Should there be a death penalty?

Question

why or why not.

but think, isnt it quite hypocritical?

Answer 1

I oppose the death penalty because it is not an effective way of keeping us safe. Here are some facts about the death penalty-

It is not a deterrent- states with the death penalty have higher homicide rates than states that do not. People who commit murder do not think they will be caught, let alone punished, that is, if they think at all.

The death penalty costs much more than life sentences. A great deal of the extra cost comes before conviction. (Messge to So What- New York State spent over $200,000,000 to sentence just 7 people to death over 10 years. Of these, only four had one appeal and the rest have not had any. Compare this to the estimated 35-40 thousand per year to incarcerate someone. Do the math.) There is an unmet need for more well funded victims’ assistance programs. (In my opinion, that is where we should spend the extra money.)

Life without parole is on the books in more and more states. It means what it says. It is no picnic to be locked up in a tiny cell for 23 of 24 hours a day.


Over 120 people have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence. In the overwhelming number of these cases, the evidence was not DNA. DNA is not a miracle cure for wrongful convictions. The exonerees had spent many years on death row before being found innocent. Speeding up the process would guarantee the execution of an innocent person. It is human nature to make mistakes.

Death sentences can be very hard on victims’ families. The process takes a long time and they are forced to relive their ordeal over and over again, in courts and in the media. Some murder victims’ family members have said that although they support the death penalty in theory, they do not want to see it in the case of their murdered loved one because of how the process affects families like theirs. Life without parole is swift and sure and rarely results in appeals.

Last of all, opposing the death penalty does not mean you excuse or coddle criminals who commit brutal and depraved acts. They must be punished severely. But we need to use common sense based on the facts, not to focus on revenge which accomplishes nothing.

Answer 2

Yes there should. There are some people that commit crimes that just dont need to keep living. And for those that will say we should just put those people in jail for life, that is just not practical or a reality. I am a lawyer, and know first hand that you can kill someone in the US and get a 6 year sentence. 6 years for a life!!! What kind of detrent is 6 years!! The Courts are so back up, all you have to do is plea bargain and charges will be reduced as a matter of efficiencey. Again, some people just need to be killed. For instance, just in our paper here in TN. 4 men carjacked a young dating couple from the University of Tennessee. The thugs shot the guy and set him on fire. He got lucky. The girl was kidnapped, raped and sodomized for three days before she was shot in the head and dumped by some railroad tracks. Now tell me, explain logically, why these people should be allowed to live another day on this earth. Better yet, why should these guys be allowed to given food, health care, education, and therapy at the tax payers expense if they are sentenced to life in prison. I guarantee the 4 would point fingers at each other to the point that 2 or 3 would get a reduced sentence to turn on the others.

The thing is, things like this happen everyday in America. This crime is far from an isolated event. Most people live in a state of denial because they never see these crimes or they live in a neighborhood that they perceive as safe. Of course once this happens in their perfect world, their views ultimately change becuase it is personal. We have to remember that for every victim, it is personal for someone. The victim is someones son, daughter, husband, wife, mother or father. Its not fair to not agree with the death penalty, and then have a change of heart when or if it becomes personal.

So yes, we need a death penalty. However, it needs to utilized more efficiently and not handed out arbitraily. Being in the legal field, there is no way that more than 2 appeals would be necessary in a death penalty claim. Then the sentence needs to be carried out quickly. 15 and 25 year waits are not appropriate. With the DNA technology we have, it is easy to determine through evidnece and testimony whether a person has committed the ultimate crime for which the ultimate penalty would be all that woudl suffice. If you look at the statistics now you will see that less then 2% of people convicted or that plead gulity to murder actually receive the death penalty. Last year alone I had a better chance of being struck by lightning than I did of going out, randomly killing a person and being sentenced to death. That makes no sense at all.

Answer 3

Do you believe the punishment should be proportional to the crime? If yes, what other punishment is 'proportional' to pre-meditated murder? I agree our system of applying the death penalty could use significant improvement, but that does not mean the penalty is wrong.
For those who will inevitably claim the death penalty is more expensive than life in prison, I have to responses. First, Cost is not the issue, punishment is. Second, if you didn't spend 30 year providing room and board and paying for redundant appeals, the cost would be significantly LESS.

Answer 4

No.

Suppose your mother was brutally murdered, then your mother's killer was executed. Okay, how does it make you feel any better that the killer is dead? Is the pain of losing mom somehow subdued by the death, do you miss mom any less? Does the lust for the killer's blood in your heart make you feel at ease, or does it make you feel like a raving monster? What benefits does your lust for revenge bring you? Some people will say, "at least I know he can't do it to any one else". However, if it was in the legal realm that he would be executed, his only other option would be life in prison. He's not getting out to kill anyone else.

People want to say we just can't afford to keep housing all these death row inmates. But. In the US, the prison population is close to 2.2 million. Of those, about 3,300 are Death Row inmates. That's about 0.2% of the prison population! Perhaps pro death penalty people think we should just start gassing people convicted of larceny and multiple traffic tickets to REALLY reduce the prison population?

Answer 5

Yes, and all executions should be by hanging in a public area where thousands of people can witness the execution.

To give more detail, I believe that a psychological profile should be done on the convicted murderer and if it is determined that said criminal fears death, then death is the sentence. If said criminal fears life in prison, then life in prison should be the sentence.

Whatever will cause them the most intense pain is what they should receive when they deprive someone else of their life or lives. In the end, that would dramatically reduce crime.

And I believe all politicians who break the law should be given the death sentence as each illegal decision they choose to make harms countless people. Death to law breaking politicians, PERIOD.

Answer 6

Did you take someones life intentionally when your life was not in jeopardy?

Okay, bah bye.

To the guy who says it wrong to want vengence, why would being in prison for life not be considered vengence?

If you kill someone too bad die. You took the life of someone else!!! Do you understand that? Someone is no longer on the earth and their family doesnt have then around anymore. The killer should sit around in prison watching cable and eating pizza the next 50 years while we pay for it. Do you even know what it cost to support ONE person for a YEAR in prison. Its like 40K if I remember right. What exactly is the purpose of keeping them around? They are not getting out again? THey took a life why should they get to keep theirs?

Boo Hoo its not fair. Then dont murder someone ya bozo

Answer 7

absolutely,because there are people in society that should not be able to live among us because of their horrible crimes.

its not hypocritical at all.murder is a spare of the moment decision,or premeditated,done maliciously without thought,to purposely take life without regard of anything,on a mass scale for control,the death penalty is a consequence for an action that provides an end.im talking about the death penalty for murderers,and i believe that habitual child molesters should die also,before they are allowed to act again and eventually kill their witnesses,if you execute child molesters,there will be no worry if they will strike again,most do because molesters are incurable.

Answer 8

Yes because it is fair, it's in the Bible and it forces someone to pay with their life for disrupting and destroying family's and people. What there shouldn't be is an appeals process that makes it take ten to fifteen years to get the deed done.

Answer 9

YES, if there is DNA evidence of the crime and it carries the death penilty then it should be carried out. WHY, should this criminal live in prison better than a lot of the lower class public at my/our expense?

Answer 10

No. As satisfying as it may be to those seeking vengeance, we should be a nation of laws, not revenge. "Killing someone is wrong, and we're going to prove it by killing you." Huh?

Better to save billions of dollars, unclog the courts (the average death penalty case probably takes 15-20 years and half a dozen appeals), and sentence them to life without parole. I think that's a more severe punishment anyways.