Why should death penalty should be illegal?

Question

Why should death penalty should be illegal? i need help on the debate whats ur opinion?

Answer 1

Here are some verifiable and sourced facts about the death penalty- unfortumately some of the answers you already have are mistaken about some of these.

Re: Alternatives
48 states have life without parole on the books. It means what it says, is swift and sure and is rarely appealed. Being locked in a tiny cell for 23 hours a day, forever, is certainly no picnic. Life without parole incapacitates a killer (keeps him from re-offending) and costs considerably less than the death penalty.

Re: Possibility of executing an innocent person
Over 120 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence. Many had already served over 2 decades on death row. If we speed up the process we are bound to execute an innocent person. Once someone is executed the case is closed. If we execute an innocent person we are not likely to find that out and, also, the real criminal is still out there.

Re: DNA
DNA is available in no more than 10% of murder cases. It is not a miracle cure for sentencing innocent people to death. It’s human nature to make mistakes.

Re: Appeals
Our appeals system is designed to make sure that the trial was in accord with constitutional standards, not to second guess whether the defendant was actually innocent. It is very difficult to get evidence of innocence introduced before an appeals court.

Re: Deterrence
The death penalty isn’t 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: cost
The death penalty costs far more than life in prison. The huge extra costs start to mount up even before the trial. There are more cost effective ways to prevent and control crime.

Re: Who gets the death penalty
The death penalty isn’t 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
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.

Opposing the death penalty doesn’t mean you condone brutal crimes or excuse people who commit them. According to a Gallup Poll, in 2006, 47% of all Americans prefer capital punishment while 48% prefer life without parole. Americans are learning the facts and making up their minds using common sense, not revenge or an eye for an eye mentality.

Answer 2

No, I think that there are crimes heinous enough to warrant the death penalty. However I feel the way it's administered needs to be looked at, and perhaps suspended and overhauled because of it irregularities throughout the nation. Two people can commit the same ugly act, and one may get the death penalty while the other may not because their state doesn't have it. I'm also fearful that innocent people are being executed and that if a crime is deemed punishible by death, a much deeper investigation and evidence be presented.

I addition to the severity of the crime there should be a more strict amount of evidence to sentence a person to death.

For example, Scott Peterson. While I don't doubt his guilt at all and believe the crime he commited is one of the worst, I don't think he should have been sentenced to death with just circumstancial evidence (no murder weapon, no conclusive manner in which the crime was carried out, no physical or biological evidence positively linking him to the crime).

Answer 3

Hey, I did the same debate in high school for law class. I believe that is barbaric to have the death penalty. How can a democratic society condemn others (countries) who kill each other when they kill their own. No one has the right to play god and decide who lives and who dies. There is also something to be said for studying in the serial murders to better understand how such a person devleops and how to stop such a thing. I also think it seems strang that by killing someone, we are punishing them. Make them do the jobs in society that no one want and repent for what they have done. I know I would be angry if someone killed someone I loved, however killing the murderer does not bring the person they killed back. Violence begets violence. The death penalty is not a deterent for crime either. Check out the statistics. We do not have the death penalty in Canada and our crime rate per capita is low compared to contries who do have the dealth penalty. Any way I am rambling and procrasinating. Hope that helped a little. good luck and happy reasearching!

Answer 4

There are three basic categories you can divide the debate into-

The first being whether an execution authorized and carried out by the state is any less heinous then one carried out by a criminal, and that the power of life and death over its citizens should not belong to the government (which screws up everything else it has power over)

The second part of the debate is the need for absolute certainty iin the guilt of the accused as opposed the fallibility and limitations of our criminal justice system- How virilent are we willing to consistantly be to ensure innocent people are not executed? Or... is that something we can guarantee? (The most common issue being the emergence of DNA testing over the past 15 years.)

The third part of the debate is how it has been applied- the perception (I do not know the statistics) is that it is more likely to be applied to Black Males, ( and that it is more likely that the death penalty is pursued against them). There is also the issue of executing the mentally ill and retarded, and that females are extremely unlikely to face it, even for comprable crimes. -showing a degree of bias.

For each part of the above, a great deal of healthy debate and information is available on the web.

As for my opinion- I try to seperate my emotions from it, but I do feel that child killers and sexual predators who we are unable to reform should be put-down.

Answer 5

It is debatable as to if the death penalty significantly deters (reduces the number) of homicides. The two sources I provided show the number of murders per state and statistics of executions/death row inmates/etc. It is raw data, but it may help you to construct arguing points.

I don't believe the death penalty prevents murders. Case in point: Texas. Though this state has consistently executed inmates on death row, Texas has a relatively high murder rate (murders per 1,000 citizens) every year compared to states that have no death penalty (or executions).

My personal belief, on the hand, has nothing to do with the effectiveness of prevention. Individuals in prison convicted of heinous acts of murder should be executed within 10 years. The appeals processes should be followed, but not abused.

Answer 6

I did a research project on this in college.

Capital punishment is not effective. Crime rates have not decreased because of capital punishment. Look at criminal recidivism rates. They are extremly high. Recidivism = prisoners being released, how often they end up going back to prison. They've been in prison and know how crappy it is but end up going back. Capital punishment just isn't a deterant to crime.

Here's a good no-brainer. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Here's another point: It costs more money to kill someone with death penalty than to keep them in prison for life.

Okay another one: Quite frequently the death penalty "goes wrong" and the person doesn't die right away, then it's torture.

Also look into amount of people who are arrested and are innocent. Then look into how many people that we eventually found out were innocent got the death penalty. You'll be suprised.
And that's just the ones we know of. Is it ever right to kill one innocent person?

And another point: Racism. Look at the numbers. There are more people of color (per capita) than White people in prison. And of the ones who do get the death penalty there are more people of color than White people. There is no way this can be right. One reason for this is because in general White people make up the ruling class and have more money, they can afford better attorneys.
In 2005:
-- 1,805 were white
-- 1,372 were black
In 2005 (same year)
White people made up 80% of population and Black people made up 13% of population yet the death penalty statistics are nearly the same. This means they are putting more Black people, per capita, to death.

Here are some websites:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cp.htm
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762156.html
http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~tonya/spring/cap/group1.htm

Answer 7

The death penalty should not only be legal but the time on appeals should be cut back!!
At one time people were afraid to fry an innocent man. However with todays DNA science one is seeing people who were once convicted of crimes being released. One is seeing more guilty people going free because juries have gotten used to the DNA evidience of CSI and are expecting it when they go to court. So it's very unlikely they are sending an innocent man/woman to the gas chambers. No it's time to cut back on appeals limit them to 2 or three no more lifers on death row. Most of them died before they hit the chair.
Let's make it where no one wants to commit a crime.
The main arguement at one time was about sending an innocent man away DNA has taken care of that arguement.

Answer 8

Some people against the death penalty say we cant play the act of god and take someones life

Answer 9

I don't think it should be illegal, especially in the case of mass murderers or child killers. I believe it is used as judiciously as possible, it's not over-used or abused. Criminals have to understand that after serving out a sentence on death row that a lethal injection, gas chamber, electric chair or firing squad is waiting for them for what they did to someone else.

Answer 10

Because the judicial system makes mistakes.

Can you imagine the horror, on both sides, when an innocent man is executed?

The conservative and tough Republican Governor of Illinois pardoned everyone on death row when it was proven to his satisfaction that Illinois had executed innocent people. He was not a nice guy, but he couldn't stand that.

There are many documented cases of wrongful executions happening.