is it ever jusifiable to execute criminals?

Question

i mainly want points on, it is wrong to execute criminals. E.g. what right do you have to execute criminals?

Furthermore if you can give a valid argument with about 5 or more pros and cons i am willing to instantly give you a best answer.

Answer 1

Believe it or not, there do exist people who are a danger to society, who cannot be reformed, and are a threat to everyone that comes in contact with them for as long as they continue living. There are also people for whom a lifetime of imprisonment is much more cruel than simply killing them.

I have known people of both stripes. And you have undoubtedly heard of some of them too. Prisoners who beg not to be released because they know that they will commit crimes again and don't even want to. Suspects who commit 'death by cop' rather than be taken to jail.

I not only think it is not wrong to kill these people, I think it may be wrong NOT to kill them. Society benefits in the former case, and the individual wishes it in the second.

Of course, I'll be the first to grant that most of the people killed by the American justice system fail to fall into either category. That is not the fault of the death penalty as a punishment, but of the system that implements it.

Answer 2

Pro: A well-governed nation must make the safety of its citizens the top priority. Once an individual kills, then the safety of the other citizens must be paramount, and the offending individual loses the right to life within our nation.

Con: There is no reason to execute offenders when they can be kept separate from society.

Pro: A society should not drain its resources by locking up offenders who have no hope of rehabilitation.

Con: A society should be judged as it treats its lowest members, and murder is still murder, even if it is state-sanctioned.

Pro: It acts as a deterrent to people considering a crime.

Con: The vast majority of violent crimes are not committed by a person who is thinking it out ahead of time. They tend to be situational, not pre-planned. Therefore, the death penalty would not be a deterrent.

Pro: The families of the victim(s) will have their revenge on the offender.

Con: A cycle of violence cannot be stopped with more violence.

Answer 3

There are many reasons for and against the death penalty.

For:

1. Punishment fits the crime (Eye for an eye, life for a life)
2. Deterrence - Theoretically, severe penalties may save lives by deterring the acts that lead to the death penalty.
3. Retribution - Satisfy victims and families that justice has been done.
4. Protection of society - Dead psychopaths can't kill again.
5. Prevent overcrowding in prisons

Against:

1. Value for human life - If we value human life it is hypocritical to execute criminals.
2. Lesser punishment may serve as deterrent, just as well as death penalty.
3. Reform - Often there is a hope of reform, even for murderers.
4. Chance we are mistaken - If DNA or other evidence later shows that the criminal was innocent, absolution is pretty hollow after the accused is executed.

That's about all I can think of. My personal leaning is against the death penalty. In my opinion, the only just time to kill is in defence of self, friends, family or country. (Never as a means of revenge)

Answer 4

11 Arguments against the death penalty

1. Permitting premeditated murder is totally unacceptable, even if done by the state. Capital punishment lowers the value of human life as seen by the general population and brutalizes society. It reinforces the idea that killing someone is an acceptable way of solving problems.

2. It is based on a need for revenge not justice. Retribution and revenge have no place in the modern justice system.

3. Lack of Deterrence: The death penalty has not been shown to be effective in the reduction of the homicide rate. There are some indications that executions actually increase the murder rate. (sources 1 - 6)

4. Cost: The cost of all the appeals by a convicted murder, plus all the costs associated with an execution more that cover the cost of locking that person up for the rest of their life

5. Human life has intrinsic value, even if a person has murdered another individual. If you kill someone, you've taken away something sacred. That is never right, even if its done by the state.

6. The death penalty is unfair The mentally ill, poor, males, and ethnic minorities are over-represented among those executed. One pilot study of over 2 dozen convicted criminals on death row found that all had been so seriously abused during childhood that they probably all suffered from brain damage. Women convicted of murder are almost never executed; that is a penalty that is almost entirely reserved for men. A 1986 study in Georgia showed that persons who killed "whites were four times more likely to be sentenced to death than convicted killers of non-whites." (sources 7-9)

7. Chance of Error: Many convicted murderers are later found innocent, and have been pardoned. It is impossible to pardon a corpse. In 1987, a study was published by the Stanford Law Review. They found some evidence that suggested that at least 350 people between 1900 and 1985 in America might have been innocent of the crime for which they were convicted, and could have been sentenced to death. 139 "were sentenced to death and as many as 23 were executed." In the UK, groups such as the Guildford 4 were released after 16 years for crimes they were tortured into confessing to. In Illinois, a class of journalism students found that 13 out of 25 men on death row were factually innocent of the crimes for which they'd been sentenced.

8. Capital punishment is cruel and unusual punishment. If it is considered torture to hand someone by their arms so they suffer pain, what is it if you hang them by the neck to kill them?

9. The family of the prisoner is also punished by having their loved one killed by the state. Yet the family is usually innocent of any crime.

10. The existence of the death penalty means that some jury members are reluctant to convict in murder trials because of the possibility of executing an innocent person. Thus, many killers go free and are never punished.

11. The death penalty is useless: Killing a murderer does not bring his victim back to life. It achieves nothing but the death of still another person.

Answer 5

No,

My view is we are riding the middle of the road with capital punishment. We kill them, but we make it painless. NO! It is one or the other. Either we dispense justice using reasoning and logic, or we go back to the eye for an eye era and if you brutally kill someone you should be killed in the same brutal way or worst. And I have no problem with the eye for an eye if we want to kill people.

The idea that a man who rapes and kills dozens of little kids is put to sleep like a pet (mind you the kids had horrible deaths) makes me sick. I would rather have have him in jail for the rest of his life surrounded by the scum of the earth. So until we make the death penalty worth it, we should not peacefully put to sleep the murders of women and little children.

Answer 6

Yes. In many cases, execution is the ONLY just sentence.

When they commit a crime that has a permanent effect on someone elses life:

Pedophiles, muderers, rapists...

Answer 7

Hell yeah, I wish they would execute the a#@$@#* who murdered my cousin last October

Answer 8

ABSOLUTELY!