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

i am for capital punishment, because if someone is cold and cruel enough to take an innocent life, then why shouldn't theirs be taken? i also think capital punishment is good, because it shows a psycho what can happen to them if they decide to kill....don't you agree?

2007-01-20 12:41:32 · 22 answers · asked by Yvette S 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

22 answers

Against.

Rudolf Hess was a convicted Nazi, and was called the loneliest man in the world. He had the full run of the Spandau Prison in Berlin until he died in the late 80's or early 90's. But he was the only person there. No guard was allowed to speak to him, and he was allowed to have 1 visitor once a year for 1 hour on Christmas. The guards were rotated to ensure that nobody developed a familiarity with him.

Imagine being alone with yourself and only your sins to ponder for the rest of your natural life. It might be fine for a while, but after years it would become a fate worse than death.

2007-01-20 12:45:03 · answer #1 · answered by TiM 4 · 3 4

You are getting a lot of for or against answers, but not much solid information. The death penalty is an issue that should be decided on the basis of verifiable facts, rather than an instinct for revenge.

Here are a few of the facts-

Re: cost
The death penalty costs far more than life in prison. (As an example, here are some 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. Non death penalty trials cost much less and the annual cost to incarcerate someone in NY is approximately $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.) Psychos do not think.

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. People should learn the facts and make up their minds using common sense.

2007-01-20 13:22:01 · answer #2 · answered by Susan S 7 · 2 2

I think captial punishment should be held for the most heinous offenders who commit crimes. Although I do not believe two wrongs make a right, I believe capital punishment is more cost effective and I would rather spend the money to kill someone than to house them and feed them for the rest of their natural life.

2007-01-20 16:36:52 · answer #3 · answered by Rhode Island Red 5 · 1 0

I'm all for capital punishment as the law applies to convicted murderers, but against it when innocent fetuses are subjected to the measure.

It would be a more effective measure if executed more rapidly in self-confessed killer cases, when the crime was solved by DNA evidence, and all other "beyond a reasonable doubt" cases.

2007-01-20 13:29:40 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. US of A, Baby! 5 · 1 0

I used to be for it but im against it now. The reason is....how many innocent people have they already killed because of DNA? There are men left and right being released from prison after serving 20 years. The government is just like "hey sorry about that, see ya" an lets them go. What happened to the old saying "proven guilty without a doubt"? I bet thousands of people were hung, electricuted etc that were innocent. Let people rot for years behind bars.

2007-01-20 12:50:29 · answer #5 · answered by Chad C 6 · 3 2

it extremely is an somewhat difficult question to respond to. that's sturdy your college has you thinking approximately this, as you & your era will could desire to make judgements in this interior the destiny. in my opinion, in concept i'm against it. merely positioned, you won't be able to overturn a death sentence as quickly as completed in case you're incorrect. there's a protracted status concept in our criminal device that we could fairly permit a hundred in charge go unfastened rather of convicting a million harmless. Now, in training, the older i'm getting, the greater tolerant I ain't. universal there is a few tale on the information greater terrible than the day till now. whilst those awful crimes contain the very susceptible like young babies & extraordinarily repeat offenders, particular i want the evil doers killed. truthfully, i do no longer understand how i could vote if I had to remarkable now...i truly envy the human beings who understand their own ideas in this undertaking.

2016-11-25 23:01:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

For it.

Why should they be spared when they coldly and cruelly took our loved one's life?

My fiance was robbed and murdered in 1992. The kid who bludgeoned him beyond recognition and killed him got 25 years instead of death via a plea bargain. He was after me when he was caught. Everyone in the family thought he should have been justly punished by death.

2007-01-20 12:54:11 · answer #7 · answered by Nancy 6 · 2 0

I am for capital punishment but I don't see what is so "capital" about it.

If someone kills someone shouldn't they suffer for with they did? By killing the killer, they are getting easy way out.

They are not suffering like their victim. Capital punishment should be eternity in jail. That way the killer will suffer for the rest of their life.

2007-01-20 12:48:35 · answer #8 · answered by Phil 2 · 3 2

No. The people (those who have not been wrongfully accused) who are on death row don't deserve the lives that they've been given.
It's a drain on society to keep them alive.
My uncle was murdered by two men in 1976. One was killed in a prison riot, the other got out on parole. I think the bastard should have been executed. A life for a life. He cut someone's life short, he doesn't deserve to keep his. The same holds true for the others on death row and many who should be.

2007-01-20 12:46:39 · answer #9 · answered by Artemiseos 4 · 0 4

against - not because the most depraved among us haven't earned their ticket to Hell, but because the justice system isn't perfect and the idea of killing an innocent person wrongly convicted is too great a risk.

2007-01-20 12:49:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers