What do people think of the death penalty. In some countries they still have the death penalty...........?

Question

And in other countries some groups advocate reintroducing the death penalty. In the world there have been some very bad murders - serial murderers and yet we laet these people live in prison with sentences _ never to be released - which means never to be released. So why not save money and execute? I dont believe in the death penalty but I am curious of other people's oppinions.

Answer 1

I'm an American now living in the UK. I'm in complete agreement with the death penalty in murder and rape cases. I feel that if you take a life, your life is forfeited. Rape takes a life in a different way. Chances are a woman that's raped won't ever be normal again.

Answer 2

I don't really have a firm opinion about the death penalty. I have heard from a few people that executing does not save money though. I mean, usually the people sentenced to death and go to death row (in the U.S.) also go through many, many appeals, which takes up time and money. Plus people that adminster the drugs, and the drug itself probably does not come free. I think it's interesting because I always thought it would be cheaper as well, until someone told me otherwise. Who knows if it's true.
Here are some sites, but I think they are pretty biased... I haven't really checked them for validity but it's just something to think about.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7
http://www.worldpolicy.org/globalrights/dp/dp-cost.html
http://www.mvfr.org/DeathPenaltyFacts.htm

Another view... some might view death penalty as a godsend. Rapests, child molesters, and pedophiles are like the lowest on the food change, and I've seen shows where they have to be put in separate areas because other prisoners harass them (not to say the tv never lies or overexagerates... i've never really been to prison). In cnn there was a news article about a prisoner who had molested and killed a child or something, so while in prison, he was tatooed with the girl's name on his forehead against his will. Some may want death, than life w/out chance of parole and live in fear till they die. So is that fair if a convicted felon went "woo hoo" when the sentence was given? I don't know if victim's relatives would be so comforted w/ that reaction. Though I dont' think I've heard of anyone doing that.

Answer 3

I am always quoting Saudi Arabia as a good example of why the Death Penalty doesn't work. Take a look at their yearly figures. It makes for pretty gruesome reading.
The main problem with the death penalty, aside from (in my point of view at least) the fact that it is inherently wrong, is how it is applied.
Here where I live 3 people out of I don't know how many murderers this year have just had their appeals against the death sentence denied.
What makes them different in their sentencing? They had the temerity not to kill one of their own countrymen living here but a local!
Justice is never fair, no matter how hard you try to make it otherwise.

Answer 4

You are right , Buddhists are supposed to be followers of non violence and there should not be any death penalty in these countries. From the religion point of view , the same is alright , as a life imprisonment is more punitive for a criminal . But let us think in the way the administrators and politicians think , who takes these decisions . These people are afraid of tomorrow , as they may not be in power . Naturally they would like to execute their enemies , to clear their existence . This is what is happening in China and all Buddhist Communist countries. In Japan , where the people are so self esteemed that they will commit Harakiri instead. Religion is a tool used by politicians to subdue the masses and this can never come in their way to obtain and maintain absolute power.

Answer 5

The death penalty will never be introduced and this stance should stay that way. People have told me you can still be executed for treason... this is not the case.

The main reason is no mater what people do, there will always be some corrupt individuals who will not adhere to the procedures of a fair hearing/trial. This will inevitably cause a miscarriage of justice.

It is a total myth that the death penalty reduces crime. What I would say is if a person is determined to kill they will. If they face the death penalty, one may think, kill as many people as the punishment is the same.

I quote the Indian congressman Ghandi “An eye for an eye, soon the whole world is blind”.

Answer 6

The death penalty's always been a sticky issue, but I'm against it for the following reasons: 1- innocent people are killed, pure and simple, that makes you as bad as the guy you're killing. Unless he ate their brains or something... then you're not QUITE as bad. 2- It costs the taxpayer more than to keep them in prison for life. People don't believe it, but it's true, because the appeals process can go on FOREVER, costing money all the way. Also, it means that you're more likely to die of old age than be executed if you're on Death Row. 3- It hasn't been shown to be a deterrant in places where it's been introduced, and the serious crime rate hasn't gone up in places when it's been removed. 4- Our justice system isn't based on revenge-type punishment, its aim is to rehabilitate those who offend, and it's hard to rehabilitate a corpse. 5- I simply think killing is wrong. They don't have the right to take life, but neither do we.

Thanks for bringing this up, it's a very interesting debate :)

Answer 7

When the death penalty was in force you still got murders but they where big news and not that often.
Now it seems to be a daily thing, the death penalty was a major deterant.
I say bring it back now.

Answer 8

In the U.K. we have abolished the death penalty after, belatedly, acknowledging several miscarriages of justice, in which the people accused of the crime were found "guilty, beyond any reasonable doubt". Those people were executed, at the will of the state and the people, and were, in fact, innocent. It cannot be right to take a life, in the name of justice, of one body who is , in the eventual outcome, innocent. Keep those people who are found guilty, at whatever cost, locked up for ever if need be, but don't put me, or yourself, in the position of saying to the surviving relatives of a person who is found to be innoccent after the event of his/her execution, as has happened often enough in the past, of trying to say "I'm sorry, we got it wrong".

Answer 9

Death penalty might appear as a fair punishment.
You kill you get killed. But who exactly says you killed?

It's pretty hard to open the coffin and say: Oops Mr. X.
We killed you by accident. You're free to go. It was
someone else. And there're more than enough cases
with prisoners on the death row that get released because
of mistakes. Sometimes because the evidence appeared
to be clear and new methods like DNA testing reveal that
it just can't be.

Answer 10

because it's the idiotic minority groups who keep saying.... 'they have the right to life' that killing a person is not the answer. i say crap to that!! what better deterrent for a person to commit a crime than to give the death penalty? if we are to introduce the death penalty again, the entire judicial system needs to be evaluated and changed so that there is no mistaking that persons guilt. we have the technology to do that now, whereas we didn't years ago

Answer 11

the death penalty exisists in all countries including the UK - however, Treson is the only crime in the UK that carries the death penalty and that is death by hanging.

I believe it to be barbaric in the so called free and fair world that we supposedly live in, however I do agree that if you are given a life sentance it should be life and that if you ever leave without cuffs, you should be in a wooden box (you may think I'm harsh but just my point of view)

I think the punishment should be relevant to the crime, for example, Timothy McVay - murdered hundreds of adults and toddlers in a day care centre, in a busy city building and he was given the "leathal injection" - he should have been made to suffer for every child he took and every mum, dad, grand parent ect that he took and took a child from - but he was given a small scratch in the arm and he felt no pain after that - fair?!! - i think not. especially as all those children had parents and siblings who will never be able to replace them - and why did he do it? - he was drunk and believed that "a higher force/god" willed him to do it after he had heard it on a song!!!!

Where is the justice?