how do you feel about death penalty. for or against it?

Question

for people that are for it?

what about the millions of dollars it costs to keep them alive. that money could go to schools.

Answer 1

That's really hard to say it goes straight back to the theory two wrongs don't make a right. Honestly though without having video evidence or a confession of the actual crime unless you are God how is anyone to know if the criminal is actually a criminal. How would anyone have the exact knowledge that the person their giving the death penalty to was the actual one that did the crime I honestly am against the death penalty I still am a strong believer that the only person in the whole world that should have the power to take away life or give life is God. That is one of the biggest controversy subjects in the world people have Ben fighting to the bone on that subject and I don't think that will ever change.

Answer 2

I'm against it simply because...well it's killing somebody. Simple as that for me.

In the manner it's being applied nowadays, it doesn't seem to be much a help anyway. Death Penalty, along with case and stuff on average is much more expensive than 25 to life cases...so yeah that's definitely an economic burden. As a deterrence, I believe for a moment the death penalty wasn't allowed (unless I dreamt that), but I've read that in comparison there is absolutely no significant effect on crime rate. Plus, if you want to use the death penalty and still have it under due process of law and individual rights etc. it's expensive yes, but it kinda nullifies what a punishment is supposed to be... swift, certain, and severe. We only got severe. I also don't like the whole "oh yeah just give me a shotgun and we'll see how well it works" idea. Yeah, I've heard that response before...I really dislike that vigilante viewpoint.

Ummm...yeah that's just what I think.

Answer 3

against, circumstances apply:
It is irreversible, so once it is done, well it is done. It has been proven that there have been people on Death Row waiting to be executed and later found to be innocent and released. Not many, but I think 1 is too many.
If the killer admits to the crime, and can prove that they commited the crime, and a jury agrees with them, and it was a pre-meditated Murder, then yes.
If a killer is found guilty buy a jury of thier peers, and the evidence points to the killers commition of the crime, there is still room for error there, so Life in Prison. If the killer wants to be executed, off em.
But that one innocent that dies for a crime never commited is too much of an argument agaisnt the Takeing of an Innocents Life.
I know, they all say there innocent, well thats fine, let em talk amongst themselves. And if the DNA or some other evidence is found that will exonorate them, let it be known and let the Innocent Free. It wont be alot, but it is better than the irreversable.

Answer 4

I don't mean to waste your time, as I have no "answer" for you as to whether it is right or wrong, only my own presently shakey current opinion on the subject. Here it is if you should feel like reading it. I appreciate a place to say it, as there really is nowhere else I can attempt to express such a whshy-washy opinion as I currently have on something I feel so strongly about.

This is a hard one for me. Up until a couple of years ago, I would have answered in a heartbeat, that I was totally against it, that although it is terrible for a person to kill another, by killing the murderer will not bring back the one(s) he/she killed. And if safety for the rest of the population should the killer ever get out of prison is a factor, then giving him/her several consecutive life sentences under maximum security until he/she dies a natural death should prevent anyone else from being harmed by that person. But, under no circumstnaces, can I personally find it "O.K." for government to even contemplate murdering it's own citizens. They simply do not have the inherrent right to decide who lives, who dies. (Unortunately, they do it anyway, on a daily basis in a number of ways, with or without my opinion on the subject). Also, just to clarity one point, these are purely my own thoughts and feelings, they do not come from a religious standpoint, as I am not a particularly religious person.

Fairly recently, however, with no particular incident triggering it, I began to see the whole thing a little differently. I started to change my mind on whether or not I believed it should be an option, when I realized that if a person has been tried, convicted and sentenced to several consecutive life sentences life in prison with no chance of ever being paroled (for example), then that person's life is at that time, for all intents and purposes, over with. So, I started to think that the convict if placed in a situation similar to what I just described, should be allowed the alternative of choosing to be put to death at that time, if they felt that it would make the ending of their life less bleak.

I now am really leaning toward making the death penalty an option. But an option that only the condemned could excercise. If the general public and the loved ones of the victim could look at it in a human & rational, rather than a hateful & irrational manner, because matters of life and death, especially in such a 'formatted' situation can be very abstract (IMO). So much agonizing over morality, expense, accuracy (as in: is the right person being convicted), etc... for the rest of the living.

BTW, the fact that the arguement of which is more expensive for taxpayers is still going on totally amazes me, since I don't know of any taxpayer who knows exactly where his/her tax dollars are going anyway, and death penalty or not, the amount of money one payes in taxes would not change based on that.

As for the safety of society from being harmed by the killer, it wouldn't make any difference one way or the other. And finally, the decision would be taken out of the hands of government and placed with the one who has already been condemned, the Only one who might have the right to make that decision.

Actually, my thoughts on the subject go much further than that, and are more complex. (For example, I do believe in the concept of "an eye for an eye"). So, as you can see, this was far from a thorough answer. However, I don't see it fit to continue further here, on this page.

I'm aware that many will not agree with my views, but thanks anyway for letting me share it.

Answer 5

As we currently apply it, I'm against it.

You don't housebreak a puppy by punishing it hours after it pees on the floor. It doesn't connect the puddle with itself, and doesn't understand the connection to the spanking.

You don't discipline children with "wait until daddy gets home". They just learn that enforcement can be avoided if they can fool you.

Discipline is a matter of swiftness and certainty, not necessarily severity.

There's simply no deterrence in a justice system that delays execution of sentences as long as we do.

I'd be in favor of it if it were carried out within a month of the sentence being handed down, but if the endless appeals are what we're going to do, we're punishing society, not the criminal.

Answer 6

I used to be for death penalty, but now I am against it. It's just not worth all the controversy. I am in favor of shipping life time offenders to prisons in 3rd world country that will house them for a fractional cost.

Answer 7

They only thing I like about the death penalty in contemporary society is that it does not pretend to rehabilitate. A penalty is a penalty. Plain and simple.

Answer 8

I do not agree with the death penalty. People should be held accountable for whatever they've done, but ending a life should be up to God. Only HE can judge what is in a persons heart. And there have been many many convicts that are and have been on death row who have given their hearts' to Christ and have changed their lives' around.

Answer 9

It actually costs more to carry out a death sentence because of all the necessary appeals that must be gone through just because a handful of prosecutors and police can't play by the rules. LWOP seems like a fair compromise to me.

Answer 10

I support the death penalty. The severity of the punishment should match the severity of the crime.