Is the death penalty ever a legitimate punishment? Or is killing always wrong?

Answer 1

The Death Penalty is a harsh sentence, the harshest that society can give, but I SUPPORT THE DEATH PENALTY.

If a person killed 15 people then how can his one death pay back that crime? Why don’t we kill him 15 times! You can medically induce a heart attack and then bring them back with a defibrillator. Of course this would be cruel and unusual punishment and it would be illegal according to the 5th amendment. The Death Penalty has been challenged several times in the Supreme Court on the grounds of it being cruel and unusual punishment, it has been upheld each time.

I have mixed feelings about the Death Penalty. People claim that it isn’t a determent to crime; people still murder each other. I also think that that it is used too often, my state is famous for it.

However, the Death Penalty does have some advantages. It is the ultimate determent for the murder. John Wayne Gacy, a serial killer, will never kill anyone again. Even if he was given a life term for each person that we know he killed, he would still be a threat to his guards and other prisoners. What’s to stop him from committing murder in prison? Are you going to give him another life term? That wouldn’t be a determent. And if he should escape then he will go back to murdering people again. However, if the Death Penalty was a possibility then he might think twice about committing another murder. We can’t ask him if this is so, because he is dead, and I think that is a good thing.

Charles Manson is as crazy as ever. He built a “family” and inspired them to go on a killing spree. Charles Manson wants to do nothing more than to incite hate and violence. To that end he has had a tattoo or brand of the Nazi symbol placed on his forehead. If he escapes from prison there is no doubt what he will do. He will start another “family” and send it too off on a killing spree. Manson has even said he will do this. If he were dead, killed by the Death Penalty, then that wouldn’t be a threat. As it is we have to keep him locked up for the rest of his natural life. He is a threat to his guards, other prisoners, and a continuing threat to society itself. We can’t kill him though because he didn’t go on the killing spree himself, he only inspired it. Meanwhile I have to spend my tax money to help support him for the rest of his natural life.

The Death Penalty has its advantages. It is something to hold over prisoners. If they murder another prisoner then they could have to face it. It also prevents us from supporting a prisoner for the rest of his life. That’s a cruel fact, but true. It will also prevent a murderer from ever killing again.

When the Death Penalty is applied it should be done so only as a last resort and under special circumstances.
-- First a higher standard of guilt should be met. The jury must be sure, beyond a SHADOW of doubt that the accused is actually guilty. A murderer can be convicted if beyond a REASONABLE doubt the jury considers him guilty. A higher standard should be held for the application of the death penalty. Just how stringent that standard should be is up to the Judge’s instructions, and the jury. Also our legal system is based on the idea that we would rather not convict 100 people, if that means convicting 1 innocent person.
-- Second the person should be considered a continuing threat to society. A man who finds out his wife is cheating on him and then kills her, may not be a continuing threat to society (unless he gets married again). He may be unstable and should be sentenced to a long prison term, but I don’t think he should be subject to the Death Penalty. The ultimate penalty should only be applied only to people who are likely to murder again; preferable only to people who have committed multiple murders and proved that they will kill again, if given the chance.
In some states there is another condition that can cause the Death Penalty to apply. In New York it is called Special Circumstances. If the crime was especially heinous and awful then New York considers it a crime worthy of the death penalty. The decision to try and apply this penalty is up to the District Attorney’s Office, but the jury should be the ultimate panel to decide if the Death Penalty should be applied or not.

I also think that a death penalty should raise an automatic appeal. This is done in most states, but the appeals process is limited. A case can only be turned over if there was an error committed in the trial. If some rule was broken, or if a procedure was violated. The person cannot be re-tried and new evidence cannot be introduced. I think that the judges should be given more liberal standards. They should be able to weigh new evidence or examine anything that sheds a new light on the case. The case should also be reinvestigated. This doesn’t mean that old evidence has to be recollected, but it should be gone over and checked to make sure it was collected and handled properly. This review should be done by a state official independent of the first investigation.

I don’t like the Death Penalty, and I think that it should only be applied in rare circumstances. However, there are some murderers that warrant this kind of punishment. These people need to have that penalty available to protect society.

Answer 2

I personally think death is such an easy way out; of couse these death row inmates pretty much have no control over the fact that their lives are ending, but once they're dead, they no longer have to suffer. I support castration as punishment instead... Somehow that seems more 'evil' than the death penalty--but why should their victims and the families of those victims have to suffer and be traumatized for life while the criminal just...dies, and rather peacefully at that (as opposed to being brutally killed or something)? Plus if they're castrated, those people (serial rapists, killers, etc) have now lost one of their 'power tools' and then they'll REALLY be punished.

(No? Too much? Aye...)

Answer 3

The death penalty is never a legitimate punishment because it is legalized murder by the state.

Answer 4

From a religious perspective (mine and mine alone): We're supposed to follow the laws of the land. In the U.S., the stance is that the death penalty is legal, therefore legitimate.

In my opinion as a human being, it's always wrong.

Answer 5

When warranted, I believe the death penalty should be enforced. An eye for an eye is said in the bible, but I disagree with keeping people who are sentenced to death on death row for years and years wasting the taxpayers money.

Answer 6

no offense but this cant seriously be a yes or no question.

I'm ah put it like this why do they have you place your hand on a bible and swear to tell the truth blah blah blah and then on the inside it reads though shall not kill? but were gonna kill them if theyre guilty,

what if they didnt really do it?

death row pardon two minutes to late!

are we in a sense playing god?

i wont lie i would want revenge on the person/persons responsible for killing mine, i just dint know if that man dying would ease my pain like i hope it would, maybe if the death were at my hands ( sounds sick )

no one can honestly answer this question with a yes or no, how many people have ou watched die and then its the wrong person? there have been people let out of jail that were waiting death row- you know what they say you never see a rich man on death row......

but I'm not saying I'm against it- I'm jus saying

Answer 7

No its always wrong...God is the giver of life so its His decision. It disgusts me when in Raleigh, my state capital, when they kill someone they actually say we are doing this of and by the power of the people of NC" I find that thoroughly disgusting...im definitely against the death penalty...sounds like what Pontious Pilate did doesnt it?? we cant say its wrong to kill and then do the very same thing!! what are we teaching our kids??

Answer 8

If someone brutally (not accidentally of course) murdered a member of my family then I'd like to watch them suffer and die - I'd even be the executioner if possible.
. The funny thing about this topic is you nearly always get some bible basher who says "an eye for an eye"
but they always forget the bit about "turning the other cheek"
Lets see what responses you get

Answer 9

Those who have killed are destined to be killed by the word of god but by his grace can they be made free. To look upon a man being killed who has not repented is a great sorrow for his punishment grows must worse but a man being killed who is saved, a blessing for heaven awaits him, it was his time. So look not upon one being punished with joy least your child be the one whom is being punished, not so cold hearted any more are you?

Answer 10

If you respect life, it is not. I realize some of the people who have been put to death were horrible killers, but the people who chose to have him/her put to death, put themselves on the same level as the killer. I've never understood the people who are pro-life and yet pro-death penalty as well. It just doesn't make sense to me. If that's your opinion, that's fine, but it is illogical to me.