如果有办法确保不会有无辜的人被执行死刑，你会赞成还是反对死刑？为什么？（上） [美国媒体]

If there was a way to make sure that no innocent person is ever executed, would you be for or against the death penalty? Why?
​
如果有办法确保没有无辜的人被执行死刑，你会赞成还是反对死刑？为什么？



注：最近一直在看邢侦案件的纪录片，弹幕里对于凶手是否应该判死刑或者当凶手没有被判死刑时总是会有很大的争议，所以我也想看看外国人是这么看这个问题的。于是打开Reddit，输入关键词，发现最近正好有一篇争论死刑的帖子，而且看来他们的分歧也很大，回帖足足有4000多条，一起来看看他们都说了些什么吧。

Ignis_Inferno
Damn. That’s a good question. Honestly, I would be really picky about the crimes, but I’d say for. Stuff like repeated child molestation or pedophilia. And only when rehabilitation has failed. When someone clearly has no interest in helping themselves and only cares about hurting others.

该死。这真是个好问题。老实说，我会对这些（该判死刑的）罪行非常挑剔，但我可以说像反复猥亵儿童或者恋童癖之类的东西，还有当他在狱中康复失败的时候，当一个人显然对帮助自己没有兴趣而只关心伤害别人的时候，我同意死刑。

theyusedthelamppost
Yes. Your premise cuts out the only opposition I have to the death penalty.

同意，你的前提消除了我唯一反对死刑的理由。

jangxx
But how do you define 'innocent'? Different countries have different laws and I object to some of them on a moral basis (like criminalising sexual orientation or beliefs). For me, this alone is reason enough to be against all forms of death penalty, simply because I could end up on the wrong side of the law of some countries.

但是你怎么定义‘无辜’呢？不同的国家有不同的法律，我基于道德反对其中一些(比如将性取向或信仰定为犯罪)。对我来说，仅凭这一点就足以反对所有形式的死刑，因为我可能最终会站在某些国家错误的法律的一边。

TheSavior666
I mean, what about the argument that being locked up for the rest of your life is a worse punishment then death?
Cause after death you have no worries. But if you stay locked in prison you are constantly reminded of and being punished for what you did.
I would argue that's worse

我觉得，你余生都被关起来的说法是否是比死亡更严重的惩罚呢？
因为只要一死你就无忧无虑了。但是，如果你被关在监狱里，你就会不断地被提醒你犯过的罪，并且因为你所做的事情而受到惩罚。
我觉得后者更糟糕。

Peacemaker_58
I'd be for it because that's been my argument for several years. Don't waste time and money with people who are guilty with 100% proof of things like serial rape or multiple murders.

我会赞成的，因为我多年来一直持有这样的观点。不要吧时间和金钱浪费在那些100%被证明有罪的人身上，比如连环强奸连环谋杀。

HiNoKitsune
Isn't it a Bit disgusting to end a human Life because it would Cost less? People like that are hardly morally superior to the murderers they want to execute.

因为这样做的代价更低而结束人类的生命难道不是有点恶心吗？像这样的人在道德上不比那些他们想处决的杀人犯更优越。

Peacemaker_58
No. Sometimes the needs of the many hardworking people contributing to society outweigh the needs of the few who have decided murders and rape is ok.

不。有的时候许多勤劳的对社会有贡献的人的需要大于少数被证明是谋杀和强奸的人的需要是可以接受的。

AbsentiaMentis
If an entire town needs to live in fear of rape & murder because of 1 guy with a history of recidivism, it is completely justified imo.

如果整个小镇因为一个有犯罪历史的人而需要生活在对强奸和谋杀的恐惧中，这么做完全是有道理的。

spideyismywingman
I strongly don't believe that financial considerations can come into this conversation. This is a moral question and can only be answered as such. It's also cheaper to kill unrepentent thieves, but we wouldn't do that because it's immoral.
That isn't to defend life sentences over the death penalty, I just don't think you can talk finances here.

我强烈反对把这个话题引入到经济因素中。这是一个道德问题，只能以道德来谈论。杀死不悔改的小偷也更省钱，但我们不会这么做，因为这是不道德的。
这不是为死刑辩护，我只是不认为你应该在这里谈论财务问题。

Peacemaker_58
Sure you can. We have an overcrowding problem and a budget problem. Both of those would be helped here. You don't need to worry about killing thieves because the punishment doesn't fit the crime there.

当然能谈经济因素。我们有监狱过度拥挤和预算问题。死刑对于两者都会有帮助。你不需要担心小偷被杀，因为这不符合那里的法律。

sage1700
I agree with you, but there needs to be like a minimum time spent on rehabilitation before it should be considered. If a guy kills from anger he shouldn't get the death penalty without any attempt of rehabilitation.
Something along the lines of 3 years of trying to turn them around and a definite agreement with a psychologist or something for it to be considered.

我同意你的看法。但在死刑之前，我们应该考虑怎么用最低的预算去让犯人康复。如果一个人因愤怒而杀人（激情杀人），那他不应该在没有任何康复尝试的情况下被判死刑。
比如用三年来彻底改造他们或者与心理学家或其他什么人达成明确的一致的意见等都应该被考虑。

HeyZuesHChrist
We can't execute people for serial rape, man. That's opening a whole other box of problems.

我们不能因为连环强奸而判处死刑。这是另一个问题。

Peacemaker_58
No it isn't. They are a burden to society, taking away the rights of many and in some cases, the lives of them too. So they should lose theirs.

不，这不是另一个问题。他们是社会的负担，剥夺了许多人的权利，在某些情况下也剥夺了被害者的生命。所以他们（犯人）应该失去他们的生命。

HeyZuesHChrist
You're ignoring the consequences of doing this. Your response is totally emotional. You have to look at the repercussions. As cliche as it sounds the punishment needs to fit the crime. A lot of people think we should just execute rapists. A big component of punishing people for their crimes is that it is a deterrent to committing that crime. Some people don't murder people because they morally cannot justify it. Others don't because they fear the consequences. If the consequences for rape and murder are the same then there is no deterrent for rapists to leave their victims alive.
If the punishment for rape was death what you would find is that more rapists would kill their victims, because it won't get them a more severe punishment. It's all the same at that point. If they leave their victim alive there is a far greater chance they will be caught and if they are caught the punishment is death. While rape is terrible, murder is final. There would actually be an incentive for rapists to kill their victims. No eye witness. Nobody to identify them. Nobody to report it to the police. You can get rid of all the evidence. Executing rapists would be extremely dangerous. Once you have already crossed the line into death penalty anything goes.
That's why you see different levels of punishment for crimes.

你忽视了这样做的后果。你的回复完全是情绪化的。你得看看后果。听起来很陈词滥调，但惩罚需要与犯罪程度相适应。很多人认为我们应该处决强奸犯死刑。惩罚犯罪人的一个重要原因是，这是对犯罪的威慑。一些人不杀人是因为这不符合道德规范，一些人不杀人是因为害怕后果。如果强奸和谋杀的后果是相同的，那么强奸犯就不会让受害者活着。

如果对强奸的处罚是死刑，你会发现更多的强奸犯会杀害他们的受害者，因为已经没有办法再给他们更严厉的惩罚了。这一点是相通的。如果他们让受害者活着，他们被抓的可能性要大得多，如果他们被抓住，惩罚就是死亡。强奸很糟糕，谋杀更可怕。这么做实际上就是给了强奸犯杀死受害者动机。没有目击证人。没人能认出他们。没人报警。你就可以处理掉所有的证据。所以处决强奸犯是非常危险的。一旦你越界进入死刑，上述一切都可能会发生。
这就是为什么你会看到对犯罪的不同程度进行不同的惩罚。

hippie_ki_yay
Exactly, but I never understand how people get the death penalty in some states for single murders that may have happened in a fit of rage. I think the serial killers and rapists should get the death penalty, the ones where, if let out, there is 100% a change they will be a danger to society and there is nothing they can do in prison to positively impact a life.

没错，但我从来不明白在一些州，人们是如何因可能是在愤怒中发生的单起谋杀案而被判死刑的。我认为连环杀手和强奸犯应该得到死刑，如果让他们出去，他们百分之百会对社会造成危害，而让他们呆在监狱里也不会对他们的人生再造成什么积极的影响。

Maigal
My issue with this i that the person who killed someone else has the chance to live, the other person doesn't. Why should a person that takes away someone's right to live have that right himself?

我对此的意见是，杀害他人的人有机会活下去，而被他杀害的人却没有了。为什么剥夺一个人的生存权的人自己拥有这个权利？

longtimelurker8246
My issue with your argument is how few factors are considered in it. Does that apply to soldiers? They kill many people, often civilians. Should they receive the death penalty upon returning to the US? What about in cases of manslaughter? What if the person they killed was also a murderer, or a rapist, or a pedophile? Etc, etc, etc.

我对你的论点的看法是，它考虑的因有多少。这适用于士兵吗？他们杀害了许多人，往往是平民。返回美国时，他们是否应该接受死刑？那么在杀人案件中呢？如果他们杀的人也是杀人犯，强奸犯，恋童癖怎么办？等等

Maigal
I understand your point, and honestly that's one of the biggest issues. I can see the flaws in my own reasoning, but I've thought about this topic a lot and basically kill anybody who kills an Innocent seems like the most logical approach.
And yes, I understand that it's hard to define who is innocent and whatnot (plus a lot of other factors), that's why its not a realistic thing that Will happen anytime.

我明白你的观点，说实话，这是最大的问题之一。我能看到我自己推理中的缺陷，但是我已经对这个话题思考了很多，基本上对任何滥杀无辜的人判处死刑似乎是最合乎逻辑的方法。
是的，我知道很难定义谁是无辜的什么的(加上许多其他因素)，这就是为什么不现实的事情会随时发生。

pcopley
“basically kill anybody who kills an Innocent seems like the most logical approach”
How about "Arrest people who commit crimes. The State should not make a habit of killing its own citizens." That seems much more logical and less based around emotion.

“对任何滥杀无辜的人判处死刑。”
“逮捕犯罪的人。国家不应养成杀害本国公民的习惯”。这个逻辑怎么样。它似乎更符合逻辑，而不是基于情感。

4th_Chamber
An eye for an eye just makes sense. That's the saying, right?

以眼还眼是对的，这是一句俗语，对吗？

trojanguy
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

以眼还眼使整个世界失明。

idkwhatimdoing25
No matter what happens to the murderer, the victim won't get their life back. I'm not 100% opposed to death penalty but this argument doesn't work. By your argument, if we sentence someone to death we are taking that person's right to live just like the murderer took the victims right to live. Death penalty shouldn't be for revenge.

不管对凶手做什么，都已经无法挽回被害者的生命了。我不是百分之百反对死刑，但你提这个论点行不通。根据你的论点，如果我们判处某人死刑，我们就是剥夺了那个人的生存权，就像凶手剥夺了受害者的生存权一样。死刑不应该是为了报复。

Maigal
I don't know about you, but for me an innocent life isnt exactly the same as a murderer's life. It's very subjective,, and it isn't even revenge, it's basically eliminating absolute garbage human beings out of society

我不知道你的情况，但对我来说，无辜的受害者的生和杀人犯的生命是不能划等号的。这是非常主观的，甚至不是报复，它基本上只是把垃圾人从社会中清除出去。

idkwhatimdoing25
A life is a life to me. What makes me better than a murderer is that I won't resort to ending someone's life. What if the murderer's victim was also garbage human being? Does that make the crime okay?

对我来说，生命就是生命没什么不同。我比杀人犯更好的原因是我不会选择终结别人的生命。但如果凶手的受害者也是垃圾人呢？这能让犯罪变得合理吗？

nebuka
Justice is not about fucking retribution. Not in any civilized society. So if a thief steals something should all his stuff get taken by the government because he lost the right to have stuff?
Not to mention you're being so infuriatingly black and white.

正义不是他妈的复仇。在任何文明社会里都不是。如果一个小偷偷了东西，那他所有的东西就都得被政府拿走，因为他失去了拥有东西的权利？
更别提你太非黑即白了。

abcPIPPO
Laws don't work that way. Human rights aren't supposed to be a "Do as I say or I'll punish you" mindset, it's a "Since you are a human being, that's enough for you to have rights that you can't lose in any way". The only single case in which a human right should be denied is if that puts in danger the same right of other people.

法律不是这样运作的。人权不应该是一种“照我说的做，否则我就惩罚你”的心态，而是一种“既然你是人，就应该让你拥有任何方式都不能失去的权利”。一个人人权被剥夺的唯一情况是，如果这样做会危及其他人的同样的权利。

DagarMan0
Because, if we were to argue like you are, then we'd be no different from them. Why do you get to decide who lives, based on their crimes? Their blood is on your hands from then on. Taking the high ground sucks sometimes, but by not doing so you are literally just excusing murder. You are doing what you are condemning.

因为，如果我们像你说的一样去做，那我们就跟他们（罪犯）没什么两样了。你为什么要根据他们的罪行来决定谁应该活着？从那时起你的手上就沾满了他们的鲜血了。占据道德高地有时候让人感觉很烂，但如果你不这么做，你就是在为谋杀开脱。你在做着你正在谴责的事。

TheShadowbyte
Because, ideally, the actions of a just and moral society, should be more admirable than the actions of a ruthless criminal. That being said, I don't want to lean on either side of the debate at this time because I'm not certain of what standing is the more "moral" one, though perhaps things like undiscovered mental illness (not just undiagnosed, but literally yet undefined by our our scientists/psychologists) may be an important factor to consider.

因为，在理想情况下，公正和道德的社会的行为应该比无情的罪犯的行为更令人钦佩。话虽如此，但我不想在这段时间站在辩论的任何一方，因为我不确定什么是更“道德”的立场，不过，也许像是未被发现的精神疾病（不仅仅是未经诊断，也可以是我们的科学家/心理学家还没有进行定义）可能也是一个重要的考虑因素。

Maigal
I understand what you mean, bug i don't necessarily think that killing a murderer and an innocent is the same morally tho, even though the action itself is the same.

我明白你的意思，但是，我不认为杀死一个杀人犯和杀死一个无辜的人在道德上是相同的，即使行动本身是一样的。

IsabellaGalavant
Exactly how I feel. Why should a murderer, who denied someone else their chance at life, be allowed to live and redeem themselves? I don't think they should.

这正是我的感受。为什么不给别人生命的机会的杀人犯要被允许活着和赎罪呢？我觉得他们不应该。