English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-12 22:09:58 · 26 answers · asked by pragya 1 in Education & Reference Quotations

26 answers

its hard to give a yes or no answer to this question.

in the case of genocide i say YES

other times it may be harder to say.

2007-01-13 02:51:44 · answer #1 · answered by donotbuyepsonproducts 2 · 0 0

My view is capital punishment should be there and enforced on person's who have done or doing heinous crime. I find absolutely no reason to ban capital punishment.
Because all cases are thoroughly analysed by experts before taking and implementing a decision.
We should also analysis the circumstances under which the crime(very offensive,hurting,disapproving human ethics) was committed, by whom and what for?.If anything was found unsatisfactory or proves that the crime was done intentionally then slapping the maximum punishment should be considered.
A person committing crime should be punished.If such laws are non-existent there will be many violating human values.
precisely,capital punishment will help in preserving societal laws to a extent.
Human mind is wicked.when you grow your mind acquires more ways to do evil things to some extent.so some inhuman activities that may arise can be stalled by laws with capital punishment.

2007-01-15 04:18:54 · answer #2 · answered by karth 1 · 1 0

Quite difficult to answer this question. Because it involves complex issues which needs to be addressed.

Yes : Because if we cannot give life to a dead person, we should not kill a person by the name of capital punishment.

No : If a person is not awarded a capital punishment for heinous crimes, what else should he be given ? A rehabilitation package, so that other people also do the crimes ? A peaceful and swifter death sentence, so that s/he does not feel the pain which s/he may have committed while doing a crime ? Even if the person is given a life imprisonment, they may spoil the group of people (who may be inmates).

As such, though I am personally against the death penalty, but keeping in mind the gravity of situation, a person may be awarded to capital punishment.

2007-01-12 23:07:01 · answer #3 · answered by Andy 3 · 0 0

Capital punishment should be redefined i.e. not taking away life of the punished,but cutting them off from any contacts other than the prison staff throughout their life and making them do hard work for the up keep of the prison . No outside contacts at all should be permitted.

2007-01-13 03:06:09 · answer #4 · answered by Mani 2 · 1 0

I think that you should have some of the facts about the death penalty.

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. (In my opinion, some of the extra money should be spent on victims' services, which are 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. 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.

Speeding up the process will certainly result in the execution of innocent people, some people just like you, your families and friends. Yes, ordinary, law abiding people have been sentenced to death, spent years on death rows, and, thankfully, were saved in time.

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. The death penalty revictimizes families of murder victims. Life without parole is sure and swift and rarely appealed.

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.

2007-01-13 15:08:45 · answer #5 · answered by Susan S 7 · 0 0

No, it shouldn't.

If anything, I think it needs some revisions. I concur with an above poster about making it more humane. I also think once someone has been sentenced to death, it should be carried out post haste instead of having that person sit on death row for 10 yrs soaking up my hard earned tax money.

Give people something to fear, rather than going through the revolving door on purpose for free cable, a gym, a bed, 3 square meals, library access, and computer access. That's more than a lot of us law-abiding citizens have, imagine that.

2007-01-12 22:39:42 · answer #6 · answered by Karma 6 · 2 1

In a way yes and no. Yes because the government speaks of how it is illegal to kill another human being. And frankly it is wrong to kill another human being no matter who you are. But then when they use the death penalty as a way of punishment, doesn't the government then use that as an excuse to kill people?? As far as I know, killing is illegal, and what is the government to override that law?? Who should be held responsible for those who do kill the charged ones?

2007-01-13 08:04:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

capital punishment should definitely be banned. You cannot give life therefore you have no right to end a life.

2007-01-16 16:51:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

You were to have no capital punishment, but were first to sweep off the face of the earth all legislators, jurists, and judges, who were of the contrary opinion.

2007-01-13 17:55:20 · answer #9 · answered by johny t 1 · 0 0

No, I don't think it should be banned. I am not sure that it is much of a deterrence to crime though. I do think that we should not keep people sitting around on death row though awaiting appeals exhaustion and using tax-payers money to feed, clothe, and house them. Punishment should be swift, and maybe if justice was carried out immediately that would deter people from committing heinous crimes expecting to just sit in jail on my dime.

2007-01-13 02:59:00 · answer #10 · answered by ragincajun1957 4 · 2 1

Of course it should be banned. Also people who murder should have shorter sentences in prison. Go through a rehabilitation program. Then the government should buy them a house in the area where you live. We should try to be more forgiving. Always give the other fellow a second chance.

2007-01-12 22:22:10 · answer #11 · answered by scallywag 3 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers