English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://www.deathpenalty.org/index.php?pid=sign_petition&menu=1%22

sign if you want to stop the Death Penalty

2006-08-26 14:54:54 · 30 answers · asked by mtajkt69 1 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

Wow I was not expecting so many responses so fast … I do have to ask this … what if the person who was on death row … was actual innocent … what if the actual person who did the crime was never caught … and the person we put to death was just in the wrong place at the wrong time … (it could happen) ….

2006-08-26 15:10:03 · update #1

30 answers

Definitely not cruel or unusual. In fact, if I were ever to choose a method of death, this would probably be it.

...which brings up the debate of whether the possibility of a lethal injection is a crime deterrent.

2006-08-26 15:13:46 · answer #1 · answered by thenextvinnie 2 · 1 0

I think "cruel and unusual" is a standard that can't include the death penalty at all. The phrase should be eliminated.

Is lethal injection "cruel"? Now lets see - we're killing the guy for crying out load - of course it's "cruel"!!

Is lethal injection "unusual"? I don't really know - what's the "usual" way to kill a person?

Let's face it, there are dirt bags in the penal system who don't deserve to breathe the same air as decent folk. Putting them to death seems like a viable option to me.

I don't even give a damn if the death penalty is a deterrent or not - when it's carried out, the scum bag won't get a second chance to destroy some else's life, and that's a fact!

2006-08-26 22:14:21 · answer #2 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 1 0

No. It is, in fact, unduly uncruel and usual.
I think the whole point of execution is that it be BOTH cruel and unusual. Cruel because it is retribution as well as a permanent cure for the disease that masquerades as a human, and unusual in that we do not want it to be overused, now do we?
I am fully in favor of the death penalty for certain crimes, provided there is no doubt of guilt. In cases where there is doubt, then imprisonment should be an option. But prison should be the fall-back position on capital crimes, not the preferred punishment.

2006-08-26 21:59:44 · answer #3 · answered by Grendle 6 · 4 0

If they knew they were 100% guilty they should be put through the same torcher as their victim did in pain wise, like torchering machine devise that uses laser or shocking devises or something like that, if they kill more then one just add more torcher to them and stretch it over time to where they be begging to put to death. I guess I getting too unrealistic here cause in a lot of these crime they really don’t know their 100% guilty or if they knew this would happen to them they wouldn’t talk or kill them self maybe if they invent a mind reader machine were you could see every little detail they done to their victim this could be practical. I guess until then this is the best way.

2006-08-26 23:06:26 · answer #4 · answered by Tony 2 · 0 0

No it isn't. It's really quite humane given what generally happened to their victims.

(Liberal Democrat here) - Here's the juice on the death penalty. If we would shoot a person to stop them from committing a rape, a murder, child molestation, etc. and not think twice about it...why then is the death penalty wrong. It's seems wholly appropriate in my opinion. And really, isn't that far more humane than locking a person up for the rest of their lives in a cement cell.

We really need to be more Atticus Finch about this subject and not hesitate to put down the rabid dogs or humans in our midst.

2006-08-26 22:01:48 · answer #5 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 3 0

OK,this is one of the trivialized questions today.
Originally I wouldn't say be against it because for me the best punishment is to lock a person for life without parole like a rat cornered and it's pretty f***ed up they way they have to survive in jail (like in OZ) but since I've never been a victim of a crime or lost someone by a criminal... I won't touch too much this subject.

2006-08-26 22:36:29 · answer #6 · answered by marian m 3 · 0 0

No, it's NOT. What's cruel is what a murderer does to the victim. Then there's the rest of the family that suffers. I believe in the death penalty. My sister, and her husband were murdered. That call from the coroner was something I will NEVER forget. I have no feelings for a killer. ~

2006-08-26 22:00:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

A long drop and a short rope would be a better example for all the people to see. To solve the problem we should go to involuntary organ donation. Put the person to sleep just like they do for surgery, then remove all of their use full organs. They will pay for their crime by saving other lives.

2006-08-26 22:03:20 · answer #8 · answered by Jack S. Buy more ammo! 4 · 5 0

I would not sign to end the death penalty. There are people who do not belong on this earth. People like the guy back in the seventies who cut off a young lady's arms and left her to bleed to death and die. She didn't die and he got caught. People like this don't need to be here with the rest of humanity.

2006-08-26 22:00:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Guess we should go back to the gallows.. How anyone can consider this cruel and unusual only indicates a lack of knowledge of what is actually taking place. They are actually put to sleep with the first injection.

2006-08-26 22:04:41 · answer #10 · answered by mrcricket1932 6 · 4 0

fedest.com, questions and answers