If yes or no, why? and give me your points thx
2007-01-19 01:49:39 · 7 answers · asked by jinkyvicente 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Personally I feel in some cases it would be appropriate. If there is an over-abundance amount of evidence and there is NO doubt that a particular person committed murder or child molestation, they should be taken out of this world.
It costs a large amount of tax-payers money to keep inmates in prison and to provide them with their minimum basic needs. If they got rid of the individuals that are a threat to society, instead of using the money to incarcerate these individuals, this money could go to rehabilitation and transition programs to individuals who TRULY can benefit.
Many people in prison (not all) are in there for charges like check forgery, driving without a license, 1st time drug possession, probation violations (which doesn't have to be law breaking rules), etc. Many individuals are looking forward to being released and to start over. Many have just made some horrible mistakes and have paid their debt to society.
Currently transitioning programs are so poor right now that many people who are released end up back to the way they were before they went in and it becomes a vicious cycle. I would rather see the money put in place to help people become law abiding, productive members of society.
2007-01-19 02:05:12 · answer #1 · answered by Erica, AKA Stretch 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I oppose it because of the facts-
Re: cost
The death penalty costs far more than lifetime incarceration. (Example- New York State statistics- 7 people sentenced to death since 1995, cost over 200 million dollars. None had more than one appeal, 3 had not yet had any. Annual cost to incarcerate someone in NY $35,000. Do the math.)
Re: DNA
DNA evidence is available in no more than 20% of all murder cases. It is no guarantee that we will never execute an innocent person. It is human nature to make mistakes.
Re: speed
If we speed the process we are bound to execute an innocent person.
Re: Deterrence
The death penalty is not a deterrent. Murder rates are actually higher in states with the death penalty than in states without it. Moreover, people who kill or commit other serious crimes do not think they will be caught (if they think at all.)
Re: Alternatives
More and more states have life without parole on the books. Life without parole means what it says and is no picnic.
Re: Who gets the death penalty
The death penalty is not reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was sentenced to death, let alone executed??
Re: Victims families
People should know that the death penalty is very hard on victims’ families. They must relive their ordeal in the courts and the media. Life without parole is sure, swift and rarely appealed. Some victims families who support the death penalty in principal prefer life without parole because of how the death penalty affects families like theirs.
Last of all, opposing the death penalty does not mean a person condones brutal crimes or excuses the people who commit them. Liberals and conservatives oppose it. I believe that the dialogue on the death penalty should be based on verifiable facts. People should make up their minds using common sense not revenge.
2007-01-19 12:42:07 · answer #2 · answered by Susan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We can not call ourselves civilized if we kill another human being, however nasty he or she might be. No, I do not favor the capital punishment. Besides, in many cases death penalty is an easy exit. If a person is sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole, he or she has nothing but time. Even the most ignorant people start thinking in a situation like this. In many cases they start regretting what they have done. But there is nothing they can do about it. That is what I call pure hell.
2007-01-19 02:22:25 · answer #3 · answered by paloma 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES! Why should I have to pay for them to sit around,watch TV,workout and eat good meals, when many people don't even do that well on the outside! If you really think about it, child molesters and murderers have it better than many who have not done such horrible things. They took an innocent life therefore they should lose their's. A family member of mine was murdered and his killer is living the good life-makes me ill!
2007-01-19 02:01:54 · answer #4 · answered by Urchin 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Capital punishment is an act of vengence. Vengence belongs to the Lord, not to us.
2007-01-19 02:05:38 · answer #5 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
The cost of incarceration is rapidly increasing and jails are becoming over crowded.
Some inmates are not able to be rehabilitated.
I probably watch to much Law and Order SVU.
2007-01-19 01:55:49 · answer #6 · answered by Culture Warrior 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Thou shalt not kill.
2007-01-19 01:57:47 · answer #7 · answered by Callie 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋