Should we use the death penalty?

Answer 1

Someone wrote "It's in the Bible and the Koran." I don't know the Koran, but I do know that the Bible (in particular the New Testament, which refers to the new 'contract' that the Deity has with human kind) talks about forgiveness, compassion, even turning the other cheek. Please don't use the Bible to justify your own narrow minded beliefs.

Someone else wrote that the death penalty may be a deterrent. I understand that the countries that still have the death penalty also have the highest crime rates. It has been theorized that this is because when the laws of a country say it's OK to kill someone (through the death penalty), then the people who inhabit that country will also lower the thresholds which inhibit them to justify death/murder.

When I look at the shallow reasoning that some people use to justify the death penalty ("The prisons are crowded", "It's too expensive", etc.), I think the aforementioned theory may have some merit.

And the guy below me who claims 'an eye for an eye sums it up' apparently never read past the OLD Testament, or he would know that the NEW Testament only mentions 'turning the other cheek'.

Answer 2

Lets not forget that the death penalty is only sought in the most heinous of crimes: Murder where there has been a kidnapping, rape, etc. Murder where there has been a robbery, if you are a police officer - those types of crimes. With DNA now available and with the fact that in most states anyone convicted of a felon must give their DNA chances are mistakes will now be even more miniscal than before. To have an innocent person sit on death row is a terrible thing. But we do have the best justice system in the world and everyone is entitled to the best defense they can afford. In many states, the public defenders death penalty units are the best lawyers around. They are dedicated and passionate and work very hard to get acquittals. Additionally, without the death penalty on the table, what would the plea bargain be? Currently, a criminal will take a plea from death to life without parole. With no Death Penalty, the plea would be from Life w/out Parole to simple life. I say yes. We need the death penalty.

Answer 3

i think a person can only answer this truthfully if they have sat on death row, awaiting their OWN execution for a crime they did NOT do
if you have enough time, money and a good lawyer, you can get anything done...you can buy your way out of a lot of crimes the same as someone else can pay to make you the scapegoat
unfortunately there are a few people sitting and awaiting execution for a horrible crime that they did not commit while the true criminal escapes justice...
i feel horrible for victims' families when all the evidence is indeed presented in a way that it is a fact...but, killing the criminal will not bring their loved one back...
besides, there are worse things than being killed...there should be a hole in the ground somewhere to torture these people for the rest of their natural life...but, that is not a humane thing to do either
it is a lose/lose situation either way

Answer 4

To receive the death penalty means you did something horrific and terrible.
But to me that's the easy way out.
Maybe after the death penalty you should be cremated and thrown away, no where laid to rest, wonder the earth like a lost soul alone for ever

Answer 5

ask the family in Washington who's two daughters and two grandchildren were murdered by a man who killed them for no apparent reason. One grandchild was 2 years old and the other was no older than six i believe. the guy slit there throats and let them bleed to death. Ask that family if America should use the death penalty and see what they say.

Answer 6

Morrally I'm apposed to it but in the long run I believe it should be used.
1. It does in some ways work as a deturent.
2. Is it really more humane to keep someone in jail for 10, 20, 30 or 40 years or longer?

So it's a tough call but in cases where it's warrented it's probably more humane.

Answer 7

This question has always been a hard one for me, see I think if you can take a persons life away from them and their families, then you don't deserve to live yourself, it just isn't fair, but then the whole two wrongs don't make a right thing, then the possibility of being falsely accused...and someone else is then responsible for killing the convict so I guess that wouldn't make them any better of a person! Its a confusing question, I would love to hear other peoples opinions on this.

Answer 8

We need something more effective deterring murder. Imagine scene from 1984. People convicted of first degree murder should be placed in stainless steel room. Contact with others only by TV, and feed same meal through slot in the wall. After all appeals ran out they could take their own life. Up to this point everyday act got committed show them roting away via by hidden video camera.

Answer 9

The cost of keeping a person on death row is stagering.
If they are sentenced to death, they shoud carry out the sentence with-in 24 hours like they do in China.

Answer 10

Of course we should.

There are some criminals that are beyond rehabilitation, and will never be able to walk free due to that. So why keep them alive in overcrowded prisons, when we could use that cell for someone that has a chance at rehabilitation and could become a productive member of soceity again?

If that person took the life of another, do you think he asked himself if he should do it or let them have their right to life? NO. So why afford him/her the same questioning and right? They didn't do that for the victim, they should die as well.