Are you against the death penalty? Why?

Question

I'm doing a research on this and would like to know reasons why there shouldn't be a death penalty. ex: moral issue, economical issue, etc.

Answer 1

I'm one of those "under no circumstances" types when it comes to the death penalty, so I have many arguments against it:

1) It's not a deterrent any moreso than life imprisonment is a deterrent. Some studies have shown that crime rates actually go UP as executions increase. In a way, that makes a lot of sense because by imposing the death penalty, society is essentially saying, "we give up; yes, killing someone IS a way to solve problems."

2) It's actually more expensive to execute someone than to imprison them for life. Remember that the appeals procedure and a humane method of execution--both guaranteed under the Constitution by way of the 5th and 8th amendments--are extensively litigated issues.

3) Studies show that you are infinitely more likely to be sentenced to death if you're some combination of a) a minority, b) poor, or c) male. Socioeconomic factors play a big role here, because indigent defendants can't afford fancy lawyers who would tend to yield the best results for their clients. By contrast, the defendants who wind up on death row most often have appointed lawyers who usually lack the time and resources to zealously defend their clients' case.

4) Also remember that it's not just the jury that has an influence on the outcome; prosecutors have extensive discretion when it comes to deciding whether or not to seek the death penalty in a case. So when a prosecutor, an elected official, sees a case that may be an otherwise weak case for the death penalty (or even for conviction), there's a huge incentive for him/her to seek the death penalty anyway, because they a) see the opposition as not putting up much of a fight in court, and b) need to send a message to the voters that they're "tough on crime."

5) I'm not one to normally point to international trends, but it's an undeniable fact that the death penalty is an institution that's frowned upon and outright banned by almost every industrialized nation in the world. Do we really want to be on the same footing as Iran or North Korea, both of which have the death penalty, in any capacity?

I think I've made my point here, and I hope this helps your research.

Answer 2

Unfortunately, I cannot help your research.

There is a moral issue supporting the death penalty, ie., 'an eye for an eye', etc. Biblical stuff, but purely common sense.

There is an economic issue supporting the death penalty, ie., it costs $40K per year per inmate to house a convicted murderer, and the minimum stay is 12 years to allow for appeals.

There is a common sense issue, in that if a person kills once, they are likely to do it again... is it fair to the next unsuspecting victim to allow the killer freedom?

Why should a convicted killer be let free AT ANY TIME?! Even if the death penalty was not applied, how can the authorities let convicted murderers go free?!

It's a very complicated issue, with religious, political and moral implications. But bottom line, the perpetrators must pay for their crimes... equal to the crimes they perpetrated on the victim.

Answer 3

i love death penalty questions.

quite frankly, i think that the death penalty's wrong. absolutely stupid idea for my mind.

first of all, the people that kill others are always put into jail. when we talk about the death sentence, we're actually debating whether it be the life or the death sentence. in this case, i would say that the life sentence is so much more rational and reasonable.

when we kill people, we sink down to their level, and we ecome murderers as well. after all, two wrongs don't make a right. it's not like we don't have a choice, we in fact have the life sentence. that way, we can keep being humane, and still punish the person.

also, when using the death sentence we actually INCREASE the rate of deaths. that's right, folks, we INCREASE it. states like texas which openly impose the death penalty have the highest rates in the nation. states with the life sentence, however, fall below average on murder rates. conclusion: death sentence=higher murder and crime rates.

finally, if you want to take it biblically, jesus said not to kill. this overrided the "eye for an eye" thing in the old testament.

thanks, and i hope i was helpful.

Answer 4

Death penalty is not valid because of the following:

1. The Bible says that only God can take life,
2. Death Penalty does not deter the commission of crimes since many crimes are being committed even with death penalty,
3. Life Imprisonment is the better penalty because the convict can be rehabilitated and reformed.
4. Death Penalty is a harsh punishment

Answer 5

Morally I believe the death penalty is wrong because for a state to kill someone because they killed, etc.. someone does not solve anything except exact revenge upon someone else-as the old saying goes "Two wrongs do not make a right" However, I also believe some crimes are so heinous that the person who commited them does not deserve to breathe my air- but executions in my opinion let the criminal off the hook too quick and easily. They should HAVE TO LIVE WITH WHAT THEY HAVE DONE! From an economic issue-I am all for incarceration of criminals, however they should not have access to or enjoy any of the luxuries/perks that we are privileged to have or wish we could have :such as TV(cable), computer access, free medical care, dental care, vision care,free meals, free "lodging(lol)", free education, free medications, free counseling, etc..,etc...

Answer 6

Sure. I'm against it for many reasons.

1st and foremost, I find it anathema to kill people to prove that killing people is wrong. I do not believe that morals and ethics can be stretched to the point where we must kill somebody.

2nd: It is irreversible. about 1 in 80 death row inmates are found innocent. if we don't' realize that before we kill them, there is no bringing them back. It's not much of a comfort to the family when you say, sorry, we got it wrong, the real killer is still free, and there's no bringing your loved one back. But we'll admit we got it wrong. cold comfort indeed.

3rd: It is not an effective deterrent. Polls have bee conducted, and most people would be less likely to commit a crime if they were faced with life in prison then with death.

4th: It's cheaper to keep them in prison for 60 years then it is to kill somebody. If you get the death sentence, you're guaranteed an appeal, which incurs all sorts of legal costs. if you're sentenced to life, you can be denied appeal.

5th: it's not applied according to a set standard. If you are a person of color, you are significantly more likely to get the death penalty then a white person.

I think that bout covers it...

Answer 7

I am against the death penalty because our justice system is not a fair one. It is a system that is marred by prejudice. It does not cost much to kill someone. In China they use a bullet to the head and charge the family for the bullet. In the middle east they use hanging and beheading.

When we start holding all personnel across the racial lines accountable for their actions, and giving them the same justice then I'll be more comfortable and vote for the penalty.

Answer 8

I am against the death penalty because it costs more money to put a person to death then it does to keep them in prison the rest of their life. Why spend the extra money if it does not deter crime and why pay the extra price if it is possible they are not guilty?

Answer 9

you do no longer would desire to condone brutal crimes or p.c. the criminals who commit them to steer away from a harsh punishment to ask no count if the demise penalty prevents or perhaps reduces crime and no count if it hazards killing harmless human beings. indexed under are some faq's with sources under. What concerning the possibility of executing harmless human beings? 124 human beings on demise rows have been released with evidence of their innocence. would not DNA shop new situations like those from occurring? DNA is equipped in below 10% of all homicides and would’t assure we gained’t execute harmless human beings. would not the demise penalty forestall others from committing homicide? No respected learn shows the demise penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment would desire to be effective and quick. The demise penalty is neither. homicide costs are greater in states and areas that have it than in states that don't. So, what are the possibilities? existence devoid of parole is now on the books in 40 8 states. It means what it says. it particularly is effective and quick and infrequently appealed. existence devoid of parole is low-value than the demise penalty. yet isn't the demise penalty extra inexpensive than retaining criminals in penal complex? The demise penalty costs lots extra effective than existence in penal complex, often by way of criminal technique, that's meant to steer away from executions of harmless human beings. What concerning the very worst crimes? The demise penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” yet fairly for defendants with the worst legal professionals. while is the final time a wealthy guy or woman grow to be sentenced to demise, no longer to show performed?? would not the demise penalty help households of homicide victims? no longer unavoidably. homicide sufferer kin around the country argue that the drawn-out demise penalty technique is painful for them and that existence devoid of parole is an suitable determination. So, why do no longer we velocity up the technique? Over 50 of the harmless human beings released from demise row had already served over a decade. If the technique is accelerated we are effective to execute an harmless guy or woman.

Answer 10

NO - I support our legal system 100% based on the fact that:

- you cannot be found guilty of murder unless the jury finds you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

- if you ARE found guilty of murder, only certain states, i.e. Texas, actually impose the death penalty. Most states give you life in prison to appeal your case, meaning you could essentially find a defense or a loophole and get out of jail, even if you really did commit the crime.

- if you ARE sentenced to death, your case is AUTOMATICALLY APPEALED.

- too many murderers are walking free because they were not given the death penalty.

- The Life Of David Gail is a pile of you-know-what, so don't play that card.