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

2007-01-31 16:47:49 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

22 answers

statistically the number of career criminals have increased dramatically since capital punishment was outlawesd in some states

2007-01-31 16:52:21 · answer #1 · answered by hiding1959 5 · 1 0

I question if the state has the right to take a life no matter what, but, yes I do think capital punishment should be abolished at least un til they have a more fair justice system, where everyone is treated the same, as it is if you don't have a min, of $100,000 in your pocket and you are charged with any felony you will be convicted, a public defender ( public pretender ) does exactly what he gets paid to do by his employer the state, get your azz convicted, or have you for got 47 men in Ill, convicted and most executed when a reporter started investigating he called in the F.B.I. and proved 35 of these men were not guilty , the cops had lied the prosecutor had lied and knew some at least of these men were not guilty, he is States Attorney General now and no charges have ever been filed against the cops , the same thing in Los Angeles the Rampart scandal, so how can anyone justify the death penalty to day?

2007-02-01 01:04:05 · answer #2 · answered by james w 3 · 0 0

I'd support capital punishment if it were administered fairly, but it is not. Innocent people are too often put to death and those that have wealth and influence are immune to it. So unless it is the same for all no matter what their place in society may be, than all it represents is a travesty of justice.

Ask the question: Does state sponsored killing really prove that killing is wrong?

Truth is that forgiveness is the only way to heal; the other way represents unforgiveness and vengence.

2007-02-01 00:55:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

This is such a difficult ? to answer because it is so multifaceted.
There is the old biblical text that states thou shalt not kill and 'an eye for an eye' etc. However, the ? should be is our judicial system perfect enough to prevent the execution of innocent people. I agree that there has to be some kind of deterrent to keep animalistic people from mindlessly killing each other, however I don't think "killing someone back" is necessarily the right answer in every case. There have been some cases that I have thought," That person deserves to die for what they did" I'm not sure that this debate will ever be solved. It is very case specific.

2007-02-01 01:00:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Persons who have been proved , by DNA tests, to have engaged in murder (like Justin Barber, Ted Bundy , the BTK killer, whoever) or pedophiles
And we are still without a medical cure for this mental illness (society would never be safe with them on the streets)
Then they should be euthanized because the jails are overcrowded and life in prison is pointless.
Capitol punishment is really obsolete, but euthanizing rabid humans is the logical and humane solution until they are cure-able.

2007-02-01 01:13:11 · answer #5 · answered by kate 7 · 0 0

We Indians in specific will not work without fear...so the capital punishment is must with speedy judgement (shall be decided within 2-3 days once it is known) for persons doing crime in society intentionally as in case of Sense less Politicians, Rapists, Hardcore Terrorists,White collar criminals ,High profile Tax evaders,Irresponsible Govt/MNC officers,viz., Bush,Parvez, Monidersingh,Late Harshad Mehta,Keetan Parikh saab,Jaya ben,Moody(??), Edawani (??), Sonie ben (??), Mayaa Ben (??),AB,Salahman,Odayaar,Cheedambaran Anna,....so many Even if U start hanging at the rate of one person per day U will be busy for next 700 days (excluding official holidays)...It may not eliminate crime rates totally ...but it helps minimise to some extent ...hope U will agree to my opinion.Jai Bharath !

2007-02-01 01:33:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Some on death row are unrepentant, criminals who will never rehabilitate. Now if there is a chance that we could find them not guilty through DNA evidence and the like then yes it should be examined.

But to go to the obvious.. if you had a multiple murderer who came right out and said they werent sorry, you know they could never be let out into society, they admitted to the murders and there was no way they weren't guilty.. well.... put them where they belong.

2007-02-01 01:17:24 · answer #7 · answered by sociald 7 · 1 0

there are certainly cases in which i feel the death penalty is appropriate. i get angry. but in the final analysis, theoretically, there is no place in a civilized society for the state to have the power to kill its own citizens. pragmatically, id feel BETTER about capital punishment if there was more being done to prevent the creation of monsters in the first place.

2007-02-01 00:52:12 · answer #8 · answered by mark r 3 · 1 1

While I don't ardently support capital punishment, I realize there are some sorry humans who have forfeited their right to share this planet with the rest of us. Bundy and Gacy are rotting in hell - Dahmer, too, thanks to a civil minded inmate.

2007-02-01 00:55:41 · answer #9 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 2 0

Capitol punishment should be kept and the process should be streamlined. While its easier to determine who is innocent with DNA testing it is also easier to determine who is guilty and we don't need the endless appeals.

2007-02-04 23:36:54 · answer #10 · answered by Christopher H 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers