Why the death penalty?!?

Question

Can someone PLEASE explain to me how this is in anyway the right thing to do?! I live in england and thankfully we stopped using it back in the 60s but I understand that most american states still use it. Please someone tell me why, i genuinley do not get the logic behind it. Why do it? For revenge? How is dealing with a murderer by murdering them any good at all? in this day and age how is this humane!? please explain cos it baffels me. if the death penalty was alive today in england..that guy who has just been found innocent of jill dando's murder after 8 years..would be dead by now

Answer 1

It's That Guy - very well said!

I live in Texas, and I supported capital punishment for a long time (for many of the reasons he mentions), 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. 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 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 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 2

American voters are not really very well-informed.  The level of political discourse in the US is really abysmal, in fact the most articulate and intelligent commentaries come from UK sources like the Guardian and the Observer.

When it comes to government policy on crime and punishment, Americans are especially ignorant.  For years we have been told that the death penalty serves as a great deterrent against crime.  But statistics show this has never been true, in fact the opposite is true.  And it costs more to execute a prisoner than life in prison without possibility of parole.

But any time an American politicians admits this and suggests the death penalty is not effective, his opponent jumps on him for being 'soft on crime'.  Crime is a huge issue here.  People have the idea that crime is quickly rising, that it is out of control, when it actually is down, because our TV network news organizations cover crime with lurid detail to maximize their audience.

So politicians have to compete with each other to be 'tough on crime', and nobody ever admits he doesn't support the death penalty.  President Bush, as governor of Texas, executed more criminals than anyone in history, and he and the people of Texas are very proud of this fact, even though it had no effect on crime in their state.

It really is more about vengeance and revenge than it is about government crime policy.  Crime policy should be based on protecting the public from crime as effectively, and cost-effectively, as possible.  But instead Americans think punishment of criminals should make them feel better.  This is a 'feel good' issue.  And isn't it appalling what makes Americans feel good?  8^P

Answer 3

Because some people are better off dead and unfortunately the cops stopped killing these b******s on sight a long time ago. I just wish we would kill them 24/7 by having them walk single file into an active volcano. That way we would'nt have to waste time digging a hole or incinerating their worthless corpses

Answer 4

The Death penalty is not handed down willy nilly. It is for the most egregious murderers. It still takes several years to implement it during which numerous mandatory appeals are made.There is not a single case of an executed prisoner being exonerated post mortem. There is also not a single case of an executed criminal repeating their crime.

Answer 5

I agree with..death penalty should be banned federally.... we do not have right to take another person lives doesn't matter how serious the crime is....He should locked up but don't kill him...he will die one and pay for his sins...i don't understand one things..when a person put to a death..who pay for his sins??? politicians or judge?

Answer 6

Basically to try and make an example of it. Research shows (and this comes from a top Criminal Justice researcher, Frank Cullen,) that the Death Penalty is NOT a deterrent and more murders are in states where the death penalty is used as compared to states where the death penalty is not used. I used to be for the death penalty, but I think it should be reserved for the worst of people, who don't deserve to live (Bin laden, serial killers, Hussein, etc.)

Answer 7

If you execute them they can NEVER get out and kill again.

simple answer.  It is 100% effective.  Any other method is less than 100% sure.

Answer 8

Yeah well, wait until a child of yours is raped and murdered.  No one can really say what they believe until it happens close to home.  My question is, why would you allow a worthless baby killing SOB to live?  What could they add to society other than to take up space?  

Answer 9

For one thing, it gives 100% assurance that the person will never commit another crime again.  When a person is sentenced to life in prison, they now have nothing to lose.  So they know that they can attack and even murder a prison guard (or other worker) and there is nothing more that can be done to them.  This is part of the reason why in many prisons, the prisoners pretty much are in charge.

Also, why should a person that has refused to work, so they committed a crime that involved murdering an innocent person to take their stuff get a lifetime of:  free food, free housing, free medical and dental care, a free gym, free internet access, free TV with cable, free laundry service, a free lawyer if they want to sue because they feel they are not getting enough for free, and many other things that the law-abiding have to work for (and do without if they cannot afford them)?

And, you call the death penalty "inhumane"?  Well, how "humane" do you think the criminals treat their victims.

When a person is executed, they also get a last meal, and time to say "good bye" to loved ones, two things that their victims did not get.

Answer 10

In this country, the death penalty is not carried out straight from the court room. There are automatic appeals in every death sentence case, and it takes about 10-20 years for the penalty to be carried out. That is more than enough time to find additional evidence that the person is innocent. I understand in foreign countries many death penalty sentences are carried out on the spot. That is not true of this country.

In regard to "why the death penalty?" I say, why not? I don't consider the death penalty as murder. Why should the tax payers pay for the lifelong care of someone who does not value human life?

And I'm so tired of these prisoners on death row claiming the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment. I think their victims could tell them a thing or two about "cruel and unusual", but they're not around anymore the voice their opinion. Maybe they should be executed in the same manner in which they killed their victim. They might think twice about what "cruel and unusual punishment" really is.

Answer 11

Some crimes are so heinous and terrible that the only thing to do is put that person to death. I used to think it wrong, and felt compassion was the way to go. When a person kills and abuses little children, I don't see compassion, and when a person takes multiple lives and shows no remorse, who should he/she be spared?

It should absolutely be used sparingly, but once in a while it's just the right thing to do.

Plus with the technological advances, we are less and less likely to falsely convict.