2006-12-17 13:17:52 · 13 answers · asked by cclleeoo 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I support it entirely. I think they should get 1 appeal within 7 days of being found guilty..get an immediate decision..if turned down..die within 2 weeks. I am sick of seeing murderers sit on death row for 20 years getting free health care, food, education (like they will ever use it..I am one year from a degree and I can't afford to finish), etc. and I pay for it. I think it should be slow and painful..and should be carried out by the victims family..I think their last meal should be hot dogs or something really cheap..why should they get steaks..I live on bologna and I have never killed anyone. Child molestors and rapists should fall into this category too..there is no hope for change
2006-12-17 13:33:18 · answer #1 · answered by chilover 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. There is no proof that the death penalty is a deterrent in preventing other criminals from murder or other violent crimes. The USA has the death penalty and also much higher rates of murder per capita than many other country without the death penalty. So where is the benefit exactly? The death penalty for economic reasons (saving taxpayer dollars) is thinking just as low or lower than that of a murderer.
2006-12-17 14:15:36 · answer #2 · answered by LindaLou 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
An smart dialogue....what a alleviation! i have connected a link to a piece of writing which addresses this difficulty featuring each and every part. in my opinion, i'm no longer for the shortcoming of lifestyles penalty. a million. apparently for a punishment to act as a deterrent, it can be adminstered right away after the guy is convicted. With the appeals procedure, that of direction doesn't ensue. it is called known deterrent which isn't effective in deterring crime. the different form, particular deterrent, merely refers to preventing that categorical criminal from ever committing that crime again. of direction that works. 2. i do not imagine it truly is fixable. there is continuously a margin of blunders and the price of the appeals in many cases outweighs the price of lifestyles in detention center. 3. i'd hesitate to respond to this one. I, fortuitously, do not have any adventure with the outrage someone would experience on the shortcoming of a loved one by skill of homicide. i don't recognize how i'd experience, so I received't choose them. 4. i imagine the fee of a violent crime by technique of each person, extraordinarily a youngsters, exhibits a psychological ailment. lifestyles in detention center.
2016-11-27 01:09:35 · answer #3 · answered by spadafora 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There should be more death penalty.
As once a criminal - life long criminal. Hardly any criminal is transformed into a normal person. Better not to take chance.
When its not sin to kill other animals like mosquito, rodents, man eating tigers etc to make our society better and safer its is not a sin to kill a criminal.
Also some of the so called politicians should be awarded free death penalty.
2006-12-17 13:29:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I've read somewhere that it costs taxpayers in excess of 25k per year to house an inmate that will never see the city streets again.When viewed in that light,I would say,yes,throw the switch.Then again,every once in awhile,you hear about someone who's been on death row for ever and find out they aren't the guilty party after all.....So my answer would be a definite,"maybe"!
2006-12-17 13:29:30 · answer #5 · answered by Steve D'Bassfish 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We need it badly. Our prisons are over run with violent criminals who should never be allowed back into society, and the cost of their upkeep is atrocious. If more of them were given the death penalty, the less our violent crimes would be.
2006-12-17 13:26:21 · answer #6 · answered by Fruit Cake Lady 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I support the death penalty and think the process should be expedited. I also think it should be extended to rape and crimes against children.
2006-12-17 13:21:13 · answer #7 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't like the death penalty, but I do think that if it's done in the right spirit (justice, not retribution) it's okay.
2006-12-17 13:20:40 · answer #8 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pragmatically, it's beneficial for society.
There's a part in Thank You For Smoking where a kid asks his lobbyist dad what the greatest thing about America is. He replies, "An endless appeal system."
2006-12-17 13:23:43 · answer #9 · answered by Smokey 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Only when there is no shadow of a doubt that the person is guilty. And this is for murder, rape, and molestation.
2006-12-17 13:28:18 · answer #10 · answered by retrodragonfly 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋