Pro or con in death penalty?

Question

I am definately con, in every case..

Answer 1

Pro.

The Lord will forgive those who ask when they are put to death.

Answer 2

I strongly oppose the death penalty. Here are some facts about it.

The death penalty is not a deterrent. States that have the death penalty have higher homicide rates than states that do not.

Capital punishment costs far more than life without parole. And a great deal of the extra cost has nothing to do with appeals.

More and more states have life without parole, which means what it says. Being locked in a tiny cell, for 23 of 24 hours a day is no picnic. Where this is the maximum sentence, the costs are many times lower.

The system is very error prone. DNA is not the answer. It was used to prove innocence in very few of the over 120 cases where people on death row were shown to be innocent.
And executing an innocent person is something most of us do not want, so we provide for appeals of death sentences.

Death sentences can be very hard on the families of murder victims. Every time the case is appealed, they have to relive their ordeal in the courts and in the media. Life without parole is sure and swift, and rarely appealed. Many victims’ family members do not support the death penalty for these reasons.

Supporting a common sense approach to how we punish murderers and how we respond to depraved acts does not mean we condone either. The death penalty is just not smart on crime.

Answer 3

There are two benefits from it: It stops dangerous people from being dangerous. This can however also be achieved by sentencing them to life in prison. In doing so instead you also eliminates some of the negative effects that I will mention below. It is claimed that it has a deterrent effect on other potentially dangerous persons. There are several major disadvantages of the death penalty: It has happened several times that innocent individuals have been sentenced to death and also been executed. One of the most notable cases were the execution of Timothy Evans in Great Britain in 1950. In the U. S. more than 130 individuals have been exonerated from Death Row before they were executed. How many innocent persons that has not been discovered but still are on Death Row or has been executed we don't know. The death penalty has been shown to not have a deterrent effect. Contrary to the claim above the death penalty has only a minor, if any, deterrent effect on the crime rate. The Death Penalty is expensive. The total cost for a death penalty trial, subsequent time on death row and execution is much higher than the cost of just sentencing a person to life in prison. There is no foolproof way to kill a human being. There is always a risk of a botched execution that will cause unacceptable suffering for the person to be executed, as well as for the persons that carry out the execution. Sometimes it happens that the execution fails completely and that the condemned person survives. The last time a person survived an execution attempt in the United States was last year when the lethal injection of Romell Broom had to be aborted since the execution team failed to insert the needles for the injection. Whether there should be capital punishment depends ultimately on how much one values the life of innocent human beings. If the value of individuals means nothing or little to you, capital punishment is of course a preferable option. If, on the other hand, you think that it is unacceptable to regard innocent individuals as sacrificial animals that merely exist for the benefit of others, then capital punishment must be abolished. Remember the words of Gandalf in "The Lord of the Rings": Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.

Answer 4

I don't believe the answer to your question is as simple as pro or con. I think that the state (understood in a generic sense) has the right to end the life of convicted murderers, if it thinks such cases merit the death penalty. The lex talionis stresses "eye for eye" or "life for life." This law is one form of retributive justice, and seems like a just way to handle cases wherein one human takes the life of another human.

On the other hand, it is possible for the death penalty to be abused. What if a person convicted of a crime is innocent? What if the death penalty is used as a tool to silence individuals or groups who constitute anti-societies ( that is, societies within society that may peacefully militate against the prevailing status quo by means of a particular language-game or set of beliefs)? Who can guarantee that the death penalty will always be enforced in a just manner? Nevertheless, I am not against the death penalty per se; only abuses of it. But I don't think it is my place to tell the state how it should govern its affairs. God will judge that.

Answer 5

CON!! I think that the person who commits such atrocities should be put in a cell as per the law and made to dwell on their crimes. That should drive them crazy on it's own. Who are we to judge? We are all imperfect on this earth, some are more troubled than others, but no-one has that right to judge on someones life. Look at Hitler, he committed suicide because he knew that liberation was coming and he knew what would happen to him, so he was a coward and took the easy way out. Same thing with Saddam, they should have made him live in a cell for the rest of his life and he would have seen that country turn around for the better, without him. That would have eaten him.

Either way, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone." Now, ask yourself, "Am i without sin?" Two wrongs don't make a right.

Answer 6

Every human being is worth more than the worst act of his or her life. True or False?
...Regardless of the damage or suffering caused?
...Even if they have made seemingly no positive contributions to society?

My politically correct answer: Con- it's applied unfairly in every country it exists in (poor, minority and disenfranchised are the largest percentage killed)...it cost way too much money in this country-much more than life w/o possibility of parole...it does not even deter crime...it's legalized murder, as the recipient's death certificated reads: 'legal homicide', and now we are finding with the benefit of things like DNA that sometimes it kills the innocent.

But I can think of a couple of people who have lived how they wanted without consequence or regard/respect for other human beings. And although I don't consider them monsters, I don't want to hear they must be sick to commit those crimes against other human beings. Mercy for the merciless is still a concept I am working on...I'm not there yet.

Answer 7

I am not sure how anyone can justify being pro death penalty. If murder is wrong, then how can the punishment be the same thing that you are saying is wrong? Besides, I believe GOd is the only one that holds the power to judge someone, I wouldn't want that hanging over my head when I die! For some people a quick death is too good. If our prisons were a little worse, people might think twice before committing a crime where they are sent to prison.

Answer 8

Con is that you support them for the rest of their lives and in some cases quite well.

In California every prison has free cable TV, ever prisoner is allowed a TV set if they get one from the outside with their own money or it's given to them, they have a computer area, weight room with Natulus, Music room, Full Gym, get to see a new movie each week, have fully paid music entertainment once eveyr so often and free weights, plus 3 meals a day.

The cost on this is about $20K per inmate or more per year

Most "good people" would love to get all these goodies for FREE. Now someone is a 3 time loser and kills at age 25, they get to stay like this for 35-45 years.

Remember it might be your Mother, Father, Son, Daughter, Spouse, Sister or Brother they kill and they get to "live" like this for years and years and years while your loved one lives no more.

They also occasionally excape. They also occasionally "riot" -- althoug God knows why. It's like living in a boarding school. When they riot that take prisoners and occassionally kill guards.

When they escape, then tend to kill again.

I know, I've managed bands who entertained at the prisons for 10 years running and they have the "same" exact crowd each time they play there.

They are also quite prejudice and the Blacks stay on one side, the Mexicans and Whites stay on the other side.

Answer 9

I am a firm believer that some people deserve to die due to the crimes that they have committed. However I also acknowledge that their death does nothing to actually correct the crime or offer any real comfort to the people left behind.
And then in some cases I would think that death would be a welcome thing rather than life in prison.
Our penal system in this country offers no reform only harding of those that are already an outcast from society.
Are we really prepared to build more prisons and support these criminals or are we ready to execute those that committed horrendous crimes?

Answer 10

I think the Death penalty is inhumane and unnecessary.The only person that has the right to take you life is God.Besides,statistics say that 1 out of 9 people on Death row are innocent.I feel it is more of a punishment for someone to rot in a small cell then to be put out of their misery.

Answer 11

My question to you is why do we have a death penalty? Because he killed someone? If any one who has the right to give the guilty person a death penalty is the one who gets killed. Since we have no way of knowing for sure the deceased person's desire, it is presumptuous to give someone the death penalty.