Yes or No? Are you in favour of the Death Sentence for serious crimes?

Question

I need lots of answers for an English assesment on "The Death Penalty" in persuasive writing.

PLEASE!! Lets make it 60 answers!!!!!

Answer 1

Yes!!! I also believe that after they have had a chance to appeal and the sentence has not been revoked, they should be removed from the court and executed immediately, no sitting around on death row for years costing the tax payers money to feed and cloth them.

Answer 2

I feel the only thing wrong with the death penalty is that it is not used often or quickly enough and it is done too humanely. Funny I should have this opinion, because I consider myself extremely liberal/left-wing. But when it comes to people who have commited serious crimes, I have no mercy for them whatsoever. If found guilty, they should be given a set length of time (ex. 1 year) in which to make their appeals. Court dockets could be rearranged to ensure they get at least one appeal during this time. If at the end of that time, their conviction stands, string 'em up. And I mean that literally. Too many people (I'm talking to you, ACLU people) are worried about "Cruel and unusual punishment" or if they feel pain while being put to death. Keep in mind that these inmates are the same people who have raped/murdered/hurt children and other innocents. I really HOPE they feel pain while being put to death. Instead of paying outrageous fees to lethally inject or electrocute someone each and every time, buy one good sturdy rope for $10-$15 at the local Home Depot and use it over and over. Tax savings right there.
As it is right now, teh death penalty is no deterrent to crime because there are too many ways around it and you can drag the appeals process out indefinitely. Let the criminal element know that they WILL die within the year if convicted and that more than likely they'll feel it for a few minutes before finally drawing their last breath and see if that works any better.

Answer 3

YES, for the following reasons;
1. Economic - prisons are terminally overcrowded, it costs on average £20000 per yer to keep a prisoner, average life sentence 12 -15 years.

2. Conviction rates for serious crimes that the death penalty would be considered for are very high, the chance of a wrong DNA identification is 1 in 1 billion, pretty convincing.

3. Persons incarcerated over 5 years become more likely to reoffend because they become used to the prison system and cannot readjust to civillian life

4. A high percentage of life sentence convicts attept suicide and would rather die than rot in prison

5. The chinese use exuected prisoners organs, why not use them to give something back from the society the criminal has abused.

6. If you kill, or rape an innocent person for no reason other that personal gain or gratification what right should you have to expect to continue life, ultimatley being paid for by the taxes of your victims family, you have denied someone their right to life, why should the criminals be preserved.

7 Its a deterrant !!

Answer 4

No, due to the fact that even one innocently murdered (and it is state condoned murder after all) person is one person too many. Is has happened in the past, and posthumous pardons have been issued by HM Gov, the same HM Gov that signed the death warrant. A postumous pardon doesn't mean much if you're dead (I realise the irony in that statement). There will always be an element of society who are going to comit crime no matter what the detterant, and I'm sure in some cases, introduction of a death penalty may intice some people commit, in a perverse way, because there is a perception of having more to lose if you get caught, thus greater risk, thus greater thrill.

Answer 5

I'm not in favour. While I certainly believe some people deserve a slow painful death due to the horrific nature of their crimes, we've seen too many cases where people have been let out years later for something that WOULD have led to execution had the death penalty been in place.
I'd happily say yes if lie detectors/forensics were in place and infallible but that's not the case, and there's no excuse for killing an innocent person

Answer 6

As a Retired Law Enforcement Officer I have to say NO, I am not in favor of the death penalty because of the way that it's carried out. It's become a farce and a farce can hardly serve as a deterrant.

As it now stands, someone convicted of a capital offense, who uses the appeals process (In other words, doesn't have a death wish) can drag the execution of sentence out for decades. Take Abu Mumia Jamal for example. That piece of filth should have been executed 20 years ago instead of sitting in a cell preaching about how his crime was everyone else's responsibility and not his.

When an execution finally takes place the prosoner is treated like you'd treat a favored pet with a terminal disease. I think that, if you want the death penalty to be a deterrant, you need to make it public and you need to make it painful or what purpose does it serve?

I say we go to natural life sentences at hard labor. Use the methods developed by Sheriff Joe Araipo in Maricopa County and make them pay for their own room and board by working. They don't need exercise rooms and they don't need air conditioning. They don't need cable TV and they don't need expensive meals.

Everyone thinks of Attica State Penitentiary in New York State when prisons are mentioned but Attica is by far, not the place I would have in mind for murders. I would prefer to see them in the DeWitt Clinton Correctional Facility. Clinton Prison is in the Adirondak Mountains in New York, not to far from Fort Drum. It started life as an IRON MINE and the prisoners who are incarcerated there call it GLADIATOR SCHOOL. Now they manufacture furniture for state office buildings. That would be more to my liking.

Answer 7

Yes. There seems to be the reasoning that too many innocent people are currently on death row. If you ask the accused, they are all innocent. Innocent people on death row is very rare. Granted, the judicial system still needs work. Maybe a few lawyers on death row would help. Let's face it, there are some bad people in jail for committing some very bad crimes. By saving their lives, you are saying the victims lives are not worth anything. Death on a consistent basis will not stop crimes, even bad crimes, but it will reduce some. Saving one life is worth it.

Answer 8

Death sentence for serious crimes? YES - absolutely. The problem is that it takes years and years for the judicial system to work and actually execute all the murderers on death row, so it is not as much of a deterrent to violent crimes as it should be...

Serial killers, rapists, etc. should all be executed as quickly as possible so other criminals will think twice before committing these terrible acts AND it will save taxpayers a lot of money rather than paying for years and years of incarceration.

Answer 9

No. The death penalty is not "justice," it's revenge.

The potential risk of executing an innocent person is horrific and the ultimate indicator that America's criminal justice system is broken.

And it's not a deterrent. The murder rate is actually higher in states with the death penalty. See this site: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=168

Answer 10

Yes.. They should speed up the process. Its non-sense to wait 10 years for a convicted murderer to await his penalty. Lethal Injection is the most common form these days , Its Quick and Painful. Some still believe in the code of hammurabi , Eye for an eye but its considered cruel and unusual punishment which is against the ammendments .