Should the U.S. abolish the Death Penalty?

Question

Lets just say do without death by lethal injection?

Answer 1

Look at the countries that still have the death penalty : Iraq, Libya, etc.....Maybe it needs more to be a civilized country.

Answer 2

I believe it should be. Here are some verifiable and sourced facts to support this.

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 3

Yes, that would save us a huge amount of money. The legal system requires automatic appeals, separate trials for the offense and the punishment, and allows the inmate many appeal and other channels. The total cost to the state for all of this far exceeds the cost of keeping that same person locked up for the rest of their natural life.

The other problem we would avoid is the death of an innocent person; we can rectify a problem if someone is later found innocent if they are in jail, but we can't bring them back if we've executed them. The government estimates over 80 such executions occurred in the last two centuries; not a lot, but sufficient to make the practice unacceptable.

Life should mean life though; no parole, no priviledges. When you've taken someone else's life, then you don't get to enjoy the rest of yours.

Answer 4

Read the book, "Mindhunter," by John Douglas and you'll come to the same conclusion that I have, that the death penalty should not be abolished. This book is a chronicle of how an FBI director interviewed numerous serial killers and developed the technique of "profiling." (He was the expert consultant for the movie, "Silence of the Lambs.") The sick and twisted methods these degenerates devised to torture, mutilate and murder innocent people will convince the most liberal thinker that something definitive must be done to ensure they never get back on the streets. I don't think of capital punishment necessarily as an "eye for an eye" punishment; in some cases, I think death is a merciful alternative to a lifetime spent in prison where brutal fighting, rape, torture and even murder are regular occurrences.

There is such a thing as justice. What would you consider a just penalty for someone who tortures, mutilates and murders completely innocent people? What if it was your brother? your sister? your mother or father? your child? Would that be enough to change your mind?

As for what can be considered a merciful method of death, I don't know. Lethal injection, I think, may be more painful than we really know. I can't imagine that being paralyzed (including the diaphragm, stopping the ability to breathe) and then having my heart arrested can feel good. Personally, I think a firing squad is the best. Blindfold the guy and get it over with quickly and soundly. Shot to the head. Immediate and permanent.

Answer 5

States with the death penalty are no safer then those without, so it is not a deterrent. Besides Bush called Iran and North Korea the axis of evil and the one thing they all share in common ins the death penalty. Not pleasant company to be keeping.

Answer 6

I would support the death penalty were it not for the inherent, historical, socio-economic and racial inequalities in the American justice system.

I believe that societies have a responsibility to protect the population and that certain crimes are so heinous they demand the ultimate penalty.

However, the unfortunate fact is that the death penalty remains one of the most politically abused aspects of the justice system.

Until the inequalities of our justice system are remedied, the death penalty should be abolished.

Answer 7

Depends on what death penalty you are talking about. For a person convicted for the crime of murderer? NO! The death penalty for unborn babies that are killed because they committed the crime of being conceived at an inconvenient time to the person who got pregnant when they didn't mean to? YES!

Answer 8

Would be a good start, only pariah Countries are still using the death penalty!

Answer 9

Nope!!! If someone kills, they deserve to die. Plus, if we do not put them to death, we will continue to spend tax payers money on these murderers.

Answer 10

no, but should take in consideration the crime, and truly verify this person is guilty