Should it be removed from criminal codes?
2006-10-29 21:41:51 · 11 answers · asked by - 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No, what the people that got served with the death penalty did is against human rights!
However, I do think our justice system needs an overhaul when it comes to the death penalty. The death penalty should ONLY be served if it's beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person actually committed the crime. One of my sister's best friends served nearly twenty years on death row before DNA evidence exonerated him. THAT is wrong!
Also, I think that each criminal convicted of such a crime (like murder, for example) should have three chances to appeal. After the third time, that's it. No more chances. They should then be executed within a week. It is MORE expensive to care for a convicted criminal for twenty years than it is to just execute them.
Perhaps they should have considered that before they decided to kill someone. Our penalties HAVE to be tough, because in truth, our prisons really aren't.
They should be fed just enough to keep them alive. Feed them bread and water. No TV, unless it's the Disney Channel. Give them plenty of books, sure, but that's it. No three meals a day, and certainly not better food than what our military gets, or what's served in hospitals and on airlines. They don't deserve that.
And they should have to WORK. I mean hard, manual labor.
ESPECIALLY for the violent criminals.
Maybe then people will think twice before they commit a crime.
2006-10-29 22:08:50 · answer #1 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have a few opinions on the death penalty. I'll open by saying only two democracies in the world still practice the death penalty. I don't think the death penalty is against human rights, but I do believe it should be removed from criminal codes. Sound crazy? Well I believe in the idea of the death penalty. I think that if someone commits a murder or rape that they should be executed. This is the fair and appropriate punishment, as it fits the crime. However the way that it is implemented allows too many innocent people to be jeapordized. Since the 70's 123 people on death row have been freed due to evidence of their innocence, the most recent being february of this year. Our current system just plain doesn't work. With DNA testing these days I think we may be entering an age where the death penalty is viable, but I only think it should be used in cases where there is biological evidence that proves the murderer is guilty. I don't believe cases that rely on eye witness testimony should be eligible for the death sentence. At the end of the day I'd rather see a murderer go free than an innocent person killed.
2006-10-30 06:06:00 · answer #2 · answered by captaincoolbeard 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do not think it is against human rights, it should not be removed. However, I do think that process of administering it needs to be revamped. In cases of willful malicious murder, the family of the victim should be asked if the death penalty should be imposed. An eye for an eye.
If the familiy says no, then the court should give a sentence, which could still be the death penalty or otherwise. Oh and the decision of the family should not be made public.
2006-10-30 05:47:09 · answer #3 · answered by Wiseguy 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Did you know that prisoners have access to all sorts of things that many regular people aren't so lucky to have, such as say a college education. So basically, that murderer/rapist/child molester is in jail getting his/her college degree while you pay for it. I think that is against human rights!!! Let that marinate for a bit and consider this:
Why should any man/woman that (1) takes the life of another, (2) hurts a child in any way (sexually, physically, etc), or (3) rapes someone have any rights whatsoever? As far as I am concerned, they waive that right the minute they commit that crime. People are getting too politically correct ot the point of ignorance. Why let a murderer/rapist/child molester sit in jail and get fed, clothed, and educated off of my money when they can just be eliminated from society? Maybe we should change the term from capital punishment and/or the death penalty to permanent elimination.
2006-10-30 06:01:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
GREAT QUESTION:
The death penalty is the ultimate PUNISHMENT for those who commit the ultimate crimes. Murder, (rape should be included) and treason.
It is the punishment for those who violate the human rights of others. When you commit a certain level of crime you loose your rights to humanity.
With the logic of your question. Any incarceration, any punishment would be a violation of human rights. So why bother even having a criminal code.
2006-10-30 05:45:23 · answer #5 · answered by Eldude 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think that the death penalty should be re introduced in every country in the world so that those who commit the most haenous of crimes can be punished the same as their victims
for instance here in australia a white girl was gang raped by a bunch of males of middle eastern appearance but the ring leader was sentenced to jail he is now a burden on the taxpayer for the rest of his sentence whereas a bullet costs around $1.00 and i would pull the trigger for nothing
2006-10-30 05:53:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If someone murders another person then they have waved their rights to humanity and are little more than animals. Why should they be given human rights when they have denied that same right to another - permanently. Criminals are better protected in our society than victims of crime.
2006-10-30 05:52:19 · answer #7 · answered by uselessadvice 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No i don't think so, people have the right to live yes, but what about the innocent people who were murdered by these psychos and lost their right to live. Eye for an eye I say.
2006-10-30 05:50:07 · answer #8 · answered by Abs 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rape, sexual crimes against children, violent crime that results in killing of innocent life, THAT is a violation of human rights. And it is a violation of my rights to pay MY money to keep them alive everyday clothing, feeding, sheltering them, when they have no purpose on a planet of "mostly" civilized people.
2006-10-30 05:46:21 · answer #9 · answered by Scratch-N-Sniff 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No,to me when someone is convicted of murder they have no more rights. They forfeited them when they chose to take a life.
2006-10-30 05:52:03 · answer #10 · answered by whitebeanner 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋