Capital Punishment?

Question

Where do you stand on this controversial topic? and why?

Answer 1

Against it, for pragmatic reasons.  You don't have to sympathize with criminals or want them to avoid terrible punishments for terrible crimes to ask if the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime, to look at alternatives and to think about the risks of executing innocent people.  (Sources below)

128 people on death rows have been released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.

The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reliable study shows the death penalty deters others. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don’t.

We have a good alternative, life without parole, on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.

The death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison, mostly because of the upfront costs of legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people. (upfront=before and during the initial trial)

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?

The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. Murder victim family members have testified that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. Speed up the process and we will execute innocent people.

Sources:

Death Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org,  for stats on executions, reports on costs, deterrence studies, links to FBI crime stats and links to testimony (at state legislatures) of victims' family members.

FBI   http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/tab...  

The Innocence Project, www.innocenceproject.org

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/COcostte... page 3 and 4 on why the death penalty is so expensive

http://www.njadp.org/forms/signon-surviv... for statements of victims’ families

Answer 2

I'm against it simply because I'd rather let somebody rot in prison for life and give them plenty of time to think about what they've done and where they're going.....

For all of you idiots who thumbs down me...think of it this way...a killer or someone who commits the worst of crimes are not in the least bit afraid of death (usually). People who spend their lives in jail, age much much faster and it takes a severe toll on them mentally and emotionally which is far worse than physical pain or death.

Answer 3

For  it.......... in this day of DNA if the conviction is for a violent murder.

My reasoning..............

Why should we spend millions of dollars a year to house, feed, cloth and give medical care for life to someone that had no problem taking a life violently?

Answer 4

I'm not opposed to capital punishment on philosophical grounds.  Some people really do deserve to die at society's hands; in a perfect world, that might even be too good for some of them.

But I have very serious problems with capital punishment on practical grounds, which places me effectively against the death penalty.

*  In practice, the death penalty tends to be given to defendants who don't have especially good attorneys.  The result is that those on death row are mostly the poor and underprivileged, and largely minorities.  The takeaway here is that money seems to be a ticket out of the death penalty, which should be a red flag right there.

*  It's happened many times now that new evidence--DNA and otherwise--has proven individual death-row inmates to be innocent.  That means that our system of sentencing to death row is not just imperfect but very problematic, and (in my estimation) justifies holding off on something final like execution.

*  In California, at least, the endless appeals system of placing someone on death row has spawned a cottage industry of lawyers fighting death sentences.  I think most people would agree that creating jobs for lawyers isn't a good use of society's resources, and countering that busywork isn't a good use of the state's resources.

*  The end result of THAT kind of thing is that it costs more to put and house someone on death row than it does to put them away for life.

*  There is a good, workable alternative to death--life in prison without possibility of parole.  Federal prisons don't offer parole--that's a state thing, if I remember right.  Remember, some of these guys would prefer death anyway--some have asked for it.  Is it better to give them the easy way out?

*  In a few cases, prominent inmates are of use to prison authorities in helping keep order in a prison, through the informal prisoner hierarchy.  Here in CA, Tookie Williams was one of those, and when we killed him, we lost the use of him in keeping inmates in his prison in line.

Answer 5

I'm for it....

Our prison system does not work... Overfilling is just one aspect... I personally do not believe that my tax dollars should go to housing, clothing, feeding, educating "even to paying for a college education where as I and my wife is currently paying for my sons college education.....

Think of the victims - not just the adults that have been murdered but those younger, children and infants born or not. "see link". [ Also "Sharon Tate was pregnant with almost a full term infant!]

This may sound harsh punishment - but for those who can not live with others - I have no feelings specially when they've committed an heinous and atrocious act of murdering another.

Answer 6

I have mixed feelings.  Susan S put together all the arguments against capital punishment.  Yet, sometimes the offenses of someone are so heinous that I feel they should be exterminated.

I receive emails from the Innocence Project and am glad that they are there to defend those people who have been jailed so long when DNA evidence should have been looked at years ago.  I'm glad to see that there is a shift in opinion from the jury is always right to the jury made the best decision they could from the evidence they were given.   As new techniques like DNA become available, we should fight to have them used in case more people are have been found guilty when they are actually innocent.  That fight makes us more sure of court decisions and shouldn't be forgotten as you  fight against the death penalty.

Answer 7

Opposed, you only have to execute one person who you find out too late was innocent, and it is too late to bring them back.

Answer 8

I'm for it because sometimes there is no other way to protect our innocent citizens from monsterous criminals.

Answer 9

I'm for it as long as there is no shadow of d aught.

Answer 10

For it. And we should hang the defense lawyer who came up with this crazy appeal process or make him pay for it. Defense lawyers are only motivated by greed and don't really care about justice. There is no truth in them!