Hmm, this is a difficult subject.

Who are we to determine who deserves to live?

As we certainly don't go around raising the inanimate bodies of those we consider died too young, neither should we have any say on whether or not the living should meet the kiss of death(HURRAY FOR LONG SENTENCES!).

Sometimes, when our loved ones die in the hands of merciless murderers, we are quick to think of revenge. We shout "execution!", tossing the word in so many ways and in so many different places that the sound makes us not only deaf, but also blind and stupid. We forget that omniscience belongs only to deity, and we act; we connive, sue, slander, appeal, sympathize, hate, love, and pity, all without any genuine reason. We fail to see and comprehend the silliness of acting for those who have passed on to a possibly better life.

Besides, who in the world knows what the dead really want? Perhaps the only thing they want is for their names to rest, so that existence no longer echoes through their bones.

I believe execution should not be handled at all. We are certainly going far enough punishing those we merely know (even if it is for the 'betterment' of society).

Maddy

I'm not in favour of capital punishment (CP). That said, I'm very fortunate to not have any family or friends who have been victims of serious crimes. So, from that perspective, my position has never been tested.

Some factors to consider:

Deterence: CP is not a deterent to those that would commit a capital crime. Deterence is one of the main considerstions in sentencing an offender, both individual and general deterence.

Protection of the public: Obviously, that's the most important issue in sentencing. CP is very effective in this regard. Well, duh! Imprisonment also works. Mind you, the parole system needs better 'prediction' tools on recidivism. Often, it's a crap shoot. On the other hand, many murders are crimes of passion - very low recidivism rate - so why CP?

Rehabilitation: A nice idea that never worked. Again, another crap shoot. Our prisons are over-crowded and underfunded to begin with.

Sense of Justice: The courts are paying more attention to what victims say. Victims and families need a sense of closure. Society as a whole needs that as well. CP as retribution is very effective. Lenghty sentences, without eligibility for parole, are also very effective.

Sanctity of life: That's an issue of personal conscience. Then again, we have many pro-life advocates who support CP.

Did I shed a tear for Sadam Hussein? No, I didn't. So CP is also a subject where individual congruence can vary significantly.

In Canada, CP was done away with some 30+ years ago. Here, the federal government has total jurisdiction over the making of criminal law. Thus, our criminal code is the same in every province and territory. The provinces have total jurisdiction over the administration of criminal justice.

Conner

The Chinese have never put a huge premium on the value of life. Perhaps that is because they've got umpteen billion people.

I suspect that this case has a serious political angle because China wants her trading partners to trust her products despite the fact that those products are produced by slaves.

China is the 500 pound gorilla in the room. Everyone knows and fears her but few have the courage to call a communist totalitarian dictatorship a communist totalitarian dictatorship that has killed more people than cancer.

The United States and the European Union have no business doing business with China- much less making them the most favored nation.

There's several countries that have some extreme laws. I remember years ago picking up a paper from an Insurance agent on drunk driving laws from around the world.

 

I think it was Turkey's law that if you were caught, you driven 10 miles out of town and made to walk back. Caught a second time, 20 miles.

 

Another country, your family goes to prison with you.

 

The most extreme one tho, and I think this was Brazil, your first offense was your last, your executed.

In all honesty, I think people who kill others because they were driving drunk should be eligible for the death penalty. I mean, if we're going to have it, then we should use it to punish all who kill in the most irresponsible and selfish manners. Just my opinion, though.

I'm definitely against it, because of many of the reasons Conner exposed above.

James, 200% with you about how the West treats China. I'm amazed at how little we're told about the fact this is still a dictatorship. Do they still bill the family of the executed person for the bullet? This always seemed to be the straw that breaks the camel's back in terms of cynicism.

It's not the first time the whole "drunk driving" thing is being said on the forum, but though I'm not for leniency, death penalty for a car accident, even with aggravating circumstances? So, if you change your CD, or grab a bottle of water, which are things you do consciously, and kill someone because you lacked the necessary attention, should you be put to death too? (I lost cherished ones in car accidents, and though the other drivers came out negative alcohol-wise, there was some carelessness involved; these people's lives were ruined too, or at least badly damaged.)

Nick, you are asking very serious questions.

About death penalty:

I'm completely against it. In our country, like in most countries of the European Union, Switzerland has abolished capital punishment in 1950 for civil and in 1991 for military crimes (in case of war).

In the United States, the state of Michigan was the first state to ban the death penalty, on March 1, 1847. The 160-year ban on capital punishment has never been repealed. Currently, 12 states of the U.S. and the District of Columbia ban capital punishment.

The European Union and the Council of Europe both strictly require member states not to practice the death penalty, except under Protocol 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which still authorizes capital punishment within the EU if crimes occur during war.

Interesting are the statistics about Executions carried out in 2006:

I know I'm all over the place with my opinions, but I know one thing: I have a real problem with any country executing people in the year 2007. I mean, we might have the lowest execution rate, but we're still doing it. We're talking about human beings having their lives ended. I don't think our lawmakers have really stopped to think about how huge of an issue this really is.