death penalty?

Question

what are your veiws on the death penalty? an eye for an eye or hypocrycy?

Answer 1

The death penalty DOES deter crime. The jurisdictions that have the death penalty are usually those that have a high percentage of the more violent races. Although the rates with which capital crimes are committed is lessened by the death penalty, they are not lessened so much that they are brought commensurate with the crime rates in an all-White area.

That's the real reason the death penalty is more common in high murder rate states. The high murder rate is NOT the result of the death penalty. Murderers are NOT saying, "Oh boy let's go kill somebody so that we can be executed!" No, indeed! Rather, the high murder rates of some US states are the result of large percentages of violent races in their populations. If you're an American, study

Crime in the United States, 2004, Tables 2.5 and 2.8, published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, US Department of Justice.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

... and correlate that information with the following demographic data ...

National Population Projections, Detailed Files, 2001-2010:
http://www.census.gov/population/projections/nation/detail/d2001_10.pdf

You'll find that Blacks are about seven times more likely than Whites to commit murder, and 16 times more likely than Whites to commit interracial murder, and that a Black is 22 times more likely to murder a White than the reverse.

You can determine that the rates for violent crimes, including murder, are much better correlated with racial percentages than with poverty or with the degree of urbanization.

The death penalty IS a deterrent. Whether it deters a lot or a little depends on how swiftly and surely it is applied.

There's a whole spectrum of personality types between Charles Manson and Mohandas Ghandi. The death penalty will deter some of the murders that these in-betweens would otherwise have committed, and the swifter and surer the death penalty is applied, the larger the deterred fraction will be.

Delays and commutations provoke contempt for the death penalty. So find them guilty at dusk and hang them at sunrise the next day. If there is a riot, call in the National Guard and tell them to kill every single rioter -- let not one escape!

The very fact of evolution is the result of the death penalty being used by Nature. Nature's laws aren't about justice, they are about survival instead. But animals who break nature's directives, whether intentionally or by mistake, tend to die, while those who obey tend to live. Human justice systems can have a similar effect on the character of a population: kill the bad ones, and keep on killing them, until all of them are gone. Then do it again for the next generation. Keep doing it. When the law mimics natural selection, it will work the very same way over the same time scales.

Yes, the death penalty works, but only when politicians don't get wishy-washy with it. A speedy death penalty deters, and it lowers the cost of criminal justice: no long prison terms, no long appeals process. Let the condemned live only long enough to "get right with God." Then off with his head.

The biggest bunch of bullcrap that I have ever heard is "No human has the right to kill another human being." That's a lie. I certainly have the right to kill in self-defence. People as much right to kill other people for transgressing human laws as animals have to kill each other for transgressing animal laws. They do. We do, too.

There never was a universal agreement among humans to foreswear the killing of people forever, and even if there had been it would be in conflict with nature's laws and thus unenforceable. People do have the right to kill other people, and it does no good to hamper the killers whose aims are to kill the OTHER killers, the ones who instigate the killing, the ones who DO IT FIRST for selfish gain or for some other unworthy cause.

Answer 2

I think that you should make up your mind after reading the facts.
Here are just a few- - they can all be checked. Revenge is no substitute for applying common sense based on the facts.

You should know that the death penalty is not a deterrent. Homicide rates are much higher in states that have the death penalty than in states that do not.

The death penalty system costs much more than a system that does not have the death penalty. Much of these extra costs come way before the appeals begin. This money ought to be spent on crime prevention methods of proven value- including more and better trained police and programs to help young people find ways to avoid getting into trouble. (My opinion is that the money should also be spent on victims' services, which are always underfunded.)

The death penalty is racially biased, but not in the way you may think. A defendent is twice as likely to face the death penalty if the victim was white than if the victim was non white.

More and more states have life without parole on the books. It means what it says and is no picnic to be locked up for 23 of 24 hours a day, with no hope of anything else.

Over 120 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence. In the majority of these cases, the evidence was not DNA, which is not often available. More often, the problem is one of mistaken eyewitnesses. After an execution, the case is closed. If the wrong person was executed the real killer is still out there. It is human nature to make mistakes and executing an innocent person, killing an innocent person in our name should be unacceptable in a civilized society.

The death penalty can be very hard on the families of murder victims. As the process goes on they are forced to relive their ordeal in the courts and in the media. Life without parole is sure and swift and rarely appealed. You can read the testimony of some murder victims' family members who oppose the death penalty, not in principal, but because of what the system puts families like theirs through. (Testimony at hearings of New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission, Sept 2006)

People who oppose the death penalty do not condone brutal and depraved acts and do not excuse the people who commit them.

The death penalty is not an effective way to keep us safe, prevent crime.

Answer 3

The death penalty is so very expensive, but then so is supporting criminals for the balance of their lives.

Does the death penalty deter me from committing a heinous act? You betcha. Does it deter the psycho heroin addict robbing a 7-11 for $100 and killing the clerk with a broken beer bottle? Heck no.

Does it deter those who committ murder under so-called crimes of passion?

Okay, enough of that. The death penalty is not a crime deterrent, evidenced by public statistics (that which I will not go into here).

If the justice were more swift, I would go for it. But, it isn't. Here in Texas, it is not uncommon for death row inmates to spend years languishing in our generous penal system.

Gee, I wonder if I answered the question.

Answer 4

Only a small percentage of the worst criminals ever get
the death penalty (and then it's after sitting in jail for 20 years).
There needs to be a serious enough penalty to make people
think before murdering other people and only the death penalty
can do that, otherwise they are housed, fed, health care, recreation privaleges, tv, visitors, and it's not all that bad for a person who took someone elses life away from them. So, the death penalty is certainly a deterant. (otherwise, it's just a free ride
and we the taxpayers have to pay to keep them the rest of their
lives in prison so they won't go out and murder again). I guess
that's what you libs want to do....pay to keep murderers alive.

Answer 5

Theres a place for the death penalty and when given out it should be swift, with all the DNA technology available it should be conclusive as to guilt. It simply rids society of a bad element. These jerks have it pretty good in prison believe me.

Answer 6

Put yourself in the place of the family member of the person that was raped and beaten/strangled/tortured to death. Try for a single moment of unbroken thought to place yourself in the place of the victim: The fear spilling through your guts until you piss your pants. the knowledge that you will be abused and after that die horribly for no other reason than you were in the wrong place and the Murderer is lurking and hiding and waiting to sneak up on you grab you and take you to his killing grounds. If you consider these things you will see why the only justice is the death penalty. And while it will not bring the victim back from the dead it certainly will rid this world of one more evildoer and give some sense of justice and peace to the family members. I'm sorry but my sister was killed in such a fashion and they never caught the mo-fo. May he rot in hell forever.

Answer 7

Funny how views on things change over time. In my 20's and 30's I was an avid believer of "an eye for an eye", hang the dirty rat, fry their butts, gas em, you name it.

In my 40's and hopefully a bit more mature, I am reaching middle ground. I still believe in the death penalty, but ONLY in cases of murder, premeditated and substantiated with DNA.

1st degree murder charges based on evidence that does not include DNA elements should not be eligble for the Death penalty.

Treason, kidnapping with other cicrumstances, rape, etc, lock them up for life.

Answer 8

I do not favor the death penalty for several reasons. It does not deter violent crime. If it did, the rate of violent crime would be much more in places where it did not exist, and that is simply not the case. It costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their natural lives, and I do not favor spending any more than is absolutely necessary on a piece of crap who would otherwise deserve to die. Thrid, it is final, and there is no room for oops--while you might say the few who are mistakenly executed are worth the ones who rightfully are, you are probably not the family member of someone wrongfully
executed. Lastly, I am not a killer, and thanks all the same, but I do not want anyone killing anyone else in my name, which is the effect of our government carrying out a law "for the people".

Answer 9

Death penalty is proper due to the following:

1. In order to deter the commission of crimes,
2. It is the proper penalty for heinous crimes,
3. To decongest the prisons, and
4. Savings for the government due to less expenses of prisons.

Answer 10

being alive to see how many people cant spell or use spell check is worse than the death penalty