Japan hangs two death-row inmates

Crime Aug. 03, 2012 - 04:00PM JST ( 201 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

201 Comments

-20

ItsMeAug. 03, 2012 - 02:11PM JST

Really??? hanged??? You must be kidding.
4

ubikwitAug. 03, 2012 - 02:17PM JST

hang 'em high.
4

cleoAug. 03, 2012 - 02:18PM JST

Barbarity.
9

theResidentAug. 03, 2012 - 02:28PM JST

@ItsMe: I fail to see the relevance of your comment. Hanged by the neck until dead is the chosen form of execution here. Why would anybody 'be kidding'?
-10

PeaceWarriorAug. 03, 2012 - 02:33PM JST

You think things are getting better and then blam, there they go again!
-28

susanoAug. 03, 2012 - 02:42PM JST

What a primitive, uncivilised culture and society
-17

ItsMeAug. 03, 2012 - 02:50PM JST

The Resident, The relevance of the post is pointing out the absurdity of modern Japan using 9th century punishment.
13

BurakuminDesAug. 03, 2012 - 02:54PM JST

Good news they have been eliminated. Rest in Peace to the poor, innocent victims of these disgusting trash. No tears anywhere are being shed for these 2. As for non-Japanese attacking Japanese for meting out these punishments: let the Japanese decide their own punishments. I wish my nation also had some tough punishment for the dregs of society. I just hope jutice being served in a tiny way closes a chapter in the lives of the families of the poor victims.
11

dorami23Aug. 03, 2012 - 03:04PM JST

The Resident, The relevance of the post is pointing out the absurdity of modern Japan using 9th century punishment.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.
0

CrazyJoeAug. 03, 2012 - 03:05PM JST

This makes me so happy. 130 more to go. (there are still 130 men and women on death row in Japan).
15

theResidentAug. 03, 2012 - 03:12PM JST

ItsMe - I suggest you do a little research - it is still the primary of execution in quite a few countries, some of which you would be surprised at. Very much used in the 21st Century.
2

TatankaAug. 03, 2012 - 03:13PM JST

This news has made my Friday -- two fewer dirt bags breathing the air in this country, but when the hell are they going to get the guts and start hanging Aum guys...
-14

basroilAug. 03, 2012 - 03:15PM JST

Apart from the right/wrong aspects of capital punishment, the use of hanging is quite absurd. While a proper hanging severs the spine, even that doesn't actually kill the individual. The actual cause of death is the same as strangulation, a lack of oxygen to the brain, asphyxiation, and eventually cardiac arrest. Death can take as much as 15 minutes. Taki probably isn't even there the entire time

Nowhere near humane as lethal injection, and very likely to not allow closure to those who lost loved ones, as it is a violent death that can sometimes make painful memories more vivid.
26

papigiulioAug. 03, 2012 - 03:16PM JST

To all who say its barbaric. Please let me know if you will say the same thing when YOUR 19 yo daughter is raped, killed and burned. seriously how dare you even utter the words barbaric in this case.
-9

gogogoAug. 03, 2012 - 03:20PM JST

While everyone is busy with the nuclear protests lets sign a few of these.... * sad face *
1

basroilAug. 03, 2012 - 03:22PM JST

ItsMeAug. 03, 2012 - 02:50PM JST

The Resident, The relevance of the post is pointing out the absurdity of modern Japan using 9th century punishment.

The earliest records of it were actually in 14th century (death by hanging). Also, 9th century Japan actually abolished capital punishment, and it was only made legal again in the mid 12th century. So perhaps, you should actually WANT Japan to use 9th century punishments.
-6

CrickyAug. 03, 2012 - 03:26PM JST

It must be a fantastic feeling of closure killing a killer. Eye for an eye ect. And it's obvious potential killers are less likely to kill knowing the State will kill them? There are exceptions...say everyone who has killed. But doesn't it feel good to know that tax paying citizens play their part in retribution, well done. Killem all some god will sort them out.
-7

dorami23Aug. 03, 2012 - 03:37PM JST

All the people downgrading the comments in support of capital punishment must feel so wonderful up on their moral high horse.
1

rickyveeAug. 03, 2012 - 03:38PM JST

japan needs to execute more people who "only" murder one person. i have never understood that logic.
5

VespertoAug. 03, 2012 - 03:43PM JST

And it's obvious potential killers are less likely to kill knowing the State will kill them?

Yo, reality check, remember the guy who went around stabbing and killing people 'cos he didn't have the guts to kill himself (i never noticed a shortage of bridges, but i digress)? Guess what, turns out people died 'cos he wanted to die, so capital punishment kinda killed them, didn't it?

Death penalty: it's absurd, it's hypocritical, it's barbaric, it's uncivilized. It takes the brains of a 12 year old to say If it happened to you you'd approve death penalty! Well that's why society organizes itself, little one, so it doesn't regress to prehistory. There's cops, courts, jails and everything. It makes burning at the stake and survival of the fittest unnecessary.

Throwing someone in solitary after a 12h day of hard labor 7 days a week until the end of his days is a much better option. Lots of jobs no one wants out there, make them useful to society. Plus, if someone makes a mistake and condemns an innocent - you can undo.
-8

It"S MEAug. 03, 2012 - 03:45PM JST

dorami23.

Take an eye for and eye and a life for a life. Isn't that what jesus fought against.

Christians supporting the death-penalty, IMHO, aren't true christians.
13

Mirai HayashiAug. 03, 2012 - 03:55PM JST

Really??? hanged??? You must be kidding.

What a primitive, uncivilised culture and society

I don't know why people focus so much on the killer's rights. What about the victims??? ...do you think they got a humane death?
-2

bilderberg_2015Aug. 03, 2012 - 04:09PM JST

Excellent news. Should have this in the UK too. It would remove a lot of scum from the country.
-3

VespertoAug. 03, 2012 - 04:17PM JST

Oh the irony of a pro-death penalty fascist to be accused of a crime he didn't commit and be convited... to the death penalty! :)
6

theResidentAug. 03, 2012 - 04:25PM JST

Well, I fully support the death penalty for a crime proved beyond doubt. How does anybody who has has committed pre-meditated murder have any 'rights'. Their victim (s) certainly didn't. This has nothing to do with Christianity.
1

basroilAug. 03, 2012 - 04:35PM JST

VespertoAug. 03, 2012 - 03:43PM JST

Throwing someone in solitary after a 12h day of hard labor 7 days a week until the end of his days is a much better option. Lots of jobs no one wants out there, make them useful to society. Plus, if someone makes a mistake and condemns an innocent - you can undo.

I'm sure they could have used those five over at fukushima. Already death penalty, so they might as well help clean areas that normal workers can't enter for safety reasons. Most of those jobs won't kill them outright, and give them plenty of time to repent.
-4

JimizoAug. 03, 2012 - 04:36PM JST

@bilderberg Thankfully the UK abolished this filthy practice in the 60s. Even Thatcher didn't try to reverse this despite her personal beliefs. It's long gone from our country and we are a better people for it.
3

cleoAug. 03, 2012 - 04:40PM JST

How does anybody who has has committed pre-meditated murder have any 'rights'.

Opposition to murder by the state has nothing to do with the 'rights' of murderers.

Jimizo - Yes.
4

CrazyJoeAug. 03, 2012 - 04:41PM JST

On the average, it takes about 14 minutes and 33 seconds for the doctor to declare the person dead in Japan after hanging. (for the heart to stop).　But the person immediately loses consciousness after the body is suspended.
0

DoLittleBeLateAug. 03, 2012 - 04:42PM JST

This has nothing to do with "eye to eye", nor deterring anybody. It is simply a statement from the society to the person who did the act that the person is no longer wanted among us ever, and nobody wants to feed them for free in prison either.
4

KariHarukaAug. 03, 2012 - 04:58PM JST

Good! Thats less sick minded people in this world already.

And anyone who calls Japan barbaric for using the death sentence. Wasn't the person who raped and burned a 19 year old girl to death barbaric? Or what about the guy who killed 2 of his relatives.
-7

almxxAug. 03, 2012 - 05:00PM JST

There are never any mistakes in the victim or the murderer. All events are programmed to happen as they do. If a country were to eliminate the death penalty, let them also prevent it in the victims. We just have to suffer our individual programs as best we can. If humans could control events, nothing bad would ever happen.
3

tairitsuikenAug. 03, 2012 - 05:06PM JST

The death penalty is obsolete and has no place in a modern society. If it would have any sort of deterrent effect they'd do it á la Bravehart but they don't and people still kill other people so it is just an old fashioned way of giving back.

I'm with Vesperto here - hard labor, rest of the life. That is a punishment.
-1

techallAug. 03, 2012 - 05:28PM JST

I say, once guilt is proven or confessed, turn the penalty over to the aggrieved, If they say hang 'em, then hang 'em, if they say show mercy and put the scum behind bars forever and ever, then so be it.
3

YubaruAug. 03, 2012 - 05:28PM JST

The death penalty is society's lust for revenge in the miss-belief that having the punishment will be a deterrent to people from committing crimes that would warrant such a punishment.

Consider this, take a person away from all human contact, solitary confinement at hard labour, never seeing the light of day, never feeling or hearing another human's voice. Which is more humane? That or death?
-4

ubikwitAug. 03, 2012 - 05:41PM JST

@basroil

yes, you're probably right that lethal injection would be less disturbing overall.

but there is a deterrent effect imparted by the death penalty.

unfortunately, it may have less of a deterrent effect on the types of individuals that committed the heinous crimes described in the articles as it does on organized crime groups.

such people can never re-enter society, and prisons are overcrowded and a burden on public coffers.

what we need to do is make some finance and other white collar crimes capital offenses. that would also serve as a deterrent, and also to restore some sense of order and justice among the population at large.
1

corner-of-my-eyeAug. 03, 2012 - 05:43PM JST

Well done Japan. Capital punishment is a very uncomfortable topic for many, but what on earth else can you do to someone who rapes, then burns a teenager?? Absolutely appalling crime.As hard as it may be to take, Justice needs to be served for humanity.
3

walteryAug. 03, 2012 - 06:01PM JST

Good job! Do the crime pay the price. Save expenses keeping them for what!
3

A CanadianAug. 03, 2012 - 06:03PM JST

I cannot believe that people are worried about the form of punishment for the killers. What about the victims??? What happened to them is beyond barbaric. Recently in Mali, a man and woman were stoned to death for adultery - each country has its own forms of punishment. If it were your loved one, would you want to breathe the same air as the killer? They gave up their right to be among us the moment they took an innocent life.
5

cleoAug. 03, 2012 - 06:12PM JST

And anyone who calls Japan barbaric for using the death sentence. Wasn't the person who raped and burned a 19 year old girl to death barbaric?

Yes, he was. How does that give him the right to make a whole country equally barbaric?

Two wrongs never make a right.
-1

tokyokawasakiAug. 03, 2012 - 06:33PM JST

well said Jimizo and Cleo. I am with you both on this...
3

FightingVikingAug. 03, 2012 - 06:43PM JST

What a primitive, uncivilised culture and society

Are you talking about the perpetrators ? Or the punishment ?
4

Thomas AndersonAug. 03, 2012 - 06:46PM JST

99.9% conviction rate, folks. An unbelievably unrealistic figure. How many of them are innocent?
1
Thomas AndersonAug. 03, 2012 - 07:05PM JST

So in conclusion: Your "soverein" ways of handling criminals would kill more innocent people. Good job UK.

False correlation. Scandinavian and some Europeans countries have abolished the death penalty yet their crime rates are about the same as Japan's.
- ModeratorAug. 03, 2012 - 07:50PM JST
  
  Readers, comparisons with other countries are not relevant to this discussion.
-1

dolphingirlAug. 03, 2012 - 07:06PM JST

Opposition to murder by the state has nothing to do with the 'rights' of murderers.

Agreed!
-2

buggerlugsAug. 03, 2012 - 07:55PM JST

I truely hope they were guilty and not falsely interred like sugamo. I have no opinion on right or wrong of the death penalty because I know if someone hurt one of the buggerlugs clan I'd be screaming for it.

Please Japan just make sure no innocents are murdered.
1

WillemAug. 03, 2012 - 07:55PM JST

The death sentence is still not part of the past? I thought people knew better by now. guess not... How in Gods name can you be happy with the death of someone?! Is locked up not enough?! Your freedom is gone anyway if you're behind bars. If you are happy with the death of someone you could as well be the executioner itself.
-5

Elbuda MexicanoAug. 03, 2012 - 07:56PM JST

Again, I want to thank god/s for the death penalty! May these evil, evil bastards burn in hell for all of eternity! BANZAI!!
-2

Thomas AndersonAug. 03, 2012 - 08:28PM JST

Again, I want to thank god/s for the death penalty! May these evil, evil bastards burn in hell for all of eternity! BANZAI!!

99.9% conviction rate. Even if they are innocent?
2

Rose Kina KinaAug. 03, 2012 - 08:30PM JST

Just asking the one who killed the British lady? What about him?
0

mrmaliceAug. 03, 2012 - 08:47PM JST

@susano, japan is one of the remaining ancient cultures, i'd hardly call it primitive, westernized perhaps because of the unusual american influence. I'm not gettin g into the death penalty debate. It's stands for sure that it's irreversible in case of mistake. You could also ask what's more cruel, instant death or a life of incarceration with no means of release ? In some cases there's no discussion, say Anders Breyivik (look him up if you've been lving on mars asking for it himself ... who could object if they did it then) in others where the slightest possible doubt might exist, i'd seriously advise against it
3

hobart_markAug. 03, 2012 - 08:52PM JST

The crimes befit the punishment....
-1

AliasisAug. 03, 2012 - 08:55PM JST

Disgusting. The death penalty is wrong, period. Japan needs to wake up and reexamine its values, seriously.
-1

JimizoAug. 03, 2012 - 09:01PM JST

@buggerlugs 'Please Japan just make sure no innocents are murdered' Therein lies the problem......
6

whiskeysourAug. 03, 2012 - 09:11PM JST

raping a woman and burning her alive ???? PURELY SICK !!!!!
-1

Gerard van SchipAug. 03, 2012 - 09:13PM JST

Wow a lot of comments on how barbaric this is but lets take a step back, what is the purpose of a death penalty? To punish the offender and sever as a warning to would be offenders. A painless lethal injection is the easy way out.
0

Daris EdwardsAug. 03, 2012 - 09:25PM JST

I wish more countries would follow suit. People are not afraid to kill anymore because they know they can stay in jail and never have to pay for their crime! Put a rope up in the court room and save our money!!!
0

toguroAug. 03, 2012 - 10:05PM JST

For those bleeding hearts that are opposed to the death penalty, maybe everyone else could view the world through your rose colored lenses, if perhaps the perpetrators were released into your custody, that way you could feed them, take care of them, keep them around your loved ones, and you could teach them how wrong it is to commit murder, since I'm so sure they would listen to you right?

Capital punishment for murder may not prevent murder, but how many murders have been prevented due to the threat of incarceration?
1

Arturo HernandezAug. 03, 2012 - 10:45PM JST

In Mexico we dont apply this "barbaric methods" and we suffer rapes and all kind of violence, we are hostages of the Gangs, I vote for the hanging!...killers be killed...
4

ojiiu812badboyAug. 03, 2012 - 10:57PM JST

Japan is mostly meticulous in this situation. If the conclusion is reached to carry out a hanging, hang 'em high. If you commit the crime, be prepared to stick your neck out.
0

nigelboyAug. 03, 2012 - 11:19PM JST

It's about time MOJ got rid of these scumbags. 130 still more to go.
-1

Thomas AndersonAug. 03, 2012 - 11:31PM JST

For those bleeding hearts that are opposed to the death penalty, maybe everyone else could view the world through your rose colored lenses, if perhaps the perpetrators were released into your custody, that way you could feed them, take care of them, keep them around your loved ones, and you could teach them how wrong it is to commit murder, since I'm so sure they would listen to you right?

You can not even be 100% sure that you got the right person. What if they are innocent? Sadly, with the bogus 99.9% conviction rate in Japan, a whole bunch of them must be innocent.
0

nigelboyAug. 03, 2012 - 11:36PM JST

You can not even be 100% sure that you got the right person. What if they are innocent? Sadly, with the bogus 99.9% conviction rate in Japan, a whole bunch of them must be innocent.

False. It's the prosecutor's job to get a conviction from the judge. It's not like the West where the prosecutors decide to go to court based on "50/50" chance and hope that the jury/judge will be convinced with their arguments. The latter method, IMO, puts more potentially innocent people at risk of false conviction.
2

basroilAug. 03, 2012 - 11:41PM JST

Gerard van Schip Aug. 03, 2012 - 09:13PM JST

Wow a lot of comments on how barbaric this is but lets take a step back, what is the purpose of a death penalty? To punish the offender and sever as a warning to would be offenders. A painless lethal injection is the easy way out.

Need me to find the dozens upon dozens of peer reviewed articles showing that it is none of those things you state? There has never been any evidence that death penalty reduces any crime in the long term (over live in prison), and quite a bit of evidence stating it makes certain types of crime streaks more common.

The original purpose of death penalty was to deal with crimes swiftly as they had limited penitentiaries and correctional facilities. By the time proper police forces (and criminal detention facilities) were established, the death penalty quickly fell out of favor for all but the most serious of crimes, usually serial killers, spies, and other forms of treason (all of which are considered to be non-reformable). The most common use today is simply due to over-crowding and a lack of willingness to incarcerate them for life . It doesn't help bring closure to anyone, and is is actually psychologically less of a punishment than life in prison for the convict.

A proper hanging is actually less painful than injection, as there's no needle pri.ck, and if the C2 vertebra is fractured it will cause total instantaneous paralysis, and the pressure to the neck will cause complete blackout in seconds regardless.
0

GUTHRIE14Aug. 03, 2012 - 11:43PM JST

isn't there a lengthy mandatory appeals process like in the states?
1

Simon FostonAug. 03, 2012 - 11:43PM JST

Never mind whether the death penalty actually deters would-be killers, or if it makes the victims' family feel any better, keeping someone who thinks it's ok to kidnap, rape and burn to death a teenager is just a waste of prison space and taxpayers' money. Wild dogs do things that aren't nearly as heinous as that and get put to sleep for them. On the other hand, the death penalty should not be considered unless the conviction is more than 100% watertight.
0

basroilAug. 03, 2012 - 11:45PM JST

nigelboyAug. 03, 2012 - 11:36PM JST

It's the prosecutor's job to get a conviction from the judge.

Sadly, sometimes they cross the line in doing so. Forced confessions for people later found to have nothing to do with it are not as rare as they should be. There's also the fact that Japan lacks habeas corpus, which gives them pretty much free reign to arrest and hope for a confession. Most trials never even hear evidence other than the confession.
0

basroilAug. 03, 2012 - 11:47PM JST

Simon FostonAug. 03, 2012 - 11:43PM JST

a waste of ... taxpayers' money.

Probably the only reason Japan still hangs rather than lethal injection. Much cheaper to buy a length of rope and some 2 by 4s than expensive and rare drugs.
-1
Thomas AndersonAug. 04, 2012 - 12:00AM JST

nigelboy

False.

The 99.9% conviction rate in Japan, which is a very unrealistic figure, is not false. The average in the rest of the advanced nations is around 80%
- ModeratorAug. 04, 2012 - 06:02AM JST
  
  Stay on topic please.
2

nigelboyAug. 04, 2012 - 12:00AM JST

Sadly, sometimes they cross the line in doing so. Forced confessions for people later found to have nothing to do with it are not as rare as they should be. There's also the fact that Japan lacks habeas corpus, which gives them pretty much free reign to arrest and hope for a confession. Most trials never even hear evidence other than the confession.

False. Under Japanese Constitution Article 38 and under Criminal Procedure Code Article 319, a person cannot be convicted of a confession alone.
1

CrickyAug. 04, 2012 - 12:14AM JST

100% water tight? That is the problem too many times innocence is proved after death, is there a number of innocent slaughters that justifies 1 . Bleeding hearts? That is a catch phrase to denigrate serious debate. If state sponsored murder is OK then murder is OK. That's what it is, lower the bar morally and expect a lower moral standard, then people can really get angry about the lower moral standards of society...
2

Bartholomew HarteAug. 04, 2012 - 12:40AM JST

What about Shoko Asahara ?Could it be this Killer is being kept alive in order to keep the "New" Aum, called Aleph , in check ? some people are beyond redemption like the man who burned that young lady alive.
-6

bass4funkAug. 04, 2012 - 01:03AM JST

I don't know why people focus so much on the killer's rights. What about the victims??? ...do you think they got a humane death?

Of course, the victims have rights and in this kind of situation, their rights come first, however, the death penalty solves nothing! All it is, is a legalized approved murder, no matter how you look at it, you can't spin it any other way, they say it's justice, it's revenge. How is murder going to solve anything. I think these people are the lowest life form on the planet, But I think giving someone life in prison is 100X worse than just offing off a person. I know some here might disagree, but I just think the death penalty is cruel and barbaric. Why do you think so many criminals long for the death penalty in the US, because many of them hate prison and prison life. When you are in solitary confinement 23 hours a day in a cell, half the size of a 1K apartment will mentally get to eat into you after a while. I hate the fact that we still use the death penalty in the states. IMO it should be abolished. Lock them up and throw away the key. Mental suffering is the worst sentence, why? Because you have time to ponder and reflect.
-2

Aída PosadasAug. 04, 2012 - 01:34AM JST

This is like putting out fire with fire. Killing killers. This makes you think that revenge (in this case called justice) is not good. BUT, when it was someone beloved to you the one who suffered, you want to kill the guy who harmed your beloved one. Let's not judge people for wanting some justice (revenge).

Also, the method they use for to kill the assassin (hanging or needle) is irrelevant. They're killed anyway! And the suffering must be less painful than kidnapping, raping and burning someone to death.
2

Brian WhewayAug. 04, 2012 - 03:49AM JST

if you have commited a serious crime or murder, you should be hung, end of, no question ! and then the do gooders should be lined up and then they can take there turn!!
3

ka_chanAug. 04, 2012 - 05:32AM JST

Not sure but Japan's old form of execution seems to be merciful than hanging. Is the death penalty wrong... depends. For christian country it would be wrong but most christian countries don't follow all the teachings of Christ. Old testament countries..."eye for and eye" seem to follow their moral code as well as Islamic countries. Buddhist countries, the death penalty seems inconsistent with the doctrine of nonviolence and compassion for life. Shinto doesn't deal with death. But lucky for Japan the only about 24% believe in religion and 15% believe in God, so no real real moral conflict with the death penalty here.
4

noriyosan73Aug. 04, 2012 - 05:43AM JST

Justice, finally. It may not stop the next person from committing a crime, but it stopped these people. Prisons are for rehabilitation and not for permanent vacations. The USA needs to consider the Japanese judicial process rather than providing full employment at tax payers expense for the continual appeals process.
4

CrazyJoeAug. 04, 2012 - 06:06AM JST

A murderer should not be breathing the same air as the victim's family.
-2

YardleyAug. 04, 2012 - 06:44AM JST

For those commenting on the cost aspect: it costs more money to execute a person than it does to keep them in prison. Look it up.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
-4

AriesKJJAug. 04, 2012 - 07:09AM JST

I wish we had the death penalty in Canada but hanging doesn't seem right. I think lethal injection would be the most civil way. My feeling is that once a person shows that they are unable, unwilling or dramatically unlikely to be rehabilitated from rape or murder the society then has the duty to protect the citizens not the offender.

Money is not my issue though it does cost us about 100k a year to house a prisoner, and tho most of the money recirculates back into the economy there is also time spent by the system and space to be considered. It's a sensitive issue but every time they release a rapist or murderer and he re-offends I become more certain.
2

UtrackAug. 04, 2012 - 09:14AM JST

One of those was Junya Hattori, 40, who raped and kidnapped a 19-year-old college student in 2002 before burning her to death at a construction site in the central city of Mishima, the ministry said.

Junya Hattori, does not deserve to live.

Kyozo Matsumura, 31, was hanged in Osaka for killing two of his relatives in 2007 and stealing their money.

Kyozo Matsumura should die twice if possible, he killed his own blood for some yen. He offed his family He could do that to anybody.

Glad these criminals are out of the society at large.
-1

Pukey2Aug. 04, 2012 - 09:40AM JST

For hideous crimes where the they are proven beyond doubt to be guilty, go for it. These criminals were absolutely evil. Tax-payers will not have to foot the bill for their accommodation and food anymore.
4

mtwildmanAug. 04, 2012 - 10:24AM JST

Nothing wrong w/ridding society of these type of vermin...@ Pukey 2...right on!
-5

Thomas AndersonAug. 04, 2012 - 02:00PM JST

So you people still think that the verdict is 100% right and no innocents are executed because they have a God-like ability to get it right 100% of the time. This is just laughable. Welcome to dictatorship/the middle ages.
1

JopinionAug. 04, 2012 - 02:20PM JST

Compared to being raped and burned to death, being hanged in return can be hardly called barbaric, but an effective way of getting rid of evil elements in our society. What is it with all these do-gooders that award so much sympathy to a heinous killer and call the death penalty barbaric, it`s not that these guys were randomly singled out for being hanged, they had a clear choice before committing their crime, so they have to bear the consequences - in this case (as in so many others) I find it fair and effective to get rid of them. Neither the death penalty nor any other form of punishment (such as imprisonment) has ever anywhere achieved to stop the most dedicated murderers from committing their crimes, yet as for the effectiveness of the death penalty....we will never know, as it would require every potential murderer to report to the police (for the statistics) that he/she did not commit the crime (he/she otherwise would have committed) because of the consequences of being put to death themselves......we will hardly ever get that information. Yet I am tempted to believe that for the more moderate of us, the death penalty is an effective deterrent.

Yes and innocent people were hanged too, but that`s a problem of a having incompetent and corrupt judges, prosecutors and policemen - in this case you can call it barbaric, but so is any other form of punishment when being innocent.
-2

Thomas AndersonAug. 04, 2012 - 02:24PM JST

Compared to being raped and burned to death, being hanged in return can be hardly called barbaric, but an effective way of getting rid of evil elements in our society.

So basically you think killing is wrong as long as it's not killed by the state. Ok.
-2

Thomas AndersonAug. 04, 2012 - 02:26PM JST

Yet I am tempted to believe that for the more moderate of us, the death penalty is an effective deterrent.

First off there is no proof, and what about that guy who recently killed two people with a knife because he wanted to be given the death penalty?
-4

Thomas AndersonAug. 04, 2012 - 02:30PM JST

Yes and innocent people were hanged too, but that`s a problem of a having incompetent and corrupt judges, prosecutors and policemen - in this case you can call it barbaric, but so is any other form of punishment when being innocent.

No, that is not the problem. The problem is that we are humans and not Gods therefore we make mistakes. Being incompetent and corrupt are human qualities. We also more or less don't have the ability to choose who gets to live and die because again, we are not Gods. People are just coming with their pitchforks screaming to kill a person even though they may know very little of the actual situation.
1

602mikoAug. 04, 2012 - 06:54PM JST

this is a great news for the victims family, finally justiced! im sure they can sleep well now without tears on their eyes.
4

Charles M BurnsAug. 04, 2012 - 07:00PM JST

I agree with the executions! These criminals gave up their lives when they committed their crimes,
5

JopinionAug. 04, 2012 - 07:39PM JST

@ Thomas Anderson

"So basically you think killing is wrong as long as it's not killed by the state. Ok."

Yes, killing is wrong, but unlike the victim here (or any innocent victim for that matter) the killer (or any killer for that matter, as I said before) has a clear choice - the choice of not committing the murder (in order to avoid "being killed by the state" or what some may call "barbaric treatment"). As any killer then deliberately chooses to ignore the prospect of being killed "by the state" and thus putting more value on the pleasure of killing someone (in whatever ingenious/heinous way), the state/society has every right to kill him back - its called justice and a deterrent and while it doesnt work for some, why do we then even bother to award those (killers) any favorable treatment.

"Being incompetent and corrupt are human qualities"

Sorry that is not good enough, letting an innocent person suffer or letting a killer pass because law enforcement reps are allowed to live their lower human qualities is unacceptable, but your standards are obviously very low, though I suspect you may change your mind should you ever become a victim yourself.
-4

Thomas AndersonAug. 04, 2012 - 07:54PM JST

Killing is killing, there are no justifications. Once you kill a person that can not be undone. You could say "Yes killing is wrong, but maybe they shouldn't have been a Christian/Muslim/Satanist/Gay/Straight/Communist/Capitalist etc." You're saying "Killing is wrong, unless..." which is a justification of a killing.

Sorry that is not good enough, letting an innocent person suffer

You don't get it do you, by wrongly killing an innocent person you are doing the very thing that you apparently condemn. There is no guarantee that you got the right person because nothing is 100% certain.

but your standards are obviously very low, though I suspect you may change your mind should you ever become a victim yourself.

You are (arrogantly) assuming that your "standards" are apparently better than mine. But really, what are you going to prove by killing the person? It proves nothing and nobody is better off for it. Really, think about it.
4

Charles M BurnsAug. 04, 2012 - 08:05PM JST

Society is better for it.
2

JopinionAug. 04, 2012 - 08:29PM JST

@ Thomas Anderson

"You don't get it do you, by wrongly killing an innocent person you are doing the very thing that you apparently condemn"

You don`t seem to understand my comments - I do not condone killing innocent people (where did I say that?), on the contrary, if someone kills an innocent person and is proven guilty beyond any doubt, then the killer should hang, if law enforcement hangs someone innocent, then those who contributed to the verdict should be hanged as well (that is all those corrupt and incompetent ones, who by your standards are just displaying human qualities) .

"But really, what are you going to prove by killing the person? It proves nothing and nobody is better off for it"

I have nothing to prove here, but my best guess is that hanging a killer is at least some compensation for the suffering of the victim (who did not have the luxury of killing his/her murderer in return) and his/her relatives.......I am sure they feel better off with the killer dead. I would!

Just out of curiosity, what is your alternative.........what rights does a society have to punish a killer, because"nothing is 100% certain"?
-1

Simon FostonAug. 04, 2012 - 09:55PM JST

For those commenting on the cost aspect: it costs more money to execute a person than it does to keep them in prison. Look it up.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Well, it is ridiculous to give someone what amounts to a life sentence and then execute them, as is the case with people who have been on death row for 20-30 years. As for the cost of appeals, the death penalty should not be considered if there is any doubt at all as to the defendant's guilt. Convictions based on circumstantial evidence and the kind of "confessions" the police go in for here shouldn't cut it.
1

JopinionAug. 04, 2012 - 10:36PM JST

Looking at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty it basically implies that it is OK for the courts to be less thorough (or in other words more sloppy) in their investigation to lock someone up for life instead of killing him.

"Legal costs: Almost all people facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. The state must assign them two public defenders, and pay for the costs of the prosecution as well."

So when someone gets just life in prison (instead of the rope) the defendant has to do without those 2 public defenders - great job, I`m innocent and have to pay for all those those costs myself then

"Pre-trial costs: Capital cases are far more complicated than non-capital cases. Experts will probably be needed on forensic evidence, mental health and the social history of the defendant. "

Its getting better - experts will only be called when Im on death row

"Jury selection: Because of the death penalty question, jury selection in capital cases is much more time consuming and expensive."

So its OK to call in a bunch of amateurs - its just my freedom at stake.

"Trial: Death penalty trials can last over four times longer, requiring juror and attorney compensation, in addition to court personnel and other related costs."

So trials for life imprisonment are over 4 times shorter and require no compensation

"Incarceration: Most death rows involve solitary confinement in a special facility. These require more security and other accommodations as the prisoners are kept for 23 hours a day in their cells."

Why so, the same killer is then kept less secure when in prison for life

"Appeals: To minimize mistakes, every inmate is entitled to a series of appeals. The costs are borne at taxpayers' expense. These appeals are essential because some inmates have come within hours of execution before evidence was uncovered proving their innocence."

Again when I`m on a life sentence I am not entitled to appeals.

Sounds all very fishy to me - the bottom line is there is no reason why a death row candidate should be more expensive if the courts would do a professional job.
-1

corner-of-my-eyeAug. 05, 2012 - 01:50AM JST

poor poor child.i'm so sorry you had to endure that.my thoughts are with you,rest in peace.

i would feel deeply uncomfortable if her killer was still breathing right now.and that just feels like a natural reaction, why there's even a debate about that, i really can't get my head around. and it certainly isn't revenge.and the fact that he is dead now offers little comfort anyway. rip.
0
Hide SuzukiAug. 05, 2012 - 03:16AM JST
@Thomas Anderson

You sound like a broken record repeating the same thing 200 times, "99%". One thing you don't know is that most death row inmates in Japan die in prison, they never actually get executed. For those few to get executed, all of the below have to apply:
1. They have to get a death penalty obviously.
2. Cause problems within prison
3. Show no remorse to the crimes they committed
4. There is no controversy to the crime. (Some death row inmates claim innocence while others admit their crime with the attitute "So what".
I don't see anything wrong executing criminals who admitted their crime who show no remorse. But I'm sure you try to defend criminals even if your family members get brutally raped and murdered.
-1

saru_auAug. 05, 2012 - 10:56AM JST

nutter no.1 rapes and kills one, no remorse... no.2 kills two, no remorse.... to the religious do-gooders - no "god" is going to want these scum, check ya book of "wisdom" on the topic...
0

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 11:11AM JST

Jopinion

if law enforcement hangs someone innocent, then those who contributed to the verdict should be hanged as well (that is all those corrupt and incompetent ones, who by your standards are just displaying human qualities) .

LOL do you seriously believe this? So someone should be hanged for making a mistake too (the prosecutors and the judges make genuine mistakes too)? LOL not going to happen, and this just shows your weakness in your argument even more.

but my best guess is that hanging a killer is at least some compensation for the suffering of the victim (who did not have the luxury of killing his/her murderer in return) and his/her relatives.

Why do you assume that the victim is better off for it if the convicted was executed? Again, it proves nothing, solves nothing.

Just out of curiosity, what is your alternative.........what rights does a society have to punish a killer, because"nothing is 100% certain"?

Being imprisoned for life is enough of a punishment and if the convicted was found innocent, then at least you can just release him/her from the prison. And actually a prison is not really a place for punishments, it's really a place where dangerous individuals would kept out of society, although it is used as that way.
1

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 11:19AM JST

Hide Suzuki

One thing you don't know is that most death row inmates in Japan die in prison, they never actually get executed.

That's even worse because the death row inmates get even fewer rights and much harsher treatments than the regular prisoners. They are held in tiny little solitary confinement and they have no idea when they will be executed or not. Every day they will live in fear.

The nature of the regime they live under is largely up to the director of the Detention Center, but it is usually significantly harsher than normal Japanese prisons. Inmates are held in solitary confinement and are forbidden from communicating with their fellows. They are permitted two periods of exercise a week, are not allowed televisions and may only possess three books. Prisoners are not allowed to exercise within their own cells. Prison visits, both by family members and legal representatives, are infrequent and closely supervised.

Hide Suzuki

But I'm sure you try to defend criminals even if your family members get brutally raped and murdered.

Like I said, killing the person proves nothing, does nothing, solves nothing. And yes, it really is a challenge to protect the democratic and human rights ideals especially EVEN IF THE DECISION IS EXTREMELY HARD AND DIFFICULT FOR YOU.
-1

AiserXAug. 05, 2012 - 11:24AM JST

The death penalty is a valid and just form of punishment for the most heinous of criminals. To all whom would disagree.... then |
1

nigelboyAug. 05, 2012 - 11:37AM JST

Like I said, killing the person proves nothing, does nothing, solves nothing.

If the surviving family member can finally put closure, I'm all for it. Yep. I'm all for those family members to finally sleep at night without disruption, moving forward, and finally enjoy what life has to offer once again. I think it's a travesty that 130 still remain.
-3

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 11:59AM JST

If the surviving family member can finally put closure, I'm all for it.

It does not bring closure.
-1

toguroAug. 05, 2012 - 12:31PM JST

"It does not bring closure."

@Thomas Anderson:

How do you know? Have you ever been the family member of a victim? And if so, How can you speak for all family members of every victim?
1

It"S MEAug. 05, 2012 - 12:41PM JST

toguro.

Like Thomas I can't speak for everyone. But there been many interviews with families that stated that there is no closure and most likely never will be.

Many also said they have preferred a life-sentence over the death-penalty and many fought for it. So instead of 1 life 2 are taken, don't bring the 1st one back nor ease the pain of the loss.
-5

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 12:46PM JST

Obviously people are going to have different opinions. But like I said, killing the person doesn't really prove anything or solve anything. If they kill the person, are the victims magically brought back to life? No.
1

PeaceWarriorAug. 05, 2012 - 12:48PM JST

It does not bring closure

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20100627a7.html
0

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 01:59PM JST

@Thomas Anderson

"If they kill the person, are the victims magically brought back to life? No."

Neither does any other form of punishment (bring the victims back to life), so again what`s your alternative?
1

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 02:09PM JST

@ PeaceWarrior

Quoting from the article @ http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20100627a7.html:

""I reached a conclusion that on the day we take Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nicols from their cage to kill them, it will simply be not part of my healing process. That killing wasn't going to help me," Welch said.”

That may well be, but as a potential victim, I say I would feel very betrayed by my relatives/friends or whoever pretends to stay close to me if they do not condone the killing of my killer. That is disrespect for the victim's suffering at it`s best!
0

toguroAug. 05, 2012 - 02:14PM JST

I just don't see why a murderer deserves to go on living, when he robbed his victims of that right!!
-1

PeaceWarriorAug. 05, 2012 - 02:25PM JST

The death penalty is bound to go the way of the dodos, and nothing can change that. It will take time, but it will happen.
0

It"S MEAug. 05, 2012 - 02:36PM JST

Jopinion.

I have a friend who got into a bar-brawl, he hit the guy whose head bounced of the curb = dead. What is your opinion on that, he is doing 20-30 now and will have no chance of a normal life when he gets out eventually.

But normally he is gently, got a great family. Just a bit too much liquor and Army training. Lots of shades out grey out there, where should we draw the lines?
0
JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 02:52PM JST

@It"S ME

A "bar brawl" - who started it? who provoked who?, was it self defense?, was it an accident? was it premeditated? given the typical cases it sounds more like homicide than murder, there are many varieties though - Still sounds different to going out and raping and burning an innocent women.
- ModeratorAug. 05, 2012 - 03:58PM JST
  
  Please stay on topic.
-1

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 03:05PM JST

@PeaceWarrior

'remaining ethically moral"

I couldn`t care less - in the case of Hattori and Matsumura justice has been done - good job!
-1

PeaceWarriorAug. 05, 2012 - 03:36PM JST

I couldn`t care less

And that is a shame!
1

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 03:43PM JST

@ It"S ME

"Not defending the 2 guys but there is a more to it than just saying string them up."

In the context of the above article I condone the death penalty for premeditated murder, even much more so in the case of Hattori given his method of torturing and killing his victim.

"When the guy came after him(He became the Attacker) and my friend retaliated. He is in for manslaughter 2."

That would be deplorable - and yes I do draw a line between those two - manslaughter and murder - but without having more information, I guess the court factors in your friend`s "too much army training" where they rather teach you to kill than to disable your opponent by arm-lock or similar.
-6

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 05:00PM JST

Jopinion

Neither does any other form of punishment (bring the victims back to life), so again what`s your alternative?

I already told you, life imprisonment is enough.
0

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 05:27PM JST

@Thomas Anderson

"life imprisonment is enough."

Are you willing to pay for it? (That is if you happen to pay taxes)
0

mph1212Aug. 05, 2012 - 05:36PM JST

Imprisoning someone for the rest of their life is pretty cruel when you think about it...ending their life with on the other hand gives the victim's family at least a little closer, knowing that these murderous bastards are now dead and gone. Imagine if Hattori-san raped and burned alive your daughter, how would you feel about this piece of s*it? He should have been tortured to death IMHO
-7

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 06:14PM JST

Jopinion

Are you willing to pay for it? (That is if you happen to pay taxes)

And you're willing to pay for the death penalty? You do realize that the death penalty actually costs more, right.
-8

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 06:15PM JST

He should have been tortured to death IMHO

Again that does and proves absolutely nothing and it only speaks of your desire for vengeance than caring anything about the actual victims.
-7

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 06:17PM JST

Most people don't seem to realize that most advanced countries have already done away with the death penalty... Only Japan and US are still practicing it.
1

cleoAug. 05, 2012 - 06:24PM JST

He should have been tortured to death IMHO

And which public servant do you think deserves to have 'official torturer' added to his job description? What qualifications would he need? (Certificate of the Imperial Guild of Official Torturers and Masters of the Spanish Inquisition? Rackmaster, First Class? working up from Assistant Toenail Extractor?) Who would train him?

People go on about the rights of the criminal - how about considering the rights of the people working in the justice system? Why should they be turned into monsters to satisfy the bloodthirsty wetdreams of people on an Internet comments site?
-1

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 06:28PM JST

@Thomas Anderson

"And you're willing to pay for the death penalty?"

Yes I am - a rope or a bullet......pick your choice - as I said before, the higher cost of the death penalty is not justified in any way, but can only be attributed to a flawed legal system.

"Most people don't seem to realize that most advanced countries have already done away with the death penalty"

Advanced in what? And did those advanced countries succeed in getting their crime rate down without the death penalty?
-6

Thomas AndersonAug. 05, 2012 - 06:35PM JST

Yes I am - a rope or a bullet......pick your choice - as I said before, the higher cost of the death penalty is not justified in any way, but can only be attributed to a flawed legal system.

What are you, a despot in a dictator state? lol.

Advanced in what? And did those advanced countries succeed in getting their crime rate down without the death penalty?

So according to your logic, the US should have the lowest crime rate, since they have had the most executions. Except that it's the reverse. The death penalty has no relation with crime rates.
0

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 06:56PM JST

@Thomas Anderson

"So according to your logic, the US should have the lowest crime rate"

Fact is Japan has a reasonable low crime rate with the death penalty and the US crime rate is pretty much on the other end even though they have the death penalty, so wrong conclusion on your part, if at all the crime rate could be even higher in the US as well as in Japan without the death penalty, because killers have even less to fear, but it`s up to you what you want to believe.

"The death penalty has no relation with crime rates"

Again this statement is unsupported - to what extend the death penalty has an effect is disputable, but as I said earlier for the more moderate of us I believe the death penalty is a deterrent. It is for me!
-3

cleoAug. 05, 2012 - 07:11PM JST

for the more moderate of us I believe the death penalty is a deterrent. It is for me!

The only thing that stops you going on a murderous rampage is the fear of being caught and given the death penalty?

There is nothing 'moderate' about the death penalty or the people who support it, in fact it couldn't be any more extreme, by definition.

the crime rate could be even higher in the US as well as in Japan without the death penalty, because killers have even less to fear

In Japan it could well be lower, considering the rash of 'I wanted to kill myself but couldn't so I killed someone else so I'd get the death penalty' nutters we've seen in the past few years.
-1

It"S MEAug. 05, 2012 - 07:48PM JST

Jopinion,

Kill one or x at the aurora cinema = same sentence. Rather than being deterrent it is a free ticket to kill many, they can kill you only ONCE not 12 or so times.

So you might take as many as you can as your punishment is the same. Can you get that? Not a deterrent but more of an incentive.
1

JopinionAug. 05, 2012 - 08:02PM JST

@It"S ME

"So you might take as many as you can as your punishment is the same"

Nice try, but 12 life sentences instead doesnt cut it either - what are all you DP opponents trying to say? Read my earlier posts, for some killers neither the DP nor any other form of punishment (in existence) is a deterrent, they are hopeless cases, not worth awarding those any further rights.........Aurora Cinema, the Norway case etc. etc....just finish them off as they did finish off their victims. What part of this dont you understand?
1

GokunamaAug. 05, 2012 - 11:56PM JST

The U.N. analyzed the effect on the crime rate of death penalty and non death penalty countries and found no real difference. The death penalty seems to have no deterring effect. I'd imagine those in blind rage wouldn't be rational enough for DP to be a deterrent and those in mafias seeing it as just more reason to take pains not to be caught.

'Hopeless cases' really ought to be examined. Increasingly neuroscience is finding evidence that a lot of the irrational things people do are due to 'messy wirings'. I'm not comfortable sending people who couldn't have done differently to their deaths just cause they were born that way and/or grew up in hard worlds and had certain gene expressions set to deal with loveless, evil worlds. Never heard a pro-death penalty even touch on these subjects in my long years of debate.

Human error is still a possibility even with our more advanced forensics and long and expensive court processes. Keeping the prisoners in prison for life would be cheaper than all that. The alternative is we speed the process up, make it less expensive, and increase our margin for error.

The desire for revenge made sense in a world where we lived in small communities without prisons, and said killer was a possible threat to our family and friends. Evolutionary psychology. It was a mechanism that protected our genes. A lot of morality is deeply rooted in self-interest and the propogation of our genes. We do have prisons these days, so make a life sentence a true life sentence.

Finally, I don't see why we should be able to violate the right to human life just cause they did.
2

Hide SuzukiAug. 06, 2012 - 01:32AM JST

@Thomas Anderson

"That's even worse because the death row inmates get even fewer rights and much harsher treatments than the regular prisoners"

Huh, how is that a problem ? Since when do death row inmates deserve spa treatment ? They got a death penalty for a reason. They should get harsher treatments than regular prisoners, that's how it should be.

I don't know what you are trying to argue
1

AylerAug. 06, 2012 - 02:36AM JST

People go on about the rights of the criminal - how about considering the rights of the people working in the justice system? Why should they be turned into monsters to satisfy the bloodthirsty wetdreams of people on an Internet comments site?

This. Unusual for me but I agree with Cleo. All the armchair hang 'em high banner wavers, gladly donating your tax dollars for the rope, oblivious to the actual financial costs of death row and more than willing to let someone else pull the lever. Cue lots of He-Men proclaiming 'I'll do it! I'll send 'em to hell' } I bet you wouldn't unless it was a personal family matter. Want to be paid to kill people? No, but want someone else to do it for you.
-1

ubikwitAug. 06, 2012 - 04:32AM JST

@cleo

There is nothing 'moderate' about the death penalty or the people who support it, in fact it couldn't be any more extreme, by definition.

In a sense, that is correct because the state has the sole right to the recourse to violence in a civilized society.

The death penalty is one of the penultimate expressions of the exercise of that right as a form of the collective will.

The other, of course, being the right to declare war, but we've seen in recent years--along with the unreliability of the electoral process--that the state doesn't always function properly: Iraq WMD.

Whereas those dysfunctional aspects of recent history in the USA do not represent a properly functioning civilized society, I think that the majority of people in Japan would be in agreement that justice was served by these executions.

And I mean that in terms of a mutual intelligibility on the part of the public with respect to right and wrong and justice.

Moreover, the carrying out of these sentences serves to reinforce that mutual intelligibility with respect to right and wrong and justice.
0

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 07:30AM JST

"The only thing that stops you going on a murderous rampage is the fear of being caught and given the death penalty?"

All I said that the DP is a deterrent for me, if it isn`t for you, then you are far more dangerous than I thought!

"There is nothing 'moderate' about the death penalty"

Where did I say that? I said for moderate "normal minded people" the DP should be a deterrent, not that the DP itself is moderate.
-2

cleoAug. 06, 2012 - 07:51AM JST

the state has the sole right to the recourse to violence in a civilized society..... The other, of course, being the right to declare war

Well, Japan has already abandoned its 'right' to declare war. Nothing to stop it joining the rest of the civilised world in abandoning its 'right' to kill selected members of society. And wouldn't it be nice if the rest of the world adopted Article 9.

Jopinion - the mods have already zapped this line of discussion so I won't waste too much time on a post that is destined to be removed - I'll simply repeat that if the threat of the DP is the only thing that stops you killing people, you need help. Seriously. And I for one do not want to live in a country where one of the requisites for working in the justice system is to be a monster with a talent for torture.
0

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 08:00AM JST

@ Cleo

"that if the threat of the DP is the only thing that stops you killing people"

So saying that the DP is a deterrent for me is a bad thing - aren`t you twisting my comments to your liking?
0

ReformedBasherAug. 06, 2012 - 09:14AM JST

Sounds like both deserved it.
-2

ReformedBasherAug. 06, 2012 - 09:29AM JST

@ubikwit

Cue lots of He-Men proclaiming 'I'll do it! I'll send 'em to hell' } I bet you wouldn't unless it was a personal family matter. Want to be paid to kill people?

Sorry, I'm not trying to demean you. But if I was assured of their guilt, I would do it. For free. Just pay my travel costs. Burning somebody to death and killing for money are the acts of really sick people and they've lost their right to life.

For those who have killed several people, the punishment should be harsher.

For crimes of passion, each case should be looked into in detail. I'm not saying we execute everyone, only those who really deserve it.
0

WolfpackAug. 06, 2012 - 09:43AM JST

What a primitive, uncivilised culture and society

They probably shouldn't have committed murder don't you think? The only possible justice for a person who commits murder is the death penalty.
-2

cleoAug. 06, 2012 - 10:29AM JST

So saying that the DP is a deterrent for me is a bad thing - aren`t you twisting my comments to your liking?

I don't like it one little bit - the idea that there are people out there with the threat of the death penalty being the only thing that stops them going on a killing rampage. Most people don't need the threat of the death penalty to stop them killing. If that were the case, why isn't everyone in Europe (where the DP was abolished long ago) dead already, with no deterrent to stop them all killing each other?
-2

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 11:37AM JST

@ Cleo

"the idea that there are people out there with the threat of the death penalty being the only thing that stops them going on a killing rampage"

Where exactly did I say that the DP is the "only" thing stopping me? Many other things keep me from killing people but this is not the subject of this discussion. Dont make things up I didnt say.!
-2

cleoAug. 06, 2012 - 11:53AM JST

Jopinion - You said, and I quote, 'I believe the death penalty is a deterrent. It is for me!' - which means that it's the threat of the death penalty that stops you going around killing people. I'm not putting words into your mouth, I'm saying that the words coming out of your fingertips are senseless. If there are other things that stop you killing people (and I hope there are), then the DP is not a deterrent- you've already been deterred by those other things.
0

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 12:18PM JST

@ Cleo

"If there are other things that stop you killing people (and I hope there are), then the DP is not a deterrent- you've already been deterred by those other things."

That is twisted logic, regardless of many other factors (deterring me before that) the DP as such is still a deterrent, even though I won`t get that far. Cannot be that difficult to understand.
0

PeaceWarriorAug. 06, 2012 - 12:36PM JST

That is twisted logic

I know!! It is really unfair how people take what you've said and use them factually against you. They shouldn't do that. It's not fair.
-3

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 12:47PM JST

@ PeaceWarrior

You may disagree with me but your comment was meaningless - stay on topic and contradict me if you can.
0

PeaceWarriorAug. 06, 2012 - 12:54PM JST

Of course I disagree with you, Jopinion. You are saying that the DP is a deterrent when it has been shown not the be a deterrent. Whatever else I tell you will fall on deaf ears. Meaningless comments aside, I don't actually have to contradict you, you seem to be doing a good job of that yourself.
-1

ubikwitAug. 06, 2012 - 12:58PM JST

@ReformedBasher

That was Ayler you quoted, not me.
-2

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 01:38PM JST

@ PeaceWarrior

"You are saying that the DP is a deterrent when it has been shown not the be a deterrent."

Please refer to my first and following comments - the DP (as well as any other punishment) has not been a deterrent for those dedicated killers who committed their crime, otherwise we wouldn`t have this discussion - in the context of my above comments it is a deterrent for me and I "believe" for other normal people as well (regardless of the existence of many other deterrents before that) - This is a yes or no question - if you cannot answer (the question of whether the DP is a deterrent for you) either with yes or no, then you are evading the question.

For the rest - the grey zone of uncommitted murders (possibly due to the existence of the DP), the effectiveness of the DP is almost impossible to judge - see my first comment on this!

"I don't actually have to contradict you, you seem to be doing a good job of that yourself."

So please quote where I contradicted myself!
-2

CletusAug. 06, 2012 - 01:46PM JST

Interesting the lack of condemnation of this "barbaric" act by the Japanese. It wasnt so long ago that the Japanese on this site where screaming about the potential death sentence that a fellow Japanese person was facing in another country calling that nation barbaric and other names. Yet they remain mute when their own nation carries out the very same act against their own people.
-1

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 02:59PM JST

@PeaceWarrior

Disagree as much as you want, but how do my comments above contradict myself, unless you take them out of context?
-2

PeaceWarriorAug. 06, 2012 - 03:02PM JST

WTH? You get a thumb down from me for that classic repartee!! READ your comments!
-1

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 03:32PM JST

Thank you - I guess we all feel better now - PeaceWarrior your list was not impolite but out of context and did not support your alleged contradictions.
-2

corner-of-my-eyeAug. 06, 2012 - 04:38PM JST

How is life time imprisonment for lowlives like these practical for anyone? You feed and shelter someone for a lifetime and they're never getting out.They die there. So why do it?And it costs a fortune. Who should pay? Well presumably, all the anti dp people here believe that rather than kill them, they should be locked up forever. I hope I'm right, because surely there are no other suitable punishments other than those two. And so from a purely practical view, why not do away with them now?
-1

ubikwitAug. 06, 2012 - 04:42PM JST

@cleo

Well, Japan has already abandoned its 'right' to declare war. Nothing to stop it joining the rest of the civilised world in abandoning its 'right' to kill selected members of society. And wouldn't it be nice if the rest of the world adopted Article 9.

an eloquent stroke from your feathered inkwell.

however, let's not pretty over the fact that japan's war-renouncing constitution has its basis in specific historical circumstances in which japan was deemed to have acted in a barbaric manner, and thus was redeeming itself by embarking on a new path with its pioneering a renunciation of the use of force to settle international disputes.

on that note, there are appealing aspects to the suggestion that other nations adopt an Article 9 like clause, so long as MAD is upheld to prevent aggression from opportunistic military adventurism.
-3

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 04:53PM JST

"Who should pay? "

Food for thought - every tax dollar spent on keeping a killer in prison (for sometimes a very long time) is a tax dollar less for a good cause..............compensating the victims, nursing homes, cancer research, education etc. etc. etc. - so who is willing to pay for the killer? No need to respond - just ask yourself (and do not cheat)!
0

Gloryjean SalvacionAug. 06, 2012 - 07:02PM JST

Its better to control crimes in this country,in my native country it was applied and all rapers ,drug lord,and so many crimes was put in death penalty,its was in true Philippines.so that many should avoid to commit.
2

Jeremy RigbyAug. 06, 2012 - 08:17PM JST

I know in Australia, constitutionally we will never have to worry about wrongfully murdering a later found to be innocent prisoner again and I am proud of that. Constitutionally capital punishment will never be re-introduced!

For all the people that support capital punishment do you feel it's OK for the innocent ones THAT have been executed in the past and will no doubt be executed in the future whilst countries continue with capital punishment?
-1

JopinionAug. 06, 2012 - 09:29PM JST

Jeremy Rigby

"For all the people that support capital punishment do you feel it's OK for the innocent ones THAT have been executed in the past and will no doubt be executed in the future..........."

At the risk of repeating myself, but since I made my mark as a DP supporter, the answer to your question is a crystal clear NO (it`s not OK) and I doubt the majority in favor of the DP would accept innocent people to be executed as collateral damage - but it happens - sadly - I have my own extreme view what to do with law enforcement who knowingly and willfully manipulate evidence to come to a wrong verdict executing an innocent person (out of convenience or because they are simply corrupt).

The DP is for watertight cases, like the Akihabara killer or the Norway killer etc., but in that case I say go for the DP full force without if and but etc.

What I am missing in all that discussion for or against the DP - particularly from the DP opponents (some of whom who support but ironically find life imprisonment far more cruel) - is how do you compensate somebody who was wrongfully accused and put in jail.....and released as innocent after many years if not decades - some of the DP opponents seem to believe you simply can undo (compared to the DP) - I dont think its possible to undo this either.
1

JaymannAug. 07, 2012 - 04:10AM JST

I try to never underestimate the extent of human stupidity... but even I was surprised by the number of supporters on this thread of the barbaric practice of capital punishment. .... then again reading posts here as I have for several years (those that get through moderation that is)... perhaps I am not surprised.
-1

IlvtheDucksAug. 07, 2012 - 04:15AM JST

I wish the US would follow through as fast with death row inmates. It takes them 20 - 30 years to go through with an execution, while the families of victims suffer knowing no justice has really been served as the convicted felons live out their lives in prison. Ridiculous!

As for the hanging part of it, why shouldn't they suffer? They don't deserve an ounce of pity...good riddance I say.
1

JaymannAug. 07, 2012 - 04:19AM JST

Incarceration. Despite what one poster is trying (poorly) to argue above. There is no proven correlation between DP and murder rates. It simply satisfies our lust for revenge. Which speaks more about us as a race than anything else. Life imprisonment (proper life), solitary confinement are all terrible punishments. I tend to think that being allowed to die (and hence cease to exist) is too easy for th murderer.
0

JopinionAug. 07, 2012 - 07:29AM JST

"There is no proven correlation between DP and murder rates."

That is what I am saying we cannot prove it (we can only speculate), but the same holds true for life imprisonment and murder rates.

"I tend to think that being allowed to die (and hence cease to exist) is too easy for th murderer."

So if it`s too easy, what are you after then, if not revenge?
0

JaymannAug. 07, 2012 - 07:49AM JST

@Jopinion: Well no, I think one could perform regression analysis on Murder rates over time, countries that re-introduce DP and countries that remove DP. If the beta-co-efficient is significant then we could talk in probabilistic terms as to whether or not DP provides a deterrent. I understand that such studies have been done and they conclude DP is not a deterrent. If I could be arsed I would look up the studies.
-1

JopinionAug. 07, 2012 - 08:38AM JST

@Jaymann

I have done my fair amount of research on this and found nothing conclusive (either pro or contra a correlation) because any before/after analysis is inherently flawed as murder crimes are random events. So I give you the benefit of doubt - there may be no correlation.

Fact is that we have to deal with the high number of those for who no form of punishment has been a deterrent - neither the prospect of being hanged for Hattori nor the prospect of being put in prison for up to 21 years for the Norway killer - which leads me to my 2nd question - what is an appropriate punishment - for you the DP is barbaric and yet too easy at the same time - "Life imprisonment (proper life), solitary confinement are all terrible punishments" but so they are not barbaric - isnt revenge always part of the equation when we talk about justice? Why do DP opponents then want to punish so hard if it hasnt been a deterrent nor do they want revenge?
0

WolfpackAug. 07, 2012 - 09:00AM JST

You are saying that the DP is a deterrent when it has been shown not the be a deterrent.

Ummm... that's not a factual statement. Unless you count all of the people that were not killed because of the death penalty. Which of course is pretty much impossible. Just because it can't be proven via statistics is not evidence that the death penalty is not "a" deterrent. Applied to the social sciences, statistics are not are scientific as one might imagine. It depends upon the assumptions that are made - which can of course be wrong in themselves. Jopinion has stated that the death penalty is one deterrent for murder - of which there are many others. But the death penalty is necessary.

For those cases that are not based on circumstantial evidence alone the death penalty is the only possible way to have any real justice for murder. Putting someone in jail for the rest of their life if not a penalty equal to the crime committed.

It simply satisfies our lust for revenge.

No, it satisfies our "lust" for justice.
-1

JopinionAug. 07, 2012 - 01:02PM JST

Valid question, don`t you think?
3

JaymannAug. 07, 2012 - 02:09PM JST

surely in an humane society rehabilitation is the goal? As for those beyond rehabilitation - life imprisonment is acceptable to satisfy the safety needs of society.

If we abhor murder in society then why do we sanction it at the hands of the state?

@wolfpack

Applied to the social sciences, statistics are not are scientific as one might imagine. It depends upon the assumptions that are made - which can of course be wrong in themselves. Jopinion has stated that the death penalty is one deterrent for murder - of which there are many others. But the death penalty is necessary.

I am not sure that any of that makes sense at all. All hypotheses depend upon assumptions, the testing (and statistics) is what is used to 'prove' something (in a scientific sense). To merely state: "the death penalty is necessary" is simple to state an opinion. Why is it necessary? I have seen no evidence to support its usefulness other than revenge. Which is a base emotion.
4

3Deuce27Aug. 07, 2012 - 02:47PM JST

Simply wishing for the death of another, for any reason, is barbaric, mindless, spiritless.

Lustful hate is profoundly ugly. Those who lust for revenge are an anathema to the human spirit, how can you claim to be human.

When the state kills, no matter where, or how, it diminishes us all as humans, The world is a community, artificial political borders are archaic.
-4

drgolf32@hotmail.comAug. 07, 2012 - 11:01PM JST

Fantastic Japan, The death penalty in the U.S. is a joke! Mass murderers and rapists sit on death row for over 20 years in many cases, and the American tax payer foots the bill for their countless appeals and care! Just one example is Charles Manson responsible for 10 murders! Please take note U.S.!
3

It"S MEAug. 07, 2012 - 11:25PM JST

What people forget is that deathrow is 10 times or more costly than general population.

As they get private cels, more guards, etc so the DP works out more costly than putting a guy into general population for the rest of his life.

In the USA a Guy on death-row can easily cost $80.000-120.000/year or more. Most people don't earn that much. Put him in there for 10-20yrs and ........

So the DP being cheaper is wrong, you can google the figures.
2

basroilAug. 07, 2012 - 11:40PM JST

WolfpackAug. 07, 2012 - 09:00AM JST

Ummm... that's not a factual statement. Unless you count all of the people that were not killed because of the death penalty. Which of course is pretty much impossible. Just because it can't be proven via statistics is not evidence that the death penalty is not "a" deterrent. Applied to the social sciences, statistics are not are scientific as one might imagine. It depends upon the assumptions that are made - which can of course be wrong in themselves. Jopinion has stated that the death penalty is one deterrent for murder - of which there are many others. But the death penalty is necessary.

I think you are failing to account for the fact that statistics renders your argument invalid. You have no need to count the numbers not killed, just the delta per population size. In many cases, the rate drops slightly after being introduced, and then actually increases above the pre-capital punishment rates. In others, it has absolutely no bearing on the rates. Statistics, while often imprecise with subjective values, it is rock solid when considering quantifiable data, like murders per population filtered by availability of capital punishment. You can't introduce bias to numbers, they don't care how you phrase a question. And you can't make up the facts either, just look at filed police reports and morgue records.

You must remember that for punishment to be effective, you need to have 1) a rational thought process, 2) punishment outweighing the benefit. When considering crimes that can fall under capital punishment, most of the time the first is absent, the remaining has the second absent (and sometimes both).
-2

JopinionAug. 07, 2012 - 11:55PM JST

"So the DP being cheaper is wrong, you can google the figures."

In the case of Hattori and many others your statement is unsupported - at 40 he is dead now and free of charge to society - you can do your own calculation how much tax money society would have to waste, if he would have been kept in prison and survived another 2, 5, 10, 20 or even 40 years. Still not convinced that the DP is cheaper - at least in Japan?
2

JaymannAug. 08, 2012 - 05:07AM JST

@3Deuce27

Lustful hate is profoundly ugly. Those who lust for revenge are an anathema to the human spirit, how can you claim to be human.

I really like that statement. It gets to the heart of what we should be striving for as humans.
3

ka_chanAug. 08, 2012 - 06:30AM JST

"Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves." Confucius
1

3Deuce27Aug. 08, 2012 - 07:22AM JST

Yes! 'Jayman' Isn't that our ultimate goal, to become fully human, not just in name only.
3

3Deuce27Aug. 08, 2012 - 07:29AM JST

Ultimately, no one has the right to kill... not even the state.
-2

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 07:41AM JST

"Ultimately, no one has the right to kill... "

But Hattori did - what is your opinion on this?
4

3Deuce27Aug. 08, 2012 - 07:51AM JST

Given my statement, he didn't have the 'right', that in no way infers that we reciprocate. To do so, makes us no better.

The vindictive nature of some of society shouldn't have the ultimate agency.
-2

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 07:55AM JST

"he didn't have the 'right',"

So what is then appropriate for society to do with him (according to you)?
0

DenonAug. 08, 2012 - 09:47AM JST

Given cases like Mainali's and the Japanese man who was in jail for decades then found to be innocent, it is just plain ridiculous that anyone would support the death penalty. We all know how corrupt and messed up the Japanese police and court systems are, don't we? So how can anyone support the DP in good faith?
-4

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 10:09AM JST

"Given cases like Mainali's and the Japanese man who was in jail for decades then found to be innocent, it is just plain ridiculous that anyone would support the death penalty."

In the case of innocence the DP is barbaric, but how can someone support life imprisonment instead, how do you compensate the wrongfully convicted (innocent) victim for that (say after decades of prison)?
-3

Dvn KurtAug. 08, 2012 - 10:11AM JST

What's wrong is it? Death penalty is just one kind of punishment ...

At least it's better than allowing all the citizens to equip themselves with guns and then kill as much as they like ... this is really I called ****BARBARI**C **!!!
1

Thomas AndersonAug. 08, 2012 - 10:59AM JST

In the case of innocence the DP is barbaric, but how can someone support life imprisonment instead, how do you compensate the wrongfully convicted (innocent) victim for that (say after decades of prison)?

Jopinion, you're using the same argument that is used against you to support your own argument. It doesn't work.

You're basically saying that we shouldn't imprison anyone because they may be innocent. Well maybe that's what countries like Norway do. They only imprison people as long as they are considered harmful to society. Most don't receive a sentence longer than 21 years.
-4

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 11:25AM JST

"you're using the same argument that is used against you to support your own argument"

What`s wrong with this - I made it clear that I support the DP in water tight cases and I do not when in doubt - still I have yet to see one answer from the DP opponents why their proposed life imprisonment instead is less barbaric when an innocent person is convicted and what they offer to do about it. Hence my question about compensation.
0

Thomas AndersonAug. 08, 2012 - 12:00PM JST

I made it clear that I support the DP in water tight cases

Ok, so you think that you can use the DP in "water tight cases", but not for life imprisonment? But the process is the same, Jopinion.
-3

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 12:12PM JST

"so you think that you can use the DP in "water tight cases", but not for life imprisonment?"

I never implied anything like that, I think that in watertight cases life imprisonment for killers is an inappropriate and insufficient punishment - yet you once again evaded my question.
-1

Thomas AndersonAug. 08, 2012 - 12:38PM JST

I think that in watertight cases life imprisonment for killers is an inappropriate and insufficient punishment

Wait, so you think that life imprisonment is "insufficient punishment", yet suddenly you're complaining that life imprisonment is MORE CRUEL than the death penalty? What kind of logic is that?

So your question is how we should compensate the innocent. Well, how do you compensate the innocent who has gotten the death penalty? You can't! Ergo, life imprisonment is less harsh than the death penalty.
-3

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 01:07PM JST

"life imprisonment is less harsh than the death penalty."

See Thomas, the problem is the DP opponents feel morally safe when objecting to the DP yet they have trouble explaining why life imprisonment is morally better even though for some this is "more cruel" (or check the previous posts of DP opponents for variations on this), so this must be even more cruel etc. for somebody innocent wrongfully convicted in prison for some even a very long time - well if it`s less harsh for you (personally) would you care to explain how to compensate an innocent convicted who nevertheless suffered, even though less harsh? Take the Mainali or similar case if you want.
0

Thomas AndersonAug. 08, 2012 - 01:29PM JST

for somebody innocent wrongfully convicted in prison for some even a very long time - well if it`s less harsh for you (personally) would you care to explain how to compensate an innocent convicted who nevertheless suffered, even though less harsh? Take the Mainali or similar case if you want.

You haven't explained how would you compensate the executed who is wrongfully convicted. I don't need to explain to you (hopefully) why the life imprisonment is less harsh, because unlike the death penalty you can reverse the act.
0

Thomas AndersonAug. 08, 2012 - 01:30PM JST

Jopinion, you can't say that life imprisonment is "more cruel" than the DP while at the same time saying that life imprisonment is not enough of a punishment. That makes no logical sense.
-3

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 01:53PM JST

"unlike the death penalty you can reverse the act."

That was my question - how to reverse the act in other words compensate (if you possibly could do that, that you have to ask people like Mainali and yourself if you were in that situation) but you are again unwilling to answer - I never made the claim that I would put innocent people in prison or execute them - I need watertight cases - simple as that. I do not even need to defend the DP because I (personally find it morally OK) - but here is my 2 cents: Compensate innocent people like Mainali or similar generously - financially and socially in any way you can - that is the social cost for all of us even more so where society is tolerating low standards and flaws in it`s legal system - punish hard those that contributed to the verdict (in the Mainali case apparently a mean spirited prosecutor withholding evidence) - make the system transparent so as to eliminate such mistakes (and this is not unique to Japan), but again all this may not even make up in the slightest to the loss of freedom, suffering endless days etc. of the innocent in prison but we should try!
1

Thomas AndersonAug. 08, 2012 - 02:01PM JST

Jopinion, you are talking about two different things:

1) In cases that are watertight and there is no doubt that the convicted is 100% guilty.

and

2) In cases that are not so clear-cut.

You're saying that in case #1, life imprisonment is not enough of a punishment. But at the same time, YOU'RE BRINGING CASE #2 TO MAKE YOUR POINT, which is completely unrelated to case #1.

In case #2 where the convicted could be innocent, you can't bring the death penalty ANYWAY, since the verdict is not "watertight". So what you're saying quite frankly, makes no sense.
-2

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 02:09PM JST

"Jopinion, you can't say that life imprisonment is "more cruel" than the DP while at the same time saying that life imprisonment is not enough of a punishment. That makes no logical sense."

"more cruel" - I did not make that claim - a DP opponent did (check the posts) - I just hold this argument against him.

But just for an argument - even if I did say that theoretically, though I did not - I am still in support of the DP because of the tax issue explained in my earlier comments (and again all on the basis of watertight cases).
-2

JopinionAug. 08, 2012 - 02:15PM JST

"In case #2 where the convicted could be innocent, you can't bring the death penalty ANYWAY, since the verdict is not "watertight""

Neither can you put someone into prison for life if innocent - where did I say otherwise? - please quote case #2?

That fact is both happened in real life where it shouldn`t.
0

toshikoAug. 10, 2012 - 05:38AM JST

Death Sentence in USA. Some states do not have but a majority of state has. I Now, they use DNA to solve old cases. IPlea bargain: ITo avoid death sentence, some plea'guilty'. Las V egas police used to kill and ask later attitude but they can;t do anymore. There are too many serial killers and crazy shooters in USA. Guns are all over. Sometimes, little children find guns in their house and kill siblings or friends. Death sentence is not bu hanging, though.
0

pratikpanchalAug. 11, 2012 - 01:46PM JST

Do two wrongs make one right?