NEVER, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE, REVENGE IS FUTILE
2006-06-29 11:13:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by Zen 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yep. In Sacramento, Calfornia there where protesters at the governers house sayiny that the penalty was wrong. And they where doing the lethal ingection to the leader of the Crypts. He is very lucky he got lethal ingection. He really should have got a slow and very painful in my opinion for the kids and the other people he killed.
2006-06-29 18:14:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by highimpacthalo1 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes because criminals get out and committ more crimes. Very few actually change on their own. They might appear to be changed but if they were let out they would go back to their old ways. No criminal that was executed ever committed another crime. I don't believe in lethal injection though as it too easy. I believe the person should die the same way they killed the other person. If they shot someone, shoot them, If they raped and stabbed a woman, the same should happen to them.
2006-06-29 18:08:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by reallyfedup 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, because I know that some types of offenders (think child molestors, habitual rapists, etc.) can not be rehabilitated. If they can't change and they've caused so much pain and grief in their lives, why should they get to live?
2006-06-29 18:50:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by vonwasden 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
For certain crimes yes, for others I believe suffering the rest of their lives in prison is fair.
2006-06-29 18:07:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by kathy059 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes when it is a repeat sex offender or someone who victimizes children and/or the elderly or someone who has gone on some crazy murder spree like Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson... somethings are just inexcusable.
2006-06-29 18:10:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by spreejo456 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sure, it shows in the bible, an eye for an eye, a life for a life.
2006-06-29 18:06:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋