death penalty?

Question

i am agianst the dealth penalty because i think it is wrong, expecially if the person is innocent. what may be some reasons i can back up my statement.

Answer 1

you can back it up because on average a y ear 17 innocent people die from the death penalty

Answer 2

Specifically speaking, those under the death penalty should have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt to have been guilty of a severe offence. There are alot of arguments you can use to support your view however that the death penalty should not be in practice:

Firstly, as much as anyone would love to believe that the law is fair, impartial, entirely just and always correct, it is often not the case. Judgement whether by jury or judge is always carried out by human beings, with human histories prejudices and human failings. You can never guarantee 100% that every man or woman sentenced to death is going to be guilty of that crime. There is always room for doubt and mistake.

Secondly, there is the issue that death is such a final punishment; what if it is later proved that that person is innocent? Further even if the person in question is a murderer, does that justify an institution effectively commiting that same immoral act upon the offender? You could argue that its a case of two wrongs dont make a right.

Thirdly, it depends on your perspective of the punitive system; maybe its purpose rather than simply to punish is to reform, don't these people deserve a second chance? Especially since in the majority of cases, people who are abusive, have been victims of abuse themself. Is it fair to punish someone who is the creation of a society which has failed to protect them from this prior victimisation? Is it not rather, more effective to attempt to change their perspectives, understand their crime, regret their actions, than kill them off like so much garbage.

Finally there is little difference between the death penalty and life imprisonment as a preventative threat. People are pretty much equally as likely to commit the crime if their going to die or live the rest of their lives in prison.

There are so many more arguments you can use, I just made a few quick points, if you want to read more, new jersey recently commissioned a study on the death penalty and this is a link to a summary of its findings:

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/committees/njdeath_penalty.asp

Answer 3

The best reason for abolishing the death penalty is a legal reason not one base on vague notions of right or wrong - there are well intentioned people on both sides that make strong moral and ethical arguments for or against the DP. The best argument against the DP stems from the Supreme Court's own interpretation of "cruel and unusual punishment" as described in the 8th Amendment, as well as our notions of substantive due process (i.e. the government can't do certain things to people because it violates their fundamental rights) are subject to the "evolving standards of deceny of a maturing society." These evolving standards of deceny have, one could argue, made the DP cruel and unusual, especially in light of the fact that a majority of jurisdictions in the U.S. (I think its 33) either no longer have the DP or have used it so rarely over the past quarter century so as to make it defacto extinct in those jurisdictions. So, if a majority of states and people no longer employ the DP, then the evolving standards of that maturing society would dictate that the DP violates the 8th Amendment. Of course, it doesn't take the Supreme Court to abolish the death penalty - the court's only say what the states are permitted to do, not what they should do. Every state legislature in the nation could reject the Death Penalty and take it out of the courts hands. To make that work however you have to convince enough people that although the DP may be constitutional, it shouldn;t be used and there are simply too many people that believe the DP is justified in some case. Of course no one wants to see innocent people put to death. But just as a note so some other posters, there are not 17 innocent people put to death a year. In the entire U.S. last year there weren't even that many people executed. The statistic is much less dramatic. Since the Supreme Court reinstated the Death Pealty in Furman v. Georgia in 1974, there have been something like 3 confirmed onnocent people put to death - I'm not saying there weren't more, but confirmed later by DNA evidence there were three. On the other hand there were 5 prison guards killed by inmates serving life sentences who had it not been for a court overturning their death penalty would not have been around to commit those additional crimes. So which is worse, 3 innocent people put to death or 5 innocent people murdered by those that should've been put to death? I don't know the answer.

Answer 4

I want to give you some more facts to back up your views. You have already received some terrific answers.

Some people do not know the facts and rely on revenge to shape their views. I think it is extremely important for people who oppose the death penalty to learn the verifiable facts about it so that they can give other people the tools they need to make a common sense decision. Many people who do not oppose the death penalty in principal, oppose it because it is simply not an effective way of keeping us safe. Your task is to explain.

The verifiable facts from other answers have to do with deterrence, cost, risk of executing an innocent person. (Source- Death Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org.)

-One person who answered believes that anyone sentenced to death who has had appeals must be guilty of something. This is not true. Over 120 people have been released from death row with conclusive evidence of their innocence. The appeals system is in place to determine if a trial met constitutional standards and was fair, not to question whether the person convicted was actually innocent. Innocence is not grounds for an appeal. Innocence can be presented in a procedure called a habeas corpus action, and it is rarely available. Most of the exonerations occurred because lawyers, working without a fee, students working on a class project, and private investigators were able to uncover evidence that could be presented in a habeas corpus action, to show that their client was innocent. Most of the exonerees had spent many years on death row, and had already had several unsuccessful appeals before being found innocent. Speeding up the process would guarantee the execution of an innocent person. It is human nature to make mistakes. You can read about some of these people at the Death Penalty Information Center website.


-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 hours a day, with no hope of ever getting out. And then still having to face whatever comes next.


-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. (Again, the Death Penalty Information Center has links to their statements.

-The people who are sentenced to death are rarely the perpetrators of the worst crimes. They are, however, the people with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a person with money was executed?

-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.

Please stay involved!

PS It is likely that innocent people have been executed, but not yet proved. Cases are closed once an execution occurs. The death penalty system buries (literally) its worst mistakes. If an innocent person was executed the real killer is still out there.

Answer 5

One non-political, non-judgmental, non-emotional reason is that the states without the death penalty have lower murder rates. Therefore, it is not a deterrent. Also, states that execute the most people have higher crime rates in general. Life in prison without parole is a heavy punishment. Never to see the stars at night or the colors of autumn--that's punishment. If you believe in the 10 Commandments, I do not recall the Bible saying: "Thou shall not kill except in the following circumstances..." The death penalty has been abolished in most civilized nations. In the states that have the death penalty, it is not applied in a uniform manner. A poorer person or a minority is more likely to be put to death than a white person with wealth. The death penalty should not be subjective to the quality of the legal representation you can afford. Finally, we know that DNA evidence has proven that innocent people have been sent to prison and executed. How can we justify the death penalty if it matters where (in which state) you committed the crime?

Answer 6

How innocent can the person be, really? It would take some pretty strong evidence to convict a person and send them to death row. And lets not forget their right to appeal after appeal.
If you feel the death penalty is wrong then ok.. It's wrong in your book. Perhaps you would change your mind if someone raped and murdered your Daughter.

Answer 7

Traitors must to be given with death penalty.Nothing else will do.why don't you think about those guarding us day and night on the boarders of our country in subzero temperatures risking their lives,so that millions can sleep peacefully in the warmth of their home.They die for our country so that several thousands of us can live here.Traitors/spys and all those who sell or try to sell our nation must be shot dead without trial.They don't deserve any humanitarian gesture.Likewise,innocents should not be punished also.Pl.don't tell that men who attacked Parliament house or who planted bombs in several places or those who shipped arms to support terrorism are innocents.And dont include all those politicians who are behind all this kind of activities.JAI HIND.

Answer 8

We spend more money (Multiple trials) to kill someone than we do to imprison them for life.

I am in favor of the death penalty, but not in it's present form.

Answer 9

you got me lol im canadian
lol all the death penalty is is somthing to protest and if some 1 dies by that law it jsut brings up more **** and more ****

Answer 10

Some reasons it is wrong in USA is it is administered on mostly poor people, even for the same crimes committed by more affluent persons. Remember O.J.?