I am all for it and I think that we do not use it enough. The courts impose these sentences with the intentions that they will be followed. The problem, as always, is that the lawyers keep making appeal after appeal to get the sentence overturned, at the taxpayers expense. I believe that the people that are there are there for a reason a need to be made an example out of. This is supposed to be used as a deterrent, but how can it be when people who are convicted spend decades without ever being punished. I say pull the lever, gas 'em, get a rope, fire!
2006-12-06 09:49:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by scottyhog 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
I am for capital punishment, not as a deterrent, but not as it is right now.
The anti capital punishment people claim that is doesn't deter crime. In reality, nothing deters crime. People speed, knowing that there might be a cop around the corner. People murder knowing that DNA technology, fingerprint technology, pathology, and forensics are superior in today's life.
The reality is, nothing deters crime, but we put criminals away because they are not like us. I don't support the idea of mental insanity, because to do some of the things criminals do, makes them insane, but not stupid.
You can check on the websites and find that people who are against capital punishment can show statistics where states with capital punishment are higher in crime. But using statistics, I can prove that if you add the populations together and take the average, the states with capital punishment have the exact same totals versus the ones without capital punishment.
If a criminal is going to break the law, they are going to do it regardless of the laws or the punishment.
The big downer for me is the amount of time that we allow people to sit on death row, wasting tax dollars on appeals... Get it over with folks!!!
2006-12-06 17:49:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Capital punishment throughout the world is used to punish criminals and political opponents. In Muslim countries adultery and the renunication of Islam carry the death penalty. In Singapore and Taiwan drug trafficking knowingly or unknowingly is a capital offence. Similarly in China corruption is a capital offence. Many military tribunals around the world have the death penalty for desertion, mutiny and cowardice.
I find the death penalty for any of these crimes wrong and morally repulsive, open to error and political interference. The States of the USA that retain the death penalty is an anomaly among the democratic Westernised countries of the world. For me this reflects a society where success wins big, failure pays heavily. Where taking revenge is a sign of strength and showing compassion a sign of weakness - this has worrying echoes of Nazism.
2006-12-06 18:21:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Chris C 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am against it because no matter how fair the justice system is, some innocent people will be executed.
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." ~William Blackstone (1723–1780), British jurist, in Commentaries on the Laws of England [vol. 4, ch. 27 (1765-1769)]
"It is better to risk saving a guilty person than to condemn an innocent one." ~Voltaire, in Zadig (1747) (ch. 6)
Of course in the case of a crime which could be a capital offense, the innocent but convicted person would not be let go; they'd stay in jail and there would always be the possibility they could clear themselves in the future.
2006-12-06 17:43:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I have no problems with capital punishment.
2006-12-06 19:40:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why should I have to pay for some murderers complete health care, 3 square meals, work program, mental care, and housing needs when I cant even get HALF those things for myself?
Its rediculous that they should live on a free ride having killed another human being.
There are worse things than dying.
2006-12-06 17:50:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by amosunknown 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm opposed to it, but not on moral grounds. What bothers me is that when some dirtbag is convicted of murder and sentenced to death, we have to see his name in the news for another 10 to 15 years while the appeals process is carried out. I know this must be heart-wrenching for the families of the victim(s). I think it would be better just to sentence them to life without the possibility of parole, and then forget them.
2006-12-06 18:39:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by huduuluv 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
**only God can judge me** 2Pac
the man on trial (guilty or innocent), judges or jurors have no right to take another man's life don't u `think 60 years of solitude, in an 8ft cell, thinking about what he did to get there knowing he'll grow old alone and die alone would bring more suffering on his part than a quick painless death
RE: other answers: how could someone define prison as a free ride - loss of freedom
2006-12-06 22:08:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by betralone 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's currently more expensive to execute someone than imprsion them for life.
It costs about 36k/yr to house an offender intil he's 55
After that, medical costs average 70k/yr.
Therefore, people who never provided anything positive for society can continue to be a burden on the taxpayers..
How about letting them clear minefields?
2006-12-06 17:51:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think more people should be sent to the capital-------there are nowhere near enough criminals in Washington.
2006-12-06 17:45:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by JIMBO 4
·
3⤊
0⤋