2006-07-11 10:48:58 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
I don't agree with the process and think that a person who is founded guilty and the facts are in that they are really guilty I think they should be put to death within one year. If it is built on weak evidents and person is founded guilty then yes have an appeal process but not for 20 to 30 years. Take the man (can't think of his name) who murdered his wife and unborn child. This man will sit on death row and probable die before he is up for execution. He gets to watch TV, read books, with 3 meals a day supplied, and etc. His wife and unborn child get death. I also think sometimes that we should do away with death row and put these people in prison with the rest of the prison population. They would last as long as when on death row. Take Jeffrey Dimmer, he killed and ate all those young boys but don't get death row just a life sentence. The prison population took care of him.
Oh, by the way, when quoting the Bible please understand what it means. "Thou Shall Not Kill" , the word kill means murder. Killing in war is not murder, Killing to save self or love ones is not murder, and Killing someone who is on death row is not murder.
2006-07-11 11:09:13 · answer #1 · answered by DeHynton 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Automatic appeal and a lot of red tape. Also, remember that the death penalty is a hot topic with strong opinions on both sides and it would be political suicide for a governor (and his party) in a state that has the death penalty to start executing everyone that's on death row.
2006-07-11 10:52:15 · answer #2 · answered by scubalady01 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The lack of life Penalty is a good element...yet people should be On It for about 2 years Max... I advise, How lengthy Can It Take for someone to face Trial? And the clarification Crime expenses Shot Up In uk is because the stupid Liberals Banned guns...Now Civilians Dont Have Them And Criminals Do
2016-11-01 21:13:04 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I thought there was a law that they had to spend more time on death row than their victims spent on earth. At least it sometimes seems that way.
In actuality, it is the appeals process.
2006-07-11 12:53:45 · answer #4 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we want to make absoluteley certian that all avenues of appeals are used before they are put to death. I honestly dont think death row is a preventative meausre though.
2006-07-11 10:56:50 · answer #5 · answered by honiebee 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Byrocracy
2006-07-11 10:51:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they are too busy arresting and locking up other people. I do not agree with the death penalty, though. Thou Shalt Not Kill.
2006-07-11 10:51:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Every year we execute people who it later turns out were not guilty so they try to cut down on that with appeals processes, etc.
2006-07-11 10:52:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because of the appeals process.
2006-07-11 10:50:59 · answer #9 · answered by Bradly S 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they can appeal their sentences which is frustrating on one hand but on the other, we really don't want to kill an innocent man.
2006-07-11 10:51:19 · answer #10 · answered by Sara 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋