2007-04-23 01:18:17 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
pro that it gives a lesson to all the other criminals, cons that the person might be innocent
2007-04-23 01:25:54 · answer #1 · answered by GiGgLeS 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Punishment in our system should serve certain objective, useful purposes: Deterrence, insuring the safety of society, rehabilitation (if possible), just punishment for a crime.
While some might argue the last is served, the massive racial disparity in how the punishment is meted out, the huge gap in how it is applied to different people in differing economic strata show that it is anything but just. The number of people who have been EXONERATED (not just let off on a technicality, but had overwhelming evidence of innocence) and the irreversible nature of the punishment also make it unjust.
How does it match up vs. the most harsh alternative, life without parole? It's more expensive, it's no more of a deterrent (multiple studies have shown this), and a life sentance doesn't display the blatant hypocrisy of killing someone to show that killing is wrong. It doesn't safeguard society any better than indefinite incarceration - either way the person isn't going to get the chance to harm anyone on the outside.
The death penalty serves mostly as revenge, and, though individually we may be okay with some revenge, as a society, our systems and processes can't serve as a tool for personal revenge and sating bloodlust.
EDIT: For all those claiming it costs less to put someone to death, THAT'S NOT TRUE. It costs much more to execute someone than to incarcerate them for life.
2007-04-23 01:27:17 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only pro is that it is cheaper to euphanize an inmate than it is to keep them in prison forever. There are many cons though. That person may be innocent, they have killed innocent people in the past, murder is murder and shouldn't be justified for the government to do it, and what kind of punishment is the inmate getting? None really because they are put to death. They should have to wake up and suffer everyday of their lives for what they did. There should be one facility for all those on death row and they should have it the worst way possible. They should bust their butts and do whatever the government feels deemed to do to them. They should be reminded daily of their victim(s) that are no longer here because of them.The government is stupid anyway. Someone can kill 5 people and get life in prison, but another can kill just one and get the death sentence. Have you heard of the Jimella Tunstall case? She was my friend, and we used to live together. That Hall b**** that killed her, her unborn daughter, and her 3 kids for no aparent reason is only getting the death penalty as an option on 1 of the murders, but she killed 5 people. She cut the baby out of my friend with a pair of scissors in a park, and left her for dead, and the baby died because she was only 7 months pregnant. She had a funeral for the baby passing it off as her own that died still born. She drowned the other 3 kids and stuffed them in the washer and dryer in their own apartment. Bad thing is that those kids knew and trusted her and went with her willingly. In my opinion she should get beat everyday for the rest of her life. She killed a sweet young girl and her innocent children out of stupidity and her own issues. The state had already taken her own kids because she was declared a danger to them and herself.
2007-04-23 05:09:07 · answer #3 · answered by trisha l 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good Question: I was talking to someone who lives in Texas. Where they execute the Prisoners. At a much faster rate. And there is noticeable stats to prove that the fear of Execution. Has made a difference in the heinous Crimes. I'm all for it. If it gets the bad guys, dead! Not just sittin' on Death Row, not being carried out.
2007-04-23 01:25:45 · answer #4 · answered by Nunya Bidniss 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
PRO
It ensures that the scum that commit the most heinous crimes never do it again.
CON
It takes too long to get someone from a guilty verdict to the electric chair.
2007-04-23 04:14:58 · answer #5 · answered by wuxxler 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
PRO- You don't have to worry about the Accused breaking the law again.
CON- Not enough other criminals see the creep getting the gas.
2007-04-23 01:22:32 · answer #6 · answered by SGT. D 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
pro, its cheaper in the long run...cons, we have killed innocent people in the past. So what do you value money or life?
2007-04-23 01:21:34 · answer #7 · answered by Laughing Man Copycat 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pro...they'll NEVER do another crime again! 75% of all ex-cons commit crime again after release!
Con... it cost to much to prosecute ( # of appeals)
2007-04-23 01:38:33 · answer #8 · answered by Robert P 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
pro'
victim satisfied
con
coppers lie
www.all-about-britain.com
2007-04-23 02:34:14 · answer #9 · answered by eurobichons 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋