Death Penalty whodunit?

Question

Who said that it was okay to kill people and that it wasn't cruel or unusual punishment? Was it the supreme court?

Answer 1

durust13 is correct. It is the U.S. Supreme Court that held the death penalty is legal. They have backed off that in one other way recently, however. Besides ruling it's unConstitutional for juveniles, they ruled it unConsitutional for the mentally handicapped, i.e. people with low I.Q.'s. There are now rulings from a couple of states that lethal injection is cruel because it is too painful. The U.S. Supreme Court has not looked at that issue thoughtly. I think the arguement that it is permitted by the Constitution is flawed. That clause does not permit or prohibit the death penalty. It addresses substantive and procedural due process necessary to impose any criminal penalty. Yes, it mentions capital punishment, but that's not the focus--it's the right to a trial, to confront your witnesses, to know the charge against you etc. It's the Constitutional doctrine of fairness in a criminal proceding and it was adopted to address the abuse of citizens by secret proceedings in English courts known as the "star chambers", which were closed proceedings without any opportunity to mount a defense.

Answer 2

The question is pretty misleading. It is not about abolishing death penalty but to change the way we administer it. Meaning, death penalty stays and how it will be mete out would depend on a case-by-case basis. If we understand this, then we know the answer should be yes we should change the way how it should be administered; and no we should not abolish it as it is an effective deterrent to those thinking of committing a serious offence in Singapore. Not trying to be a saint here or play hero, but people do deserve a 2nd chance. However, whether they deserve it or not is a very subjective matter. I would think that the current system makes it easier for the judge. You do something wrong and deserve a death penalty they administer it. If you change the way it is going to be carried out. Then, inconsistencies and problems may arise. So, the current system is working and it is giving the judge less pain so keep it. In this instance, the Msian guy, does he really deserve a death sentence, based on the evidence collected? Yes? However, can the law exhibits some humanity? Give him another chance? Yes, the president of Singapore can do that. So there is an avenue to pardon a death penalty and it lies on the hand of our President. So if you look from that angle, the death row prisoner does have a last avenue to stay alive. It depends on the President. So, to all...Just stay good and be nice. Dont flout the law, I mean serious ones. Otherwise your life will be on a hanging loop....

Answer 3

The Constitution presumes the existence of the death penalty.

Look at Amendment Five:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..... nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Given that, no one can make a credible argument that the death penalty is a Constitutional violation or is "cruel and unusual" per se.

They have tried, though.

David, you're obviously overlooking the plain text of the Constitution. It most certainly does permit the death penalty. Other parts prohibit "cruel and unusual" methods, but it very clearly foresees the death penalty being used. What it does NOT do is require the legislatures to make it available. All your chatter about Due Process is a procedural matter. The Constitution is so clear on the permissibility of the death penalty that only a lawyer could be confused about it.

Answer 4

The Supreme Court has ruled that it was not cruel or unusual punishment. Recently, they have begun backing off of that stance. It is now considered cruel and unusual to put individuals under the age of 17 to death (a ruling that the US was very slow to do, in comparison to the other "civilized" nations of the world).

Answer 5

death penalty is great dont do the crime ,dont do the time