Do you believe capital punishment is just ?

Question

If you do/don't try to back it up with some reasoning.

My stance on the issue is that capital punishment is wrong for the following:
The court system is imperfect, many innocent people have been, are and will be tried and excuted for crimes they havent commited.
Capital punishment attempts to reward murder for muder(an eye for an eye) which has just shown our naiveness, because the justice system is meant to prevent and rehabilitate criminals. furthermore it does sentencing a real murderer for life instead of the electric chair is more reasonable because it allows them to contemplate their crimes for their entire life in a small cell which they are confined to 23 hours a day.
My last reason for not agreeing with it because of the cost it takes to execute these so called criminals. the cost itself it overwhelming more then what it would cost to simply let the person live out his sentence in his jail.


Please state your position and try to back it up.

themrpine- Housing the "worthless" is tons less costly then executing them. Why would you rather waste money killing them when it can go towards social programs to help real comunities.

C J - Your argument fails to reason for the same reason as my earlier statement concluded. The cost of keeping these criminals at bay, locked up for life is greatly less then executing them which with all the appeals and processes included run up to be at least 2.5 mil a case. Now who's wasting the taxpayers money ?

Sharon/Gaspode/RC/Rnc2win-

Firstly let me begin by breaking some of the arguements you presented :

"C.P(Capital Punishment) is just because the criminal deserves the same treatment that was given to the victim."

This is one of the more chimerical arguements and niether is it logical or ethical. the whole central basis for it being an eye for an eye. seems like you want to serve vengence rather then justice? and it doesnt or can't apply to all cases seeing how the death penalty is given for cases of treason where there is no solid victim.
Furthermore this doesnt take into account the numorous incidents that the convicted was innocent, so this whole arguement is quite fallible.

"C.P is just because it prevents crime"

Texas has been using the death penalty for decades now and there has been no decrease in crimes commited and to counter that there has only been an increase in states where C.P is being applied as a means to punish criminals.

CJ- You added I couldnt back up my statement, I apoligize for not using sources earlier but here they are:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7#financial%20facts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_penalty
http://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/summer06/capitalpunish
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-murderersalive.htm

If you scroll down to each of them where it says cost/finances you will find that I am right to in saying it cost more.

Answer 1

I think you may be confusing the just with the practical.

Personally, I believe capital punishment is just. I believe our justice system should consider retribution and compensation along with prevention and rehabilitation. Some crimes can never be repaid, and the only fitting retribution is death...in my opinion. I can respect those who see otherwise.

BUT, though I see the justice in capital punishment, I also believe that it is impractical as currently practiced. As you mentioned, our courts are not perfect. As just as it may be to put a heinous murderer to death, it is infinitely more unjust to kill an innocent man. Even putting the guilty to death is costly, and in many cases the death penalty may not serve as a deterrent.

So I would say that the death penalty, when properly applied, is just. However, as commonly applied, it is impractical, which is why I don't support it as public policy.

Answer 2

I don't believe capital punishment is "just." However, I think it would be crueler to confine somebody in a small cell for the rest of their life. This is a difficult question. I abhor the use of the electric chair and any other means of execution, but lethal injection seems pretty humane for some twisted person that caused untold suffering to the victim and the victim's loved ones.

Capital punishment is of course unconscionable if that person is innocent of the crime, and I read that this has happened way too many times in the past. I also believe that our justice system has evolved and that with, for example, DNA evidence, innocent people have been exonerated, not executed.

So, if I have to choose between the two, I would choose capital punishment, and that if there is no doubt about the guilt of that person (caught on videotape, lots of eye-witnesses, DNA evidence, etc.) that they be dispatched quickly, not after 10 years of appeals. But only because I think it's even more cruel and unusual punishment to lock up a human being like a caged animal for the rest of their lives. Maybe they should be given a choice between life imprisonment and a speedy death? I just don't have a lot of sympathy for murderers.

Which brings me to a case like Scott Peterson. He should not be executed because the evidence is circumstantial. But I believe he killed his wife and her unborn child, and so did a jury. He should get life imprisonment for the reasons I've stated above.

Answer 3

I am sure their are innocent people in prison because they didn't have enough money to hire a good lawyer ,they were infalsely accused and sentenced,my heart goes out to them but ....If the justice systems were ran the way they are suppose to be then we would not have over crowded prisons, we wouldn't spend OUR tax dollars to feed ,clothe ,and educate the prisoners ....THESE ARE OUR TAX DOLLARS ..they get 3 square meals a day and they can complain and sue the state for so called inhumane conditions?? What about the victims?? The teenage that will not grow up ?? The mother or father killed because they were innocent by standers or a robbery gone wrong?? They leave behind family members to mourn and never forget ...Their is so much corruption in the court systems that drug dealers get more time then the killers and a killer can get 10 years ???? a LIFE IS WORTH 10 YEARS???If they get the death sentence Hell don't keep them 5 years or longer I say take care of it ...don't prolong it!

Answer 4

I believe it is just.
I personally don't care much for criminals nor for what they've done.
I would think that most people found guilty of murder and sentenced to death have committed many other crimes before their last crime. For this, I have no sympathy if they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time this time.

Live a clean and correct life and you're chances of being wrongfully charged decreases.

With (DNA) technology and improvements in murder investigations, the few wrongfully charged should be decreasing out of the rightfully charged. Those that are obviously guilty should not have more than two years to be able to appeal the judgement. The reason the cost is so much to execute is so high is b/c of the length of time we keep sentenced criminals alive to keep appealing their case. I believe I'm being too liberal in the two years clause.
There are too many repeat offenders. We aren't being tough enough on criminals.
Several stats I think are unbelievable...
Since 1977, there have been over 24 million babies killed in abortions. In that same amount of time, we've had ~1,100 criminals put to death in the US.
There has been ~2,800 soldiers killed in Iraq since March 2003.
There were ~2,800 American citizens murdered in just eleven of the most violent cities in the US in just 2004.
Should we 'cut and run' from those eleven American cities?
~1,100 death sentences in 30 years... >2,800 murders in just one year?!!?

Answer 5

Seems like a no-brainer (aka a cheney) doesn't it? Of course it's justified.

But the older I get the less I can support it.

There is of course the fact that many have been executed and found later to be innocent. The system too often goes for a quick and easy conviction, particularly around election time.

Then there is the fact that many impressionable people tend to see some sort of romantic heroism in executed criminals.

There is always the question of just how civilized can we be if we kill people?

I think that we need more, life sentences with no parole, and a Constitutional resolution as to what does and does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.

Some people, those who truly are remorseful, ask for capital punishment, and I think we should grant their wishes.

Answer 6

Capital Punishment speeds the Perp's Karmic evolution along a bit...BUT as a former Death Sentence PROPONENT I have come around to the informed opinion that death is too good for some individuals. And yes there could be some things for some people worse than death...i.e,a life time of isolation or hard labor, i.e. Chain Gangs, no TV or Rec time and/or conjugal visits or In-House Weddings via CCTV or communication.

Unless you are the Dali Lama those arrangements in a windowless "Cell" incommunicado might be a tad uncomfortable ... for this "lifetime" that is.

Answer 7

capital punishment is not wrong:
1)eye for an eye sounds reasonable
2)there are unbalanced individuals that canot be rehabilitated and can potentialy escape if allowed to think out their escape
3)now days ensures that the right person is tried
4)as to the cost it would decrease if the right person is tried, no means of apeal on any grounds
5)to the contrary allowing someone to live for life in a jail will only isolate them and over time adapt them to their envoronment as to not being punishment rather a way of life. There is one reason why we are the most sucesfull species on the world and that is adaptation, we are the vertebrate version of a cocaroach.

Answer 8

Yes, and it certainly prevents crime from the jailbird that
is executed. Seems everyone wants to live their lives in
jail or prisons as they are all bulging at the seams. Some
jails/prisons have had to let guilty felons out because they
have no more room for newer felons, murderers, drug
pushers, rapists, cop killers, etc. It takes millions to build
new buildings to hold them all as they have to have re-inforced
walls, windows, gates, etc. Not that many mistakes are made
by judges and juries, so I'd say when the prison gets full, then
for every new inmate, the inmate that's been there the longest
is executed.

Answer 9

Oh bull

When there is DNA testing and evidence to back it up it is the BEST solution to get rid of some people who are hopeless.
They are lucky they are now put down humanly like the dogs they are--no wait, they are worse than dogs, worse than any animal ever.

People were executed for the DUMBEST reasons not long ago with the most horrible torturous executions possible,
now we put down the absolute WORST among us in the utmost of comfort and caring.--let them choose lobster tail for a last meal....

In my town in FL. Danny Rolling was just executed-
he was on death row for ten years!
DNA evidence backed it up and he confessed--
He stabbed with a knife an eight year old boy,
his teenager aunt, and her father,
then he killed five college students, stabbing them to death and raping a few of them.
He decapitated one and he posed ALL of the bodies-- it was his trademark of his SICK mind.

If it were up to ME , buddy,
I'd have at least a hundred LASHINGS at the whipping post for those kind of evil beasts,
then to the gallows with them.
Hanging and swift justice is the best.
The whipping post and the gallows are GREAT deterrents in society.

You should feel good that we are no longer disemboweling them after near death hanging. Because THAT's EXACTLY what they DESERVE!

Answer 10

Yes. It is just. I think that the doctrine of self defense is valid. I think that people shouldn't have to defend themselves against certain convicted criminals and I don't believe that taxpayer money should go to support them into their old age.

Added: I don't think you can back that statement up with verifiable statistics. (Where you said it costs more to execute than to support prisoners for years.) And guess what!! Those supporting my side has already won the argument for a very long time now.

If your willing to defend yourself against harm where you would kill someone in your own defense, in the end, you are for the death penalty.