Death penalty is humane?

Question

debate topic

Death penalty is humane

Please give me some ideas in the aspect of human rights

with some examples,

Please!

thx~

Answer 1

Are you pro or con? Go on GOOGLE and type in Amnesty International, and then type in United States.

Countries with the death penalties are not recommended as being great places for human rights.

Answer 2

Executions are stupid. they should be called what they are. Revenge killings. Their are far better ways to punish someone for crimes like murder. Executions are so freaking painless and humane anyways, with all but a few states using only lethal injections, it doesnt even hurt the dying anymore. Why not just house murderers together, and let em kill and torture and rape each other. In the end, with the expense of the lengthy *** appeals process, its gonna cost yah about the same., and you get the benifit of knowing theyre NOT haivng a good time and they are living in some of the worst conditions possible. Put em in super max 23 hour lock up. Thats a nice torture. Hell... Bring torture BACK! i would love to see a killer on the rack or in thumb screws. I don't understand why people always think killing is the best answer. It lets people off the hook far to easily and it makes a murderer out of all of us. Unless you are in the act of saving a life, or in self defense, their is no reason to kill someone. by killing an imprisoned man, you are NOT saving lives. You are murdering a person. It has NEVER been proven to deter crime. In fact, laws in general do NOT deter crimes. But hey... who cares.

Answer 3

Those thoughts to occur seems very much out of pitch. Why would you judge of a warrant that you do not have? As the rule from the oppressed, better you than me. So, death is just an scape route to deal with criminal that others doesn't have some responsibility handling them.
If you do not want death penalty, then be responsible in handling them of the behavior that have created the unsolicited crimes.
And if you want death penalty, then you pull the lever and let the consequences rest in your behalf.
As what others have said, death is just in the other side.

Answer 4

We don't allow killing so we punish it with killing? Some role model we are. It doesn't make sense. Also, I believe that a lot of people who commit bad crimes are sick or do not understand. If they did, they would understand what a negative force they would realize the illogicalness of immoral acts.These people should be treated so that there can be research to find cures causes and cures. Killing is a solution to nothing because there will always be people with dangerous illnesses, delusions or misunderstandings. These are the root causes that need to be focused on.

Answer 5

The Death penalty is wrong because we value a respect for human life and killing people who kill only makes hypocrits of whichever goverment does it, how can you say he killed he has to die? My country hasn't killed people for 40 years and I'm proud our legal system isn't killing people in our name anymore. Example Look up the 10 Rillington place murders and what happened after.People despise these murderers but how could we do what they do and call it right?

Answer 6

We had a serial kille here who killed 10 people, mostly by strangling them. But, thanks to a quirk in the law, he didn't get the death penalty.
Guess there's not much of deterrent effect right? Well, depends on who you believe. There are cases where the persons invovled in crimes said they would've went ahead and killed the people who walked in on their burglary, but, they didn't want the death penalty.
All of the anti-death penalty crowd though, will not tell you that there is a deterrent effect. I admit that some people will kill no matter what, but you can't deter them anyway.

Answer 7

Come ON: Do you think that the person that is condemned to death gave a flying @#$%#$ if he was humane when he killed his victim? With our court system it can take 20 years for a person to be put to death. So don't worry about the wrong person being put to death. STOP worrying about the criminal and just think about the person that they Did not give a Damn how they felt when they killed them.i

Answer 8

The Constitution allows for it....

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury,....

By definition A capital Crime is ONE PUNISHABLE BY DEATH.....

The Framers of the constitution EXPECTED Death as a punishment which is why they addressed it also in the double jeopardy clause.

"nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"...

THUS allowing for LOSS of LIFE or LIMB as a punishment if found guilty the first time...

and further explained in the due process clause

"nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law"

Which means that Criminal CAN be and would be expected to either be KILLED, or Imprisoned, or have property confiscated if found guilty through due process depending on the severity of the crime.

Then the exception for Capital process is explained for the Military which by constitution has its own rules.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger

IN otherwords, A grand jury is not needed for the military to perform capital punishment when in actual service during war or public danger.

The cruel and unusual punisment statement was intended to be a modification of laws concerning sums of money greater than $20 and had nothing to do with CRIMINAL procecution.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

That would mean you can't put someone in debtors prison just cause they can not pay a bill. It was designed to protect the poor people.
You cant Kill someone just cause they owe money.
You can not cut off their arms just cause they are late on their house payment.

BUT, You COULD cut off their Arm if they were caught stealing because THAT is not common law, that is criminal law. (did you read about loss of life OR LIMB)?

The constitution is interesting reading.

Answer 9

Frankly anyone who kills someone in cold blood.
They just gave up their right to life.

As far as humane they are treated far better than they ever treated their victims.

Example: Ted Bundy who the women love. He love them to death.
saddam

I will never understand how they concern for a murder far out weights that of the vicitms.

What would be far more humane if we start teaching our kids morals, discipline and respect.
When a kid screams in a mall "I HATE YOU MOMMY DIE B****"
There is serial killer in the making.
Mom's response " now son i am going ot have to put you in a time out"

Feel good parents got us what? Columbine

Answer 10

I peronally think it is in humane to kill even a convicted criminal! A life sentence is good enough. Will it be the proper punishment? Maybe, NOT! I am not a Judge of the right to live or to die. Let God do his will not the will of man......