Moral problems with the capital punishment??

Question

I mean, they say "an eye for an eye".
So they kill the killer.
I dont really get the logistics of the moral problem other than that.
Clarify please, por favor!!!!

Answer 1

Imagine a little girl getting raped, amputated, tortured and finally slaughtered like a pig. And the killer then gets locked up in a jail and live to enjoy hanging around with other prison buddies, receive porn from his friends. And live the rest of his life thinking what a great thing he had done. Do you think that is fair for the little girl?

Answer 2

Capital punishment (death penalty) is done for two reasons basically: to punish a person for what he has done or for vengeance for the victim. Deterrence is usually discounted as an argument but I do have clients that hate getting caught committing crimes in Texas because they all know that we have the death penalty. They also know that Harris County (Houston) has placed more people on death row that almost the whole country combined.

But, in answer to your question, not all murders are "capital murders". If you kill someone, it is a 1st degree felony here (5-99 or probation), unless you do one of 6 things along with the murder: murder a police officer, murder a child under 6, or commit a murder while robbing, kidnapping or sexually assaulting someone, and finally if you kill more than one person at a time. These are the ways it can become a death penalty case. The next step is when a prosecutor looks at the facts and the defendant's criminal history and either makes the decision to seek life in prison or the death penalty. Many times, smaller jurisdictions do not seek the death penalty because they do not have the money in their budgets. (cases like this are extremely expensive for the county in appeals and trials)
Morally, it depends on where you stand religiously and ethically. Is it right? The Bible states that is you commit murder then the result will be your death. It also talks about forgiveness and turning the other cheek.

I personally think that people in Houston are tired of murders. They give the death penalty because they are concerned for their neighbors and they want to send a message that murdering police officers, for example, will not be tolerated. If you kill a police officer, they reason, you do not deserve to breathe the same air as normal law-abiding people anymore. They are fed up with crime. Many people in Houston are people of color. Many of them are democrats. I do not think it is a "political" thing here. It is about accountability and knowing right from wrong. They do not care what your color is: if you kill and rape a child, you will find death. Right or wrong that is the sentiment I have seen.

Answer 3

Judaic law prescribed an eye for an eye, meaning that the payment had to fit the crime. If you took someone else's eyesight, then yours had to be removed as well. If you took someone's life, you paid with your own. The problem with this concept is that the payment was not often very satisfying for the victims. If you paid with your life, the widow and children still had no income.

Some Native American tribes believed that crazy people were touched by the great spirit and should be venerated. People who did violence to others however, were born with no soul and should be quickly and humanely put out of their misery. Some people think of capital punishment as a way to allow GOD to make the final decision. Some people see it as a way to remove a persistent threat to the community.

The problem with capital punishment is that there is no way to reverse it when new evidence is presented. This was seldom an issue fifty years ago, but with DNA and new forensic techniques it has become more and more of an issue. Even confessed criminals have been set free when new evidence has proved their innocence. Convicted rapists have been released when it proved that the victim how accused them of the crime was wrong! This has prompted at least one Governor to take all of the prisoners in the state off of death row because so many had been proven innocent during his tenure.

The moral problem with capital punishment is that there is seldom any way to prove conclusively that a prisoner has absolutely committed the crime beyond any doubt whatsoever. We have been wrong too many times, and too many people have served decades when they were innocent, or paid with their lives when their only real crime was being too poor to afford competent legal representation.

Answer 4

the logic behind the moral problem with the capital punishment is that many people think that by killing the killer, we are falling down to the killers level as we are also technically a killer. they think that instead of becoming a killer ourselves, we should give the killer a chance and show that person humanity; as otherwise, there would be no difference between the killer and themselves ("good people").

that kind of people often forget the meaning of justice and sympathize with the killer instead of the victim

Answer 5

I oppose the death penalty, but I think that the logic of the eye for an eye argument, either way, doesn't change many people's minds. There are many practical issues surrounding the death penalty whatever moral views you hold about the death penalty, it is important to know about these issues.

Here are some facts about the system- all of them with sources listed below.

The death penalty risks executing innocent people (123 already exonerated) and DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee that we will not execute an innocent person.

The death penalty is not a deterrent. States that allow the death penalty have higher homicide rates than states that do not. Most killers do not even think they will be caught (if they think at all)

Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. Supermax prisons are terrible places to spend the rest of your life.

The death penalty can be very hard on families of murder victims. The legal process can take years and they are forced to relive their ordeal in courts and in the medial

Many innocent people on death rows spent over 2 decades before being freed. If the process were speeded up up we would certainly execute innocent people.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison.

The death penalty does not apply to the worst of the worst. It applies to defendants with the worst lawyers.

48% of Americans prefer life without parole and 47% prefer the death penalty.

Answer 6

the logic behind capital punishment is it is an end.it is meant to remove people from a society that cannot stop killing and maiming,why wait to see if a killer kills again.......incarcerated or not,it was never meant as a deterrent,there are so many reasons why it should always be an option,and not one good reason why it should be abolished.

Answer 7

No, however the best arguments against capital punishment are logical, no longer morality-based (this is subjective): a million. via a techniques the main compelling is this: each now and then the criminal equipment gets it incorrect. interior the U.S., over one hundred dying row inmates have been exonerated via DNA data interior the final 30 years. regrettably, DNA data isn't available in maximum situations. no count how uncommon that's, the government shouldn't possibility executing one unmarried harmless individual. fairly, that could desire to be reason adequate for many individuals. in case you want greater, examine on: 2. by using better price of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals technique (this is needed - see reason #a million), it costs taxpayers lots greater to execute prisoners than to imprison them for existence. 3. The deterrent result's questionable at best. Violent crime expenditures are fairly larger in dying penalty states. this could seem counterintuitive, and there are various theories approximately why it fairly is (Ted Bundy observed it as a undertaking, so he chosen Florida – the main lively execution state on the time – to accomplish his very final homicide spree). in my view, i think of it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against homicide…via killing human beings. the government turns into the undesirable verify who says, ‘do as I say, no longer as I do.’ 4. There’s additionally an argument to be made that dying is basically too good for the worst of our criminals. enable them to rouse and flow to mattress every day of their lives in a penal complex cellular, and think of with regard to the liberty they DON’T have, till they rot of old age. whilst Ted Bundy became into ultimately arrested in 1978, he advised the police officer, “I want you had killed me.” 5. maximum governments are meant to be secular, yet for people who invoke Christian regulation in this debate, you will locate arguments the two for AND against the dying penalty interior the Bible. to illustrate, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall no longer beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only individual who can take a existence interior the call of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, fairly, is what the dying penalty quantities to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "enable he who's without sin forged the 1st stone."

Answer 8

It's a revenge thing. If someone raped & killed your child, wouldn't you want to see him dead?

I think what's more important here is that particular killer can never kill AGAIN. Every killer that is sent to hell probably saves 5 other people from dying.

Answer 9

It is state sanctioned murder!

You take the Bible out of context and really don't say what Jesus said!

The principle of justice that requires punishment equal in kind to the offense (not greater than the offense, as was frequently given in ancient times). Thus, if someone puts out another's eye, one of the offender's eyes should be put out. The principle is stated in the Book of Exodus as “Thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”


Jesus referred to this principle in the Sermon on the Mount, calling on his followers to turn the other cheek instead.

Jesus rebuked your theory, and you can't bring back the dead if they were innocent. It may have been a custom, but so was infanticide in some cultures, including GB! Jesus never taught that principle.

“Ye have heard that it hath been said, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth”; but I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”


I believe in the execution for mass murderers and ones that are psychopaths. Since they lack a conscience, no person, including prisoners , are safe from them! Usually there is ample evidence!

Most murders are crimes of passion. Murder has by far the lowest recidivism of any crime!

Answer 10

Killing should be done when in imminent danger.Killing an incarcerated person after 10 years of appeals,where is the danger?