Death Penalty??

Question

do you think it was wrong to ban it? and do you think that if the death penalty was used more, there would be less crime? and a better world??

Answer 1

I'm totally against.

Who decides who lives and who dies?

The places where death penalty exists are not even slightly safer from the otrers.

Answer 2

I am for the death penalty, and here's why:

-it serves due justice (the punishment fits the crime), and serving due justice is the NO.1 job of a court of law

-it shows that we are tough on crime

-it gets bang for the taxpayers buck

-criminals given the DP have a 0% recidivism rate

-It holds people responcible for the horrible content of their character. This fulfills what MLKJ always wanted: judge not by the color of your skin, but by the content of your character. The characterof these criminals warrants death

-It holds the criminal responcible for his actions

-appeals and **** aside, it's cheaper then prison

-it decreases the prison population, which saves even more taxpayers money

-it decreases the prison population, which saves even more taxpayers money

-Because the death penalty is the punishment given by a neutrel judge, there is no vengance in it. Therefore, there is no moral objection to be had with the death penalty.

-The death penalty establishes a mentality that "we will not tolerate any violation of any innocent person's human right's"

-It is a terrific deterrent to violent crimes when it is carried out swiftly, as the United states proved when we had the pre 1960's DP system, and as China is proving today. On the other hand, European countries only have 65 less deaths per 100,000 people per year, despite having millions and millions less people

Answer 3

Better off without it.  When you look at the death penalty system in action in the US, you realize that the only purpose it serves is retribution or revenge and, most disturbing, that there is a serious and continuing risk of executing innocent people.

129 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 state and regions that have it than in those that don’t. Rates of violent crime are worse in the US than in western Europe.

Life without parole, on the books in 48 states, also prevents  reoffending. It means what it says, and spending 23 of 24 hours a day locked in a tiny cell is not a picnic. 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 4

It's not banned in every state, and even here in WV (where we did ban it), a person can be put to death by FEDERAL court, just not state court.  It happened just this year - people murdered an undercover agent.

Answer 5

Had plenty of places that had a lot of death sentences. they tend to be the most violent and tyrannical places in the world. ourselves included on our current path.

Answer 6

I supported capital punishment for a long time, but I have changed my stance over the years, for several reasons:

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 after years of imprisonment because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. 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. If you need more, read on:

2. Because of the extra expense of 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 becomes the bad parent who says, ‘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 of our 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, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. 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

I think the death penalty is good for repeat offenders. It is not, however, a deterant to crime. Statistics show that the same amount of crime exists regardless of the death penalty. It doesn't deter the people who are crazy or don't care or think it's worth the risk. It's  like locks  don't deter a burgler.  It only serves to keep honest people honest and the American public lulled into a false sense of security.

Crime is cyclical. The only way to stop it  is to change the laws and increase funding to education and educational programs.

Answer 8

I do think so.  Would you commit certain crimes if you knew it would lead to your swift 'extermination'?  

I think we'd have a lot less crime everywhere if this were the case....