Why shouldn't we kill the bad guy after defeating him

[Relique du Madde]

I recall a sociology class where the point was made that some study showed that death penalties don't discourage crime. I think to sum up, the actual penalty doesn't discourage crime, because the criminal does not think he will get caught.

Life imprisonment or imprisonment in general also does not discourage crime for the same reasons. In truth, the existance of the prison system is not to discourage crime but to prevent a captured criminal from commiting more crimes, albiet temporarily in some cases.


-Sent via Tapatalk

 

[Umbran]

To extend the Batman reference, sometimes the BBEG isn't bad.

Or, let us go to current events (and let us all be wary of drifting into politics) - go check CNN.com, for stories on Florida teen, Trayvon Martin, who was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch captain. Assume, for a moment, that watch captain actually thought he was doing the right thing.

It does not seem like the world in general is accepting the captain's word for it that the dead boy was a villain, and it is apt to get messy.

Just 'cause you think it is the right thing to do, doesn't mean society will agree with you.

 

[Chairman7w]

I think the notion that Death Penalties don't discourage crime is ludicrous. I believe that if punishment was indeed harsh, and immediate, there would be an effect. Now, with Death Row being a joke, a place to live for dozens of years and appeal after appeal.. Sure, that ain't deterring much.

But immediate, swift, brutal (Bang!! Bang!! Double tap to the head) retribution for appropriate crimes (murder, child rape, etc)... Oh yeah, it would deter.

I recall a sociology class where the point was made that some study showed that death penalties don't discourage crime. I think to sum up, the actual penalty doesn't discourage crime, because the criminal does not think he will get caught.

 

[fanboy2000]

First, thing's first. Janx, have you thought about watching My Little Pony or Rainbow Bright instead? I think all these one-hour action shows are starting to affect you.

Now, a lot of good stuff has been said. But I'd like to add/expand on a few reasons.

First reason is certainty. If the perpetrator of a crime is killed soon after committing the crime, there can be doubt as to whether or not the deceased actually committed the crime.

Consider all the doubt surrounding Lee Harvey Oswald. Had he lived to trial and been convicted, there would be few widely held conspiracy theories about Kennedy's death. But as it stands, lots of people don't think he had any involvement with it. And many of those who do don't think he acted alone.

Now consider Charles Manson. Almost everyone agrees he belongs in prison. It's like the exact opposite of Oswald. He's the poster child for life in prison. Why? Because he was convicted at trial where the prosecution actually had to put on evidence and make an argument that he belongs in prison.

Second reason is that bad guys don't have to reform to be useful to society, they can be useful in prison. Again, look at Manson. Every so often a journalist interviews him. When sane people read or watch the interview, they think "Manson is crazy, he belongs in prison." In fact I saw an interview on 20/20 by Walters and there wasn't a doubt in my mind that Manson was were he belonged. That's a valuable public service imo. People need to have faith in their justice system.

You can't do that if the person is dead. Because they can't speak for themselves, doubts persist and the action is tainted. It's one thing if they die of natural causes, or from another prisoner (like Dahmer), but if they die in the name of retribution then it's a little dicey.

 

[Elf Witch]

I think the notion that Death Penalties don't discourage crime is ludicrous. I believe that if punishment was indeed harsh, and immediate, there would be an effect. Now, with Death Row being a joke, a place to live for dozens of years and appeal after appeal.. Sure, that ain't deterring much.

But immediate, swift, brutal (Bang!! Bang!! Double tap to the head) retribution for appropriate crimes (murder, child rape, etc)... Oh yeah, it would deter.

You do realize that the reason it takes years to put someone to death because they want to make sure a mistake has not been committed.

Project Innocence has freed dozens of wrongful convicted people innocent people who did no crime and did not belong in jail.

The very conservative Governor of Illinois put a moratorium on executions after it was discovered that a state lab forensics unit was forging data to get convictions.


The problem with your way of doing things is that you will end up killing innocent along with guilty.

Being on death row is no picnic you are kept away from the other prison population and are in your cell alone usually 23 hours a day. It is really pretty horrible. So they are being punished while they wait for their execution.

I can't think of anything more horrible than waiting to die knowing you are innocent.

If we are going to take lives for crimes then we need to make sure that they are truly guilty and that a mistake was not made or that they were not railroaded through the system.

 

[Elf Witch]

Or, let us go to current events (and let us all be wary of drifting into politics) - go check CNN.com, for stories on Florida teen, Trayvon Martin, who was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch captain. Assume, for a moment, that watch captain actually thought he was doing the right thing.

It does not seem like the world in general is accepting the captain's word for it that the dead boy was a villain, and it is apt to get messy.

Just 'cause you think it is the right thing to do, doesn't mean society will agree with you.

I have been following this story it is big news here in Florida. There are a lot of outraged people who are wondering why Zimmerman is not in custody for killing a teen who only had on him a little cash, skittles and ice tea. And it is not like the boy was trespassing he was heading home to his father who lived there.

But no Zimmerman was a big man with a gun who took the law into his own hands and now a teen is dead over it.

Which is why I really dislike the whole vigilante style of justice some people seem to favor. Yes police officers have shot unarmed people but on the whole they are trained to handle a situation without using deadly force.

If Zimmerman had listened to the 911 operator and stayed away this boy would be alive. But he had to be a big hero and I hope he gets jail time.

In fiction we usually know beyond any doubt who the bad guy is. In gaming if you use alignment you have clue right there. But real life does not work this way.

People are quick to jump to conclusions based on how someone looks. But just because a kid is wearing ghetto style does not mean he has done anything wrong.

Ted Bundy was very charming and good looking you could not see the evil in his heart just by looking at him.

 

[Umbran]

Folks,

Whether or not a death penalty should exist qualifes as politics. Please don't go there. Thanks.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

Mmh. Some of my players let enemy npc:s live when given change and others do not. It is also bit case by case, depending actions of characters and enemy and how much hate/fear that causes. I've noticed they more often let hated enemy live than one they fear.

For me it depends a lot on those things when I play and sometimes it also depends on dm. I have had especially one that would always abuse any act of mercy/humanity.

I think in fiction it's often about people who already have killed and changed by those actions. Thus they are heroes, adventurers, jaded soldiers. Many fiction also has growing stories, where some concern more with changes and some less.

If you read the news, not all areas in world care for human/animal life that much. Modern thinking requires certain level of comfort and easy survival. And different people choose differently when facing "hard choice" situations. Some choose to rather die, others choose to fight but "nor sacrifise that" and others turn into survivers at any cost.

I don't think it really equates to compare multiple war traumas of soldier to someone you killed or put into hospital some random person assaulting them. War traumas can well change personality permanently but some "it could have been you but it was that other one this time" is not that traumatic. Well it can be, but far more rarely. This winter couple of random people died when snow/ice dropped from roof and killed them. Still people kept walking those streets even if risk of such bad luck.

Killing someone who isn't directly threatening you usually happens in case of horrible misunderstanding/mistake/accident, or then person has dreaming some dark shadows of hate/fear for their target. Then there are crazy people. And hardered people (criminals typiically) who kill for property and other comfort reasons.

This would be most common in modern society. In historical times/countries still livijng historical times/dysutopian future stoires thing are different. Value of children was/is diffrent and value of life generally is different. Value of nature and animals is different.

I think many people play rpg:s and write fantasy books with modern cameos. If not we would have heard quite different version of Grimm stories when we were kids.

I don't think all people are terrible affected by violence/causing death. And situations where you are just protection yourself/someone you love makes it less pricey mentally for those that would otherwise be not able to. Also most people also lie to other people how they felt about it. Actual sociopats might like to prag about it. Normal people tend to overdo the personal agony. Because of laws and because of social acceptance. That's my experience at least. And then there are drunken drivers, some are truly sad, some claim they don't remember anything. More distance there is less emotion it involves. I remember the book "Ender's Game", nice book, later editions where too much about mr writers personal religion, but first whan was kinda neat. It remains me of modern warfare and computer-game like it looks. When you are flying that vehicle you don't see real people you see targets.

Emotional reaction comes only when realization between their action and event unfoding connects. Modern warfare is lot about disconnected mental dots. See some of those kids might not like to kill real people. And you can't have that in war, right?
Wars throughout the ages have used all kinda trics to dehumanized their soldiers. And when they stop believing shame keeps them in it. Sure there were people who liked it, there always is.

Afwull sidetracking.

But reasons why not to kill enemy is often political, or because enemy can be used to get something worse downed. Because you were promesed reward/better reputation to imprison it instead. Religion reasons sometimes. I've never had serious character that woud start crying over having to kill someone. Action heroes don't do that. HOwever comic books meant for childr audiance avoid killing. I think it really relates what kinda story you want to tell. Real world doesn't have standarnized set of moral values to this day. Of course some stories are all aobut doing horrilbe things to nice, normal people.

Most roleplaying games however, are about adventurers and monster slayers. Killing ordenary citizen for not heavy reason is rather bad behavior (and sometimes evil). Killing monsters is kinda between job/fun. Killing some "your species" baddie is not really any more moral choice than killing monster boss usually is.

Made me think this song for some reason:

"One of these days I'm gonna stop my listening
Gonna raise my head up high.
One of these days I'm gonna raise up my glistening wings and fly.
But that day will have to wait for a while.
Baby I'm only society's child.
When we're older things may change,
But for now this is the way, they must remain."

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I think the notion that Death Penalties don't discourage crime is ludicrous. I believe that if punishment was indeed harsh, and immediate, there would be an effect.

But immediate, swift, brutal (Bang!! Bang!! Double tap to the head) retribution for appropriate crimes (murder, child rape, etc)... Oh yeah, it would deter.

Go research the areas of the real world where punishment is harsh and immediate and tell us if it's an actual deterrant.

tl;dr: It's not.

 

[Janx]

First, thing's first. Janx, have you thought about watching My Little Pony or Rainbow Bright instead? I think all these one-hour action shows are starting to affect you.

Well, never assume any of the crazy ideas suggested by me in these threads as something that I personally would pursue.

Mostly, I watch a show, and ponder "why the heck is this premise valid" and pose it here as a tactical or moral question to the board.

I get a lot of good answers. Some of which I hadn't considered. I like those.