Yes, I believe in it....
To get this sentence, someone had to do something pretty bad.
Is some time in prison really gonna really gonna allow them to become a better person so that they won't commit the the crime again?
Time on death row did allow "Tooky" (the man responsible for the Blood & Cryps gangs) to inform & get involved with gang awareness. He even wrote a book but they still carried out his sentence.
Our country wastes enough money.
We could be helping children or doing something good for our country but it's better for us to keep the criminals in jail, especially the ones that are a threat.....
If you kill someone and now-a-days people usually aren't just killing one, then I am sorry.....
The truth is you have no value for life, more less care about yours because you know what can happen so therefore let's turn you over for God to deal with because you are far beyond the "norm" of understanding.
2006-08-18 19:12:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by SuperPrincess 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have just finished reading an opposing viewpoints series about the DP (I find these helpful when trying to decide my stance on an issue because they provide arguments from both sides). Here is what I found.
>Is it just?
Even with DNA evidence these days there are issues of human error, unqualified personnel, etc. Studies have shown problems with racial bias (ie blacks who killed whites receive a death sentence improportionately). Also, a verdict may not be consistent for a given case, say, if the judge and/or jury were different. With a punishment of this severity we cannot afford to be so subjective. There has been some controversy over lethal injection infringing on the 8th amendment, but I do not think this argument is very useful.
>Is it ethical?
These are largely my own convictions. Even if there was less than 1% chance that the convicted was innocent, I feel that chance is too much. Does the government have sanction over our lives? Supreme Court justice Scalia wrote that he believed the government could act as the hand of God in dealing our justice, so it is within their rights. I think differently, that no one besides me has the authority to deny me my existence.
>Is it effective?
This is hard to judge. As a deterrent, it may work if the perpetrator is a mass murderer and likely to murder again. Or you could just keep him/her in jail. For others, I seriously doubt when someone is in a killing mood that (s)he is thinking about the consequences at that time. As retribution, it is faulty. I don't know who said it, but "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." Should we encourage violence to combat violence? As for victims and their families, their conception of punishment is likely to be skewed. How can you be objective if you are vengeful? Whatever the perpetrator suffers may never be enough. Also, the DP legal process is very drawn out because of the care that needs to be taken. The legal process costs states significantly more than a life-in-prison sentence would require.
All that being said, I believe people can change. If there is a problem like chemical imbalance in the body, it can be rectified. Some prisoners discover religion, and counseling might help for others. Taking their lives is an extreme we need not go to.
2006-08-18 02:48:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by alethiaxx 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The death penalty is not a deterrent as it is currently used. We put them to death at night and as quietly as possible. In addition, it is not used equally....i.e, we have people get lesser sentences for greater crimes, and vice versa. It depends on how good a lawyer you get. I would do away with the death penalty as it is currently used. I woudl agree with having the death penalty is they made it publc and as gory as possible, much like the public square beheadings of old. Actually, it would make a great pay-for-view spectacle and woudl last longer than a Mike Tyson fight.
2006-08-18 02:16:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by rando_59 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The person who is murdered usually had a family, whether it was YOUR family or not.
The death penalty should be expanded to include rapists and repeat child molesters.They have no place in our society and prison life is cruel and unusual punishment for them because lots of their cellmates take offense to sickos who would harm a child.
Look at Jeffrey Dahmer.He was murdered in prison,where he never should have been. When he was convicted, he should have been taken out back and shot.
2006-08-18 02:15:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by hott.dawg™ 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I do. And yes some criminals are proven "innocent" after being on death row but my stand is they were obviously not a descent human being in the first place to even be accused of the crime. I think we should go back to the good ole public hangings, society might even improve a little if we did.
2006-08-18 02:14:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I dont believe in it because our justice system sucks; way too many mistakes are made. Plus it cost too much to carry out the sentence. I say put them in jail and make them pay back society by participating in drug trials.
2006-08-18 02:14:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by rkalch 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I totally believe in the death penalty.. Sure, we could give them all life in prison.. but then I would be footing the bill to house, clothe and feed someone who commited a crime so bad that they got life in prison instead of the death penalty.. I would be pissed.
2006-08-18 02:13:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Imani 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it sets a bad example. Who are we to empower someone to take another's life, other than in a case of immediate self defense or defense of others? "Thou shalt not kill" seems pretty clear to me. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we should open the doors of the prisons and set everybody free. But we are civilized enough to deal with killers without having to become killers ourselves. Every time the state sticks the needle in someone's arm, we all have a hand in it. It was wrong when they did it to Jesus, and it is still wrong.
2006-08-18 02:17:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by buttercup 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do, and I think that the murderer should die in the exact same manner in which they killed the victim. In ancient history, people were given death penalty not just for murderer and also their whole family would die too (prominent I believe in ancient Persian days)
2006-08-18 02:50:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by pierson1953 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I do. I feel it is a deterrent. If it wasn't, Michael Moore, Alec Baldwin, Al Franken, Tom Cruise, the MoveOn gang, Nancy Pelosi, Clinton, etc.. would NOT be coming down for breakfast anymore.
Yes, the death penalty is a deterrent.
However, I WOULD kill a pedophile if they came NEAR my child.
2006-08-18 02:11:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋