Death Penatly you do the crime you pay the time
is the right or should we do what they did to the victim
like if the offerdener killed a little girl should we kill him like he did the little girl.
2007-03-19 02:52:52 · 8 answers · asked by samantha_lry 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
The US Supreme Court in 2005 in Roper v. Simmons forbide the execution of convicts if the convict killed before his/her 18th birthday. However, the death penalty is a bad choice for punishment in any case because what people are crying for is retribution. When someone is executed it doesn't lower the crime rate and it doesn't deter killing in any sense of the word, so why do it? In fact, (with all the appeals and time involved) it isn't any cheaper to execute than it is to keep someone in prison for life without the possibility of parole. To say that a victim is crying out for justice is just plain stupid, but jurors actually believe it. One could go on and on as to reasons for or against executing someone, but the bottom line here is, "WHY DO WE KILL PEOPLE THAT KILL PEOPLE TO SHOW THAT KILLING PEOPLE IS WRONG?"
Some say it is shown in the Bible, but that isn't so because God gave us the 10 commandments and the fifth commandment says, "Thou shalt not kill". It doesn't say that thou shalt not kill Mrs. Jones or anyone else, it says "Thou shalt not kill". One can put the bible on the table and read twisted scripture after twisted scripture - but killing is evil in any terms and it doesn't make a difference as to who is doing the killing.
2007-03-19 04:19:12 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The death penalty is a justifiable punishment I believe however in America it not able to be applied correctly so until we get it right we should not use it. The death penalty fulfills two purposes, retribution and incapacitation.
BTW. "Eye for an eye" is not retribution, it is a limiting of punishment. The punishment cannot go beyond what the original damage that was given, read the verse in context. Jesus did not overthrow this, he clarified it actually. (Matt. 5:17-19)
2007-03-19 11:40:00 · answer #2 · answered by Clamps 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would depend on the crime. If in fact a murder did happen as the Bible says an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. This government would save alot of money by doing just that instead of putting them in jail or a juvenile detention center.
2007-03-19 10:01:29 · answer #3 · answered by Williamstown 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
tough question, personally i believe an eye for an eye, but in todays society it is hard for us to put a child to death, but the excuse that they don't know right from wrong doesn't hold water for me......as for the theory that maybe they were abused so they are reacting to that isn't getting it for me either...i am from a different generation and sparing the rod so to speak didn't harm us, so yes, if a juvie does a crime, they should do the time....if they take someones life in anything but self-defense, they deserve to die.......
2007-03-19 10:05:13 · answer #4 · answered by msvaga 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, I think that's incredibly sick and medieval. If we consider ourselves civilized as a society, we should not harm, torture or kill people, whatever they do.
We should strive to be better than criminals, not just sink to their sadistic, despicable level.
2007-03-19 10:10:10 · answer #5 · answered by Saint Bee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that that we should do the same to them as they did to the victim, but i'm not for sure about a rapist though!
2007-03-19 10:03:34 · answer #6 · answered by blondiegirl1065 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whenever that happens...society sinks to the level of the offender. We, as a society, need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. Just my opinion...
2007-03-19 09:58:29 · answer #7 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Kill them then sort it out.
2007-03-19 10:36:03 · answer #8 · answered by James B 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋