Death penalty?

Question

I know this has probably been discussed several times but Id like now what people think of the death penalty.

Some feel that its wrong!!
Well here's a case where a woman by the name of Rosie Alfaro at the age of 18 (and pregnant with twins) broke into someone home and attempted to rob them.. she ended up killin a nine year old girl in the process. She stabbed the lil gir 57 times.. she is now currently on californias death row.
Do you feel she should have the right to live after doing this?
Read about it here
http://www.womenofdeathrow.com/id26.htm

There are also some people who think its right to sentenced some to death for their crimes.
Well here's of people who were found not guilty and released from death row.
Do you feel we have the right to kill when we have found that there are innocent people on death row?
http://ccadp.org/free-life.htm


So what do you think? You be the judge!!
Is the death penalty right?

Awarding 10pts to the person with the most sensible and smartest answer!

Answer 1

The death penalty is a tough one, but I am for it. Why? Because if you were sentenced to death row, obviously the people felt your crime was so heinous that you did not deserve the right to live. It wasn't justice enough to just take your freedom from you.

I challenge the list of those released from death row - how many of them had their conviction overturned on appeals? That is why we have the appeals process - to make certain that we do not execute an innocent person. Obviously that part is working - the list shows it.

I feel that there are just some crimes that the perpetrators do not deserve to live after. If there is absolutely no chance of rehabilitation, and they are just too far gone to "save", then just send them on their merry way to hell, where they belong. The punishment would be more fitting for them there.

Answer 2

I dont believe the death penalty is a solution for the next reasons:

a) The State doesnt have the power or at least the right to take a human life away, I believe in Divine Justice and is only God who can decide when the life ends.

b) The system has mistakes, who is going to repair the mistakes in the case someone was wrongly accused and convicted?

c) The Judicial System should teach individuals how to re adapt to society, to teach them to be better citizens, now it is true some of them never will adjust or adapt for any reason, that is true that some members will adjust and adapt but social members are not going to get trust to them or some of them wont get jobe because of their backgrounds, but those criminals did good things too, the problem is that justice only focus on the wrong side of actions not good things.

d) Like it or not, people who are convicted have rights, we can ask the Organization of Human rights and they are still citizens with less privileges, and Im not saying they have 100 % rights as any citizen will have, but they have some of those rights and the State should protect that. Or....is the State going to put in death penalty the soldiers that killed 120 children in Irak? or those soldiers are going to be consider heroes?

e) Some of the witness of the death penalty that do help that to be a success I believe they feel remorse later in their lifes so thats a psychological-emotional issue there.

f) Sometimes the reason for the death penalty is not because of something that has to be done, but rather because some jails are full of people and every criminal costs money to the State, so this is a way to spend less money on them.

Now my question is...Should the ones who apply the death penalty get the death penalty too ??

Answer 3

If our justice system was infallible, I'd support the death penalty. The problem is, lots of innocent people have been put on death row. We know this by using DNA data that has become readily available over the past 15 years. The justice system doesn't always get the right man. If even 1 innocent life is lost due to the use of capitol punishment, I think that's justification to do away with it.

Also, our justice system does not judge everyone on a level field. It's apparent that money buys "justice" and the more cash you've got, the better chance you'll have of beating the rap, or staying off death row at least. So in a round about way, the death penalty serves to punish those with the least means of defending themselves in a court of law.

As for the lady who stabbed the little girl: I'd like to kill her myself and if she gets the chair you won't hear me complaining. But that's me. Those are my emotions. The justice system shouldn't be based on emotion, but rather sound logic, equality and reason.

When the day comes that all are treated equally under the law, and the possibility of the wrongly accused being convicted is reduced to ZERO, I will support the death penalty only for the most heinous crimes (child killers, serial killers, sadistic killers).

I'm not holding my breath.

Answer 4

Some people don't deserve to live, but the debate is who has the right to hand out death to other people... and where do you draw the line? If a judge sentences a murderer to death, he essentially becomes the murderer... even though he feels (and many people feel) its in the best interest of society to remove the "bad apple" from the bunch.

Prisons are overcrowded, and usually turn a casual troublemaker into a hardened criminal more often than rehabilitate him/her. People end up going in, coming out, going in, coming out until they die. It would be easier to just put them to death.

But what about the innocents? The people who didn't do anything, but take the blame. Their lives are wasted because of a flaw in the system. The death penalty should be used everywhere... but ONLY once we've reach a point were all things are monitored...all the time. If you always have a camera on you, you will have to be very messed up to commit a serious crime, and there will never be a length debate in court over the guilt of an individual.

Answer 5

Two wrongs never make a right and I think we have no right to kill anybody no matter what. People give such terrifying examples to appeal to others' emotions. Of course that woman who killed the little girl is horrific, but how will killing her help? I don't think death is a good punishment. Life imprisonment is what she deserves. Living all her life in a jail, she will regret doing what she did everyday she wakes up.

And leaving this case aside, there are some cases where the person was found unguilty after being executed. Isn't that horrible?

And if it's not right for a person to kill, how can it be right for a government? Who decides that? Moreover, it's a fact that killing the murderers does not deter others. People are still gonna kill. There must be some other way to deter people from killing.

Answer 6

Maybe I am old fashioned but an eye for an eye is my motto. Yes there are faults in the judicial system that do allow a small portion of innocent people to be convicted, but there are some very cruel and haneous crimes committed by sick people need death row. Could you imagine Dominey sitting in prison with a small possibility of parole I DON'T THINK SO. I would rather the death row put an end to these sorts of people where there is no possible way their lawyers could get their sentences lightened due to a technicallity. These people are dangerous and do not belong around other people. It is not fair that guards or society should have to exposed to these kinds of heartless criminals. If I were a judge I would grant her the right to a speedy and fair death!

Answer 7

Personally, it ALWAYS depends on the circumstance--- just like the controversial topic of abortion... that is another story...
Death penalty is right.
'These' people have gone through many, many, many trials and procedure to get to that point, and the courts don't make mistakes after all that work. If their is evidence, witnesses, strong data--- they are guilty. Countless investigations + $$$. In many other countries, like China--- people who do crimes are instantly GUILTY until proven innocent-- many are executed soon afterwards. The citizens don't pay taxes that end up paying for these criminals in jail.
These people who do the crime need to pay the price, even if they change in jail. You only live life once, and if you are going to use it that way... TOO BAD.
In California recently-- Stanley "Tookie" WIlliams died of lethal injection--- I felt that it did the victims family justice. He began the whole 'crips' gang... he may have changed over time, and nominated for the Nobel Prize, but when it comes down to everything... he is GUILTY. He killed an innocent family in a hold-up.
If these killers, rapists, have any sense, they would not do such a stupid thing.
Please don't be prejudiced against those who feel death penalty and abortion are right... everyone is different.
I AM PRO_DEATH PENALTY!
Hope my opinion helps!
^_^

Answer 8

Man this is a very hard subject to come up with a correct answer to, probably because there is not one. Every case is different. Like the 18 yr old pregnant murderer. Difficult to say. She of course would not be put to death while she was pregnant. But shoud she be put to death after she gave birth? What of her children? Should they be forced to be raised with out a mother? Then again, should they be forced to be raised by a murderer? Its a tough call, and no one has the answers. What of the person actually administering the lethal injection, is he no better than a murderer himself? Or is it justified by saying he is doing his job, doing society a favor. But isn't it only God's job to take a life? I would commit murder myself, if it was to protect my kids, and I wouldnt have a problem with it. I think we should give the victim's familys the choice. Then hand the criminal over to them, and let them do it in their own way. An eye for an eye. But what if they are really innocent? There has to be proof beyond a shadow of a doubt they are guilty.

Answer 9

The punishment should fit the crime, she chose to break into these peoples house with whatever intentions and while there she made the choice to take anothers life, (a little girls life at that).
Why should she have the choice to live? This innocent child didn't have a choice! Sitting on death row is not where she should be, she should already have been executed. Her children will never see her again and neither will the parents of the child that was murdered

Answer 10

taking someone else's life is never right. Although there are cases where people have been found innocent after they were sentenced to death in a first degree trial, most of the times dead men walking have been put there for a reason.
In this particular case you mentioned a 18 y old girl stabbing a 9 y old 57 times during a robbery ....... was that right??? 57 times !!!!!
Sorry but although it might be wrong the pregnant inmate has to be sentenced to death

Answer 11

Sorry, but DNA isn't an accurate science in order to prove that someone didn't kill a person.
I believe in the death penalty-don't care what the circumstances are.
I also believe the insanity defense should be stopped.
Look at Andrea Yates. She drowned her 5 kids, admitted that she knew it was wrong. She planned it, waited for her husband to leave. That's insane? Don't think so. I don't care what "voices" she heard or who she claimed told her to do what.

I think that people on death row should have 2 years to prove their case. None of this sitting there for ten years stuff. We'd be better off if we had quicker turnover rates.