Death Penality?

Question

There are a couple of sides to this....Do you think that it should be banned...stay as it is.....or have the process sped up....

I think that if you are found quilty and sentenced to dealth, you should get one appeal....heard by a court that only handles appeals for capital cases, then, if the sentence stands you should be walked out of the court house takes to the chair, or injection table....what ever you state uses and get it over with....my tax money should have to pay for another 10 years of food, just so the state can kill you.

As far as the inocennt....those were from cases that were before DNA....and when testing DNA was available then they were let go.....DNA today is there from the beginning....

I do agree that it is more about swift justice for families than about tax dollars but at the same time....how much money would that free up for the government to use on other things....such as poverty that was mentioned....

Answer 1

Whether or not it should be just one appeal I'm not so sure...the courts should have some flexibility since every case is different. Still, they should be able to wrap up the process within five years. In California they sit on death row for twenty years or more. I think more of them die from natural causes while waiting for execution. that just ain't right.

That said, there are problems with the way CP is doled out. Money certainly does buy justice, as in a good lawyer. A rich white guy should have just as much chance to be executed as a poor black man (given similar convictions).

Answer 2

In youth my opinion on the death sentence was different than it is today. Only because of the person I am that can't stand the thought of a life being taken. That opinion has changed. If someone is found guilty of a capital crime, and they do get one appeal, and the appeal is denied, that says to me the evidence of this persons guilt is overwhelming and accurate. So if they have taken someones life theirs should be taken. It really has nothing to do with my tax dollars paying for them to stay in prison until the state kills them, even if that's something I don't like as a taxpayer. It is more like I would now rather see swift justice for the families left to suffer because the criminal took one of their loved ones life.

Answer 3

i think that if the process is sped up then the court system should change its process ie raise the # of jury members, call for 100% votes, and maybe change the way that jury selection is done....the reason for this would be because i agree that keeping someone locked up for ten years to turn around and execute them is a waste...if we're going to execute then lets get on with it.....but...and this is a strong but...what about those that are innocent and put on death row?....we've seen it happen only for dna evidence to set them free....and what about the ones that were innocent that WERE executed?...its a little late to say oops! our bad!
and i think that we should go back to public hangings although i know its not feasible because of the folks who dont believe in the death penatly....we'd be burying more than one person due to the riots that would start! so probably lethal injection....its cleaner and does not subject anyone to having to clean up around dangerous chemical fumes

Answer 4

If capital punishment were banned ,as it is in all other civilized western countries, this question would be moot.

While we realize that this is not an answer to your question, the rest of the first world countries need not ask it. They believe in the old adage " rather the real perpetrator go free than an innocent person wrongly convicted" as has happened with capital punishment in all countries before banning it.

Answer 5

I second that one...the people on death row are there for a reason. They are not helping society, and my tax dollars should not have to go to keeping people who have done horrendous, violent acts alive.

It always seemed to me like letting them live in a prison for the rest of their lives was like spitting on the grave of the person they murdered. The victims didn't have a choice about when they died...neither should their killers.

Answer 6

The expres lane is the way to go. People say that death does not detur. Well, if you knew you would be dead inside of 365 days of sentencing, the tune would change. As it is right now, the death row people should simply be serving life...

Answer 7

i dont think it really works as a deterrent to crime, most criminals and people in general are'nt afraid to die.
threatning them with death does nothing.
i think we should torture violent criminals, give them a gimp leg, make it so they drool out the side of thier mouths, but keep them healthy enough to be productive but not soo healthy that they can commit crimes.
and then let them be seen in public, the surest way to make other violent offenders really think about what they are about to do
especially when they see ole joe or that good ole boy frank talking with twitch or an uncontrolable arm swagger and he tells them flat out dont do any thing criminal cause the prison will f*** you up. and they will know it aint the inmates he is talking about .!!!

Answer 8

the death penalty should be banned, it has been shown over and over again that it does not deter criminals.

We need to fix the issues that land people in prison to begin with, ignorance and poverty. If we had an educated and economically stable population we would see crime rates drop, its as simple as that.

Answer 9

The people against the death penalty should be give the $50k per head per year bill for those on life sentences.

Answer 10

I am against the death penalty. Life in gaol is enough. Who has the right to take a life, irregardless of the crime.