Is capital punishment necessary?

Question

true or not? why?

Answer 1

Yes, I think so.

It purges society of vile miscreants and guarantees that those criminals will never prey on the public again.

With DNA and modern forensics coming into its own, it will spare the innocent and hold the guilty accountable... better than ever before.

Answer 2

No it is barbaric and uncivilized, and doesn't achieve anything. Only the US and some pretty unpleasant countries use capital punishment. It certainly hasn't helped the US violent crime rate which is sky high. It sends totally the wrong message, that human life isn't precious.

Answer 3

No ! But it works.   Nobody who has recieved capital punishment has done the crime again !

Answer 4

Yes, with the amount of people incarcerated and the amount of money it takes to house just one, I feel it is.  In my opinion not only should it be used in all states, but also be the punishment for several more violent crimes that are being punished with death.  Non-violent crimes on the flip-side though like drugs, failing to pay fines, being poor, etc. should no longer be criminalized like they are.

Answer 5

h**l yes.  The death penalty is society's ultimate weapon against the sociopaths who terrorize it.

Answer 6

Absolutely not - it does way more harm than good.

I supported capital punishment for a long time, but the more I learned about it, the more I came to oppose it.  In the end, several factors changed my mind:

1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 30 years in the U.S., over 100 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.”  Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. No matter how rare it is, the government should not risk executing one single innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people to oppose it. If you need more, read on:

2. Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting a DP case, and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

4. There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.”  Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death.  In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."

5. Most governments are supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible.  For example, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus praises mercy (Matthew 5:7) and rejects “an eye for an eye” (Matthew 5:38-39).  James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice.  Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to).  In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Answer 7

No.  Homicide rates are actually higher in states and regions with the death penalty than in those without it.  True enough, it prevents a killer from repeating his crime.  But life without parole does the same thing, and, at much lower cost.

Sources:

Death Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org,  for stats on executions, reports on costs, deterrence studies, links to FBI crime stats

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

Answer 8

in some casses yes, like serial rapists/murderers.

although maybe studying the person before killing them could allow scientists to help prevent these kind of crimes from occuring in the first place

Answer 9

in some cases yes, in some case no - i believe it depends on the circumstance.

---------------

if you search on google there are lots of interesting articles on this subject