept Schizophrenia and other disorders similar to that, don't give me any of that my mother hit me a lot and now I don't know right from wrong sh*t). You take a life then you are not worthy of your life. And hell yeah if it was someone I cared about I'd want to inject the SOB myself. And I feel no remorse about it.

reply

[deleted]

So what if it's about revenge? It might not be justice, but it can be justified. I have a wife and a new baby girl. Anyone hurt or kill them I want my revenge....will it make me happy? Not in the slightest. But he needs to know that there are consequences. He might not care about his life, and he certainly didn't care about my wife or child's, but that doesn't concern me...to me, this is all about payback....F the politics....

reply

Lethal injection more costly than spending life in prison without possibility of parole? On what planet? The cost of lethal injection is a one time expenditure as opposed to maintaining the lifespan of an inmate which could range from twenty to fifty years. Do the math. How much do you think it costs to support just one person in prison? And, taxpayers pay that cost.




Come on little pup, get back on the porch and let the big dogs play.

reply

[deleted]

It's not the cost of the actual injection that's expensive, it's the process of getting there that is. There's all kinds of legal fees, court costs, appellate costs, filing costs, etc. All of this over decades can cost millions of dollars. If a man kills a man at 25 years old, and lives to average life expectancy to 75, that's 50 years. I believe it's about 30-35K per year to house a prisoner, so that comes to 1.5 mil without taking into inflation and interest....so it would be more like $2 mil....I guess it comes down to "Do I want my taxes to house an inmate for $2 mil for 50 years or have him exectued for $2 mil in 15 years?" Just execute him...

reply

[deleted]

johnjjdw like so many people on these boards you are assuming that the only reason people are against the death penalty is sympathy for murderers.

There are many other issues: the wrongly convicted (read the Innocence Project and the Innocence Section of The Death Penalty Information Centre for more information on this very serious issue), the lack of deterrence of the death penalty in fact states with the death penalty have higher murder rates and the murder rate goes up after executions so your idea that blurring the lines leads to murders couldn't be more wrong and people that aren't murderers being effected by the death penalty example families of the executed. To say that it is a black and white issue is an extreme over-simplification. There are strong arguments for and against the death penalty.

reply

Crime rates actually went up in the U.S. in the 1970's when the dealth penalty was declared unconstitutional.

reply

Americans are always very emotive in their attempts to justify the death penalty.

reply

I have two thoughts on it.

If it is wrong for me to kill someone who doesn't wish to be dead, then it is wrong for you to do it. If it is wrong for us to do it, then it is wrong for everyone to do it. If it is wrong for everyone to do it, it is wrong for the state to do it. The death penalty is merely a way of diluting your own responsibility for murder, by pretending that the state did the killing, not each and every one of us.

A different way of looking at it is this: If you don't trust the government to do something as simple as paying for your health care (and many people don't) then why would you trust them to kill only people who you believe should be killed? I certainly don't trust them with that power.

reply

A lot of yout point comes down to semantics. The dictionary definition of the word justice fundamentally means 'fairness'. If 'A' takes 'B's life, but 'A' is still alive, there is no parity or fairness for 'B'. So by the definition of the word 'justice', in murder cases, this must mean death for 'A'.

In other words, there is an argument that the death penalty provides a solution that is 'just'. (Whether people agree with the principle or not is a different issue).

On your point about 'revenge', again it comes down to semantics. After all, any kind of punishment, whether it is a financial penalty (ie: a fine), or a prison sentence, could be construed as an act of revenge or retribution against the person who committed the act.

I don't think anyone here can seriously argue against the principle that a criminal act must have a consequence (whether you call that consequence revenge, retribution, punishment or something else).

In conclusion, I think the death penalty can absolutely be about the administration of what is 'just'. But it can equally be construed as retribution. I don't think it has to be either/or.

reply

ALL I GOT TO SAY IS WHAT IS THE BIG WHOOP ABOUT SAYING YEEEESSSS.,IT IS REVENGE AND PEOPLE YOU RAPE AND MURDER INNOCENTS DESERVE REVENGE....WHICH THEY DO NO GET...THEY GET "JUSTICE" WHICH IS DYING IN A COMPLETELY EASY WAY COMPARED TO HOW THEY KILLED THIER VICTIMS. there is NOTHING WRONG with family feeling it as revenge. PRAY YOU NEVER HAVE TO WALK IN THIER SHOES, YOU P.C.PUSSY

reply

I agree. I think it's both JUSTICE and REVENGE. Nothing wrong with either one.

I hear that opposition to the death penalty all the time. "It's only for revenge." So, maybe it is. And guess what? Revenge is a completely valid reason for it.

reply

Death row prisoners are not armed, they don't have a chance at attacking when strapped to a chair. So I wouldn't compare that to self defense, yes it is revenge and punishment, and murder. I am neutral on it.

reply

It's not murder. It's not murder because you feel bad about doing it, or because it is done. It's not murder if you take someone's life who doesn't want to die. Murder is the unlawful taking of a life. And that means when it's NOT an official penalty under the criminal code. The death penalty IS an official penalty under the criminal code.

Calling it murder because you think it's mean to kill them doesn't very well convey any sort of wrong-doing on the part of death penalty advocates. It just appears ignorant.

I personally think the death penalty is too lenient for these sorts of criminals. Why do you care if these pieces of shït die anyway? Do you think you're doing society a service when you fight against this punishment?

reply

It prevents that person from an act of violence to anyone else. Until there is another sure way to take away that violence from the person then they are still a threat to others.

You lock them up for the rest of their lives, then they will be violent in that prison for the rest of their life. They may harm other prisoners or even Officers that work in the prison risking their lives to protect us.

I'm curious if you are against the death penalty, then are you against a police officer shooting a criminal to prevent them from harming or killing someone? Should that police officer take his baton and try to stop the criminal with the gun and hope he can arrest him?

If you and someone you care about are facing a criminal that plans on killing that person, do you just let them kill that person since you can't stop them without taking their life? Hope that the police that can't kill them arrests them and they can spend a life in prison thinking about what they did?

Now if you feel it's okay to take their life in self defense of the crime they are about to commit then why is it wrong to take their life after they committed the crime?

I feel the death Penalty is about protection since we don't have anything else that is that absolute. If we could put a computer chip into the heads of the person that was violent or reprogram them to not being able to be violent, then we can make sure they would not harm anyone else.

Come visit my blackrosecastle.com
stephentheblackroseenterprises.com

reply

People in prison for crimes other than murder can still hurt others including the Corrections officers and they've never committed murder. So then shall we put to death everyone who enters a prison? Because everyone has that possibility to hurt others.

Then you have serial killers like BTK who supposedly are 'model' prisoners and are well behaved. Yet some guys in the general population of the prison who have never killed are beating up on people.

I'm just pointing out the flawed logic on that one.

reply

As a Christian I would think about the death penalty and wonder about it because I do feel like its not our decision to who lives or dies however it is hard for me to agree with that when I read about such horrific crimes and murderers who are just so unremorsful. I see the death penalty as a punishment you have to face when you commit such horrific crimes. Especially when it comes to children. The Green River killer killed 70 plus women. That's a TON of women who won't see their families, won't see their children, spend a birthday, Christmas, Thanksgiving with their family. Some crimes, in my opinion, are suited for the death penalty. Someone in an earlier post from the first page said when you commit something so sadistic your right to live is taken away.

I don't know if anyone's read about this couple but this is a crime, to me, thats suited for the death penalty. Just a heads up it is a very sad, sadistic crime. There were 4 perpetrators and only one got the death penalty, which to me, is a little of an injustice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christop her_Newsom

Also, Jessica Lunsford, when a crime like this is committed against a child I have no sympathy for this man because he showed zero sympathy for this girl. This is a crime that is suited for the death penalty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Lunsford



Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son...

reply

You're totally right.

reply

Thank you! Those crimes that I posted I think could be the poster crime for the death penalty. Not all crimes are fit for the death penalty but Channon Christianson and Christoher Newsom but especially Channon was killed so unmercifully I don't think there is a punishment suited for those people that fits the crime they committed. And poor Jessica Lunsford I can't even think how awful it must have been for her. She was just a child and people like him who murder children like that, he was such a coward he just buried her alive. Her and Channon died in similar manners. I can't feel like they should still be alive when those men committed such atrocious crimes.

It's easy to watch something like Dead Man Walking or Into The Abyss and feel sorry for inmates on death row because they had a time stamp on their date of death and that's hard to see but I try to take in the whole picture and in my opinion those people should pay for their crimes and I see the death penalty as suitable punishment and I do respect others who feel differently than I but I don't have sympathy for those men. They're pure evil.

Also, I saw on YouTube about a survivor of Robert Lee Willie (The person Sean Penn's character in the movie was based on) and her ordeal and Sean Penn played the character with remorse but I read the real man showed no remorse for his crimes. This is it if anyone is interested in seeing about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeW8RRLBV1c&feature=youtube_gdata_p layer

Also about Channon Christianson and Christopher Newsom, the judge in the case back in 2007 or 2008 apparently was addicted to prescription drugs during their trial so they have I retry all those men and the woman for the deaths of Channon and Christopher and those parents have to go through that all over again. I hope the punishment fits the crime. Sorry for this to be so long. I got caught on a tangent.


Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son...

reply

Surfgirl said, "So then shall we put to death everyone who enters a prison? Because everyone has that possibility to hurt others."

If they commit murder while in prison, then yes.



reply

I have never got the forgiveness thing the Chistians here always go on about as if by not forgiving you wither away consumed with anger and bitterness.

There are actions which are unforgivable and the god given natural urges for revenge and for justice are there as a balance - for society and for the family affected. It does no good, for the family or greater society forgiving the unforgivable.

I cannot see any strength in forgiveness applied to these types of crimes - turn the other cheek, love thine enemy etc... for low level crimes, assaults, theft perhaps this makes sense, but not for seroius crimes where the only fitting, rightoius, just response is the death penality.

reply

[deleted]

I am totally against the death penalty in literally every case HOWEVER the killer in this film only showed remorse when he was hours away from death.... just what i noticed

Do guys like "the thing"?
They like it better than no thing.

reply