Death Penalty y is it bad or good (bad)?

Question

i need to interview some 1 for that Death Penalty is bad idk care but plz state your name + what qualifies you to state that what you are saying is the thing

Answer 1

I think that the so-called death penalty is a joke, and a bad joke at that. Someone commits a murder and robs someone else of their ability to exist and takes that person away from his family and what happens?

After years and years of appeals and a bunch of goony birds gathered outside a prison with Dixie Cup candles singing Kumbaya, they put him down like you'd put down a favored pet.

What a joke.

I think that, if you want the death penalty to be a deterrant, because that's what punishment is supposed to be, a deterrant, it has to be done in a reasonable period, be painful and awful, and it has to be a public as we can make it so everyone gets the idea that murder will not be tolerated or rewarded.

Ask Police Officer Daniel Faulkner who died 3 decades ago while his stinking murderer is still selling books and rallying liberals who now want this human turd released.

If that can't be done, stick them in a prison somewhere to rot for the rest of their lives and forget that they exist. The way it's done now, you're doing the mutt a favor.

Answer 2

death penalty is diabolical! why? you may ask..it is so because it puts an end to something god could only put an end to. I have two points against death penalty.

First, death penalty violates the rule in the Decalogue, Thou shall not kill. What does this say? death penalty is against the moral norms that is interwoven with the society, therefore to start death penalty is to disband society itself because in order for people to accept it you have to destroy the moral frame work set there a very long time ago making more damage than progress.

Second, death penalty will bring back the power of the Government over the life of the nation, returning Monarchy behind the image of a democratic government.

Answer 3

If you want to learn more about this and my connection to this issue, you can send me an email through yahoo. Clicking on my id will do that.

The death penalty should be judged on the facts. Here are some verifiable and sourced facts. You can visit the webpages listed here to find out about the sources. These facts speak for me.

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 4

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.h...
http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~tonya/spring...

My name is Natasha. I have a B.S. in Psychology.

Answer 5

I think the death penalty is not for someone to decide who should die or not.......I mean I think that IF a person commits a really bad crime, then they should suffer true enough but who am i too decide that they should die.....I think the best thing that you can do to someone in that situation is to make them suffer....I think that when someone gets thes death penalty for a crime....it's only an easy way out.

Answer 6

the death penalty is bad because there is no evidence to suggest it is a deterent , second the person killing a person for good or bad is still murder and if we execute a innocent man which will happen in the near future , if the death penalty is not ended , it will make murders out of all of us

Answer 7

You first could have an opinion. i will not be able to work out which you have an opinion the two way, yet you are able to % a ingredient the two way with the intention to cajole somebody. oftentimes supporters of the death penalty cite that justice and vindication are mandatory for the kinfolk of the sufferer. in addition they oftentimes argue that homicide, and oftentimes extremely nasty murders like different homicide or homicide of a newborn, and so on, are so heinous that the criminal could be placed to death. additionally, it is seen the desirable deterrent to dodge human beings from murdering one yet another. the different ingredient oftentimes argue something alongside the traces of "an eye fixed for an eye fixed leaves anybody blind." Others argue that for the period of a democratic state, the courts don't have the authority to homicide its voters. nonetheless different arguments are extra pragmatic and communicate on the subject of the cost (oftentimes human beings sentenced to death have a mandatory superb to an prolonged sequence of appeals) and additionally to the numerous situations the place human beings on death row have later been exonerated with DNA data. Whichever ingredient you %, the two have different significant factors to make. you in basic terms could be sure which ingredient you are able to take and sound convincing. good good fortune!

Answer 8

it does not work its not a republican thing or a lib thing it just wont work appeals grind along and the murders sit waiting hell charlie Manson is doing life. I think that taking one for the other wont work and it has not worked so what to do no possibility of parole give them something to do like making furniture in the industries but never to get out they have to be in a maximum area but aside from that they get what all max prisoners get

Answer 9

If you had the choice between a quick execution and perhaps 40 years of languishing in some 4by 8 cell what would you choose?
provided of course there is no chance of getting out ever.

Answer 10

Kill the good, save the bad.
Stupid good people!
To damn gullible in the first place, too damn gullible in the second place.
Probably just too cowardly to kill.