Do you think everytime a person convicted of murder should a death penalty be given.?

Question

Everytime I heard someone was muder in a news it makes me angry so much i wanna torture and kill these murderers for their crimes, if a death penalty is given everytime a person is covicted of murder i would be happy cause they deserve it.

Answer 1

it would definitely make the murder rate go down significantly.

the words "happy" are a bit strong. it would be more like justice was served and the world would be a safer place. that would be my rationale. people would think more before they act out of anger and the second time offenders would be eliminated in the case of murderers....

a few people brought up some great points... it would save a TON of money keeping such large prisons in order.

Answer 2

After having sat on Jury the term "covicted of murder " carries no weight with me.
The person with money - meaning the person with the most money tends to win. Far to many people have been "convicted" of murder and later found not guilty in retrial.
If the person is proven by DNA tests and valid eye witness, or admitts to the crime in many cases I say sure, issue the death penalty, no point in wasting tax dollars and rehab is a crock. However as pointed out above there are many reasons murder can occur, depending on the legal system you get locked into.

Answer 3

Well, you get the death penalty when you commit a capital offense...especially in Texas. If you kill an officer (and you know they are part of law enforcement) you could face the death penalty. Aggravated sexual assault that leads to the victim's death is grounds for the death penalty. Even robbery and then murder. So unfortunately, our criminal justice system does not automatically hit offenders with the death penalty if they just murder someone. There has to be aggravating circumstances. The criminal justice system needs to wake up.


But I am for the death penalty.

Answer 4

It is only human to feel rage when a terrible crime is committed. That doesn’t mean that we should act on it. We need to make up our minds about the death penalty only when we know the facts about it. I hope that people will take the time to find out the facts.

The two most common mistakes in your answers have to do with cost and with deterrence.

Here are some of the facts.

-The death penalty 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. They are not likely to think twice, if at all.

-The death penalty costs much more than life sentences. Much of the extra cost comes before conviction, in fact even before trial. (In my opinion, we should spend the extra money for victims’ services where it is really needed.)

-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 being released.

-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.

-Once someone is executed for a crime the case is closed. If the wrong person was convicted, the real killer is still out there.

-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.

-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.

Answer 5

I am in favor of it. I am also in favor of removing the supreme court for their decision that the chemicals used in most states constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Matter of fact I would like to see us remove all judges and lets just do away with juries while we are at it. The system could work something like this. Have the prosecutor enter his evidence into a computer, then have the defense do the same. Give the computer 30seconds to analyze all the data and print out a verdict. If innocent let the man go, if guilty just have the computer whip out a colt 45 and Bam!! justice served. No setting on death row eating from the public trough, no unlimited appeals with state appointed attorneys eating at the public trough, no having to provide medical care with the doctors and hospitals eating at the public trough, No second offenders, No overcrowding in our jails, reduce the country budget by eleminating the need for new jails. Switft justice with no arguments. See, I have addressed the same items that all politicians adress, Health care, Education, and reducing the budget. Will have to work on the Iraq war just a little but I am sure I can fit it in here somewhere. Maybe that is the platform I will run on when I oppose Hillary for the job of Bull Moose. However, there is just one thing. I want to be the computer programmer because there are a few bastards that I want to get even with.

Answer 6

While many people should be dead, we don't have that power. And that is a good thing. People abuse power that is why the system is in place. It's not a perfect system, and yes, sometimes these people should die for their crimes.

However, even if they are sentenced to death, appeals keep them alive for another 18 years or more. People dying now were sentenced 20 years ago or better. Tax dollars should not be used on those people. Let them work every day in prison to earn that money to pay their upkeep. That makes me madder than they are alive and most of my family is dead. My family didn't kill no one or get killed but died of natural causes and diseases. The big C. My tax money should be spent on the cure for cancer, so maybe I can live, instead of supporting people on death row for 20 years.

Sorry to vent but you hit my last nerve.

Answer 7

Then would you be next on the hit list. I think that we have the death penalty so that we feel that were doing something about the problem in fact we're just as guilty. If it made the family's of the victims feel better I would say sure but it doesn't bring there love ones back or justify there deaths.

Answer 8

I personally do no believe in the death penalty. However, if a person is convicted of murder for reasons other than mental disorders, he/she could be incarcerated. I would say for life but young kids make mistakes, most of them are too young to understand the effects they bring about, but the adults they are a different story. I do believe in second chances.

Answer 9

Easy big fellow, I am with you to a point but if someone broke into yo crib in the middle of the night and you capped em, do you think u should fry like a cheap slice of bacon?

Answer 10

I think it should be considered, for killing a child no question, a cop again no question. I really think the courts need to stop plea bargaining all together. Will we ever see it ?, probably not there are too many Johnny do gooders in the world.