Suddam Hussien was recently put to death only days after his conviction. Yet there are inmates who are still on death row 10, 15, years and longer since being sentenced. Should there be a set date for execution. say 6 months maximum. If the first appeal failed that should be it. Also should the victims families be included in the sentencing decisions.
2007-01-05 14:16:37 · 15 answers · asked by ? 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I think they should get 1 appeal within 2 weeks..and then killed within 30 days..I am sick of paying for their food, education, health care , etc. They live better than I do.. They get first priority in the ER, they can even get organ transplants (why..they are on death row).. As many things as there are to pay for..we should not have to use our taxes to pay their azzes to sit on death row for 20 or 30 years.
2007-01-05 15:51:56 · answer #1 · answered by chilover 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe there should be a deadline on the death penalty most definitely. we the tax payers are paying to keep these inmates alive and fed. I mean we have homeless people who can't afford to eat, and the government doesn't help them, but we will provide food and shelter for the filth of our country??? Ya its not the most perfect life style, but its better than what some people get. And my other reason for feeling this way is that we are now running out of prison space, and they are shortening the sentences on sex offenders and child predators. Excuse me, but they should be in jail for their full time. Get rid of the people on death row, and make room for the other filth. And yes the victims families should get to choose the punishment. The inmates took the fate of their loved ones into their own hands, let the loved ones hold the fate of the criminal!!!!
2007-01-05 14:25:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely.
I would want the convict and his lawyer given a reasonable amount of time to appeal or to produce conflicting or suspect evidence or even mitigating circumstances not brought out at trial - but years and years is ridiculous!
All it accomplishes is giving the people who debate that the death penalty isn't a deterrent more ammunition.
Maybe it would be a deterrent if it were carried out in a more timely basis.
2007-01-05 14:24:50 · answer #3 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Over 120 people on death row have been released with evidence of their innocence. Of these cases, very small number involved DNA. Many of these people were found innocent after multiple appeals and after spending over a decade on death row.
If the process were speeded up they would have been killed, in our name. By the way, most appeals accepted by the courts are not based on claims of innocence. Courts do not take cases where that is the only issue, unless it is a habeas corpus appeal.
2007-01-06 03:01:21 · answer #4 · answered by Susan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good point. Iraq hanged Saddam, maybe that is why. If families were included in the sentencing decisions, can you even think of the amount of dangerous criminals that might be put back on the street. I feel sorry for the families, because blood is thicker than water, but I do not think this will ever happen.
2007-01-05 14:24:12 · answer #5 · answered by m c 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
specific that is Biblical. The dying penalty became established as a human judicial regulation by technique of the God Yahweh Himself and is definitely one of His Mosaic rules which lots of those rules have been judicial rules for a rustic to run that is government by technique of. that is purpose became to the two eliminate the regulation breaking person from society and scare something of the people into controlling their strikes in the different case the comparable might take place to them. Yahweh Himself is being quoted interior the Bible speaking and coaching this dying penalty regulation to Moses after the Israelites exodus from being slaves of Egypt. The dying penalty became and nevertheless is considered a justified killing of a convicted criminal and not an act of homicide interior the eyes of our God.
2016-12-15 16:51:02 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they ought to be given 1 mandatory appeal. Then if the conviction is upheld they should be executed immediately. In this day and age of DNA getting sentenced to death for a crime you didn't commit would be probably close to impossible.
2007-01-05 14:27:26 · answer #7 · answered by Lori H 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The court sets the date for the execution of a convict but when there is an appeal and the evidence is strong, the date could be set aside pending the adjudication of the case.
2007-01-05 14:18:51 · answer #8 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don't think the family's should be included in the decision.
As far as how long should they wait after sentencing goes, I think they wait too long in many cases.....BUT....there have been cases where even after the death sentence was carried out, that it was proven that indeed the person was innocent-------------which, to me, leaves that question as debatable (and I'm not in the mood to debate). Good "debatable" question though.
2007-01-05 14:28:23 · answer #9 · answered by J T 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree. One appeal. If that doesn't work you're done. None of this 25 years on death row B.S.
2007-01-05 14:19:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋