English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Please explain and what your reasons are for your answer!

2006-06-07 16:26:57 · 39 answers · asked by single mom 4 in Society & Culture Other - Society & Culture

39 answers

Only in extreme cases.

Osama Bin Laden
Timothy McVeigh
Adolf Hitler
The Nuremburg Trials were justified

I think you get my point. "Extreme."

2006-06-07 16:30:39 · answer #1 · answered by Adam 7 · 0 1

Yeah I do believe in death penalty, since there is no more the crime he commits after the death.Only the highest punishment is death and after that nothing more.
See the death penalty is the Capital punishment if he commits a murder.
There are two different types of hanging one is unlawful one where as the other one is judicial hanging. Why at all that criminal to live and becomes a bur don for the GOVT. after all he is an unwanted criminal for anybody so instead of torturing him in the cell keeping him for 20 years of life imprisonment better to kill him .This can also be compared to that of a mercy killing.
Finally I am to say that a death must be equally balanced by death only.The agony and the losses of that beloved man who is murdered by some one the implication of the loss to the family of the deceased is immeasurable. and there is no words to console the sorrow of the losers.Hence the same way death only can have the real value of punishments.

2006-06-07 16:37:41 · answer #2 · answered by gkakkasseri 4 · 0 0

There are so many good points to both sides of that question, i am not sure that anyone could say for sure one way or the other 100% of the time. I am against it most of the time because no matter what humans are flawed and humans make the decision to put someone to death,no way out if a mistake is made. However the idea of paying for mass murdurers to sit around and not work and eat three meals a day(which is better that a lot of starving children across the country get) really irritates me to no end. I guess if i was on a jury deciding on a persons fate it would boil down to whether or not the person was still going to pose a threat to other humans even in prison.

2006-06-07 16:34:08 · answer #3 · answered by okie300 2 · 0 0

I used to. An eye for an eye is such a clear cut version of justice and is very appealing, and in some cases, I still feel that a death sentence is the only viable one. However, the current system is corrupted, putting to death minorities and the poor at much higher rates than caucasians or wealthy people. Until this inequality is fixed, I feel that the death penalty should be suspended.

2006-06-07 16:32:15 · answer #4 · answered by smartsassysabrina 6 · 0 0

I do believe in the death penalty 4 those that kill 4 no reason and child molest but I dont 4 the people that have a strong reason why they need to kill some1

2006-06-07 16:33:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

NO - One side of me believes that a person who has committed a heinous crime is due his date with death. But, the death penalty actually costs taxpayers more money on the court & appeals process than incarcerating an inmate for life. The bottom line though is that life in prision in maximum secrurity is worse than death IMHO. The inmate would've wished he could have had a quick death.

2006-06-07 16:37:46 · answer #6 · answered by justntime2c 3 · 0 0

Yes I do. If they did a crime that a life sentence was put upon them. Then the death penalty should be used. That way we are not paying for their room and board for the rest of their lives. To say nothing of the medical attention that they may require throughout their lives.

2006-06-07 16:35:23 · answer #7 · answered by Sander 4 · 0 0

I do not believe in the death penalty...the only one that has power over life and death, I believe, is God...when we decide as a state to put a person to death, we are playing God...I don't believe it is right...not even if you killed my Mother would I want to be the one to say , you should die...then I am no better than a killer myself...I don't want to be that person.

2006-06-07 16:31:20 · answer #8 · answered by yvonnejust4today 4 · 0 0

No. Morally, I don't like the idea of killing someone (but I don't think that my morals should outweigh what the family of the victim wants- I might change my tune if I were the victim). But, financially, the death penalty doesn't make sense. It costs way more than just housing the criminal.

2006-06-07 16:30:20 · answer #9 · answered by Princess 5 · 0 0

I believe in the death penalty. If someone commits a heinous crime, like murdering someone and then going on to murder that person's family, or raping someone and then killing them and leaving their body out like trash, that person should die.

It's not about violence begetting violence, or taking someone's life not bringing the dead person back--it's about paying for what you did. Taking a life is the ultimate crime (under certain circumstances), and a person who does that in a cruel and unusual way should pay for that with thier own life.

2006-06-07 16:33:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Absolutely--if someone commits such a horrendous crime I don't want them to ever do it again. It would be nice if the death penalty helped prevent the crime in the first place, but this has not been shown.

2006-06-07 16:29:40 · answer #11 · answered by Nelson_DeVon 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers