Capital punishment? Agree or disagree, please explain?

Answer 1

Agree. It has not been proven to be a deterrent, but it definitely helps fight crime. For example, a District Attorney can ask for the death penalty for a guy who was in a conspiracy to commit murder. But the investigation needs more info to catch the others involved. So the DA is able to bargain down to life in prison in exchange for information. So in this way, the death penalty is a bargaining chip. Every once in a while, you have to execute someone for a particularly heinous crime to show that the death penalty is real.

Answer 2

disagree
(1) it legitimises violence and therefore sends the wrong message to members of society (eg children)
(2) it is vengeful rather than restorative justice
(3) there is a chance that the innocent are executed
(4) it is not a deterrent in any way
(5) international law is against it (the states that practice it:the most: (a) China, (b) Iran, (c) USA, (d) Saudia Arabia are mostly human rights abusers (USA should not be amongst these))

Answer 3

I don't think it is the great solver of crime. States without the DP have lower murder rates...go figure.

Besides why would a country who is out to free the world want to have shared qualities like the death penalty along with the following countries and their methods. If I am not mistaken...I see a few "axis of evil" countries.

- Beheading (in Saudi Arabia, Iraq)
- Electrocution (in USA)
- Hanging (in Egypt, Iran, Japan, Jordan, Pakistan, Singapore and other countries)
- Lethal injection (in China, Guatemala, Philippines, Thailand, USA)
- Shooting (in Belarus, China, Somalia, Taiwan, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam and other countries)
- Stoning (in Afghanistan, Iran)

It is not pleasant company.

Answer 4

We demonstrate how much we abhor people killing people by killing people.

Makes sense to some people.