I answered this question in another Yahoo Answers forum.
I am assuming that because you asked this question in a few forums you really want to find out the facts. You have received several answers to this one that are wrong- on deterrence, on whether the most heinous crimes get the death penalty etc.
I know this is supposed to be for death penalty supporters, but I want to make sure people make up their minds knowing the facts. Here, again, are answers to some questions often asked about the death penalty system. The sources are listed below- anyone can check them out.
Isn't the death penalty cheaper than keeping criminals in prison?
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison. Much of the extra costs is due to the complicated nature of both the pre trial investigation and of the trials (involving 2 separate stages, mandated by the Supreme Court) in death penalty cases. There are more cost effective ways to prevent and control crime.
What about the risk of executing innocent people?
Over 120 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence, many having already served over 2 decades on death row.
Doesn't DNA keep new cases like these from happening?
DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee against the execution of innocent people.
Doesn't the death penalty prevent others from committing murder?
No reputable study shows the death penalty to be a deterrent. Homicide rates are higher in states that have it than in states that do not. Most killers don't think about the consequences anyway. They do not think they will be caught (if they think at all.)
So, what are the alternatives?
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. Life without parole is less expensive than the death penalty.
What about the very worst crimes?
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??
Doesn't the death penalty help families of murder victims?
Not necessarily. Murder victim family members across the country argue that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.
So, why don't we speed up the process?
Many of the 123 innocent people released from death row had already been there for over 2 decades. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.
But don’t Americans prefer the death penalty as the most serious punishment?
Not any more. People are rethinking their views, given the facts and the records on innocent people sentenced to death. According to a Gallup Poll, in 2006, 47% of all Americans prefer capital punishment while 48% prefer life without parole. Americans are learning about the system and we are making up our minds based on facts, not eye for an eye sound bites.
2007-05-02 09:51:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Susan S 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I know that it not allways the right anwer
look on the net for faces of death or traces of death
and se what the punishment is for serious ofennses in other contrys .
personaly i would rather fece a capita case here than over seas at least you get to keep all you're boddy parts.
ther the punishment fits the crime (that which offends is usualy cut off) you know what means in cases of rape.
in the midel east a dui is punishable by death. and no the juge does not pass down this, it is the police that carrys out the punishment on the spot. it is a haging offence just find the neares light post and thare you hang.
i am definatel for capital punishment,
just think of it this way which would you rather have all youre boody parts in ther proper places and do the time or face death,
this is not how it would be in other countrys,
if you escape or attemt to the punishment is death but not by humane methets (the private area on a man is severd stufed in the mouth then decapitated that makes capital punishment sound sweet compared to the alternative.
2007-05-02 07:05:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by rubberhotman 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Capital punishment is reserved for only the most heinous kind of crimes. Since murder with no extenuating circumstances can already result in a life sentence, there must be an extraordinary punishment for the truly extraordinary crimes. Just review any case that resulted in Capital punishment. Read of the depravity of the person who perpetrated it. Read about what that perpetrator actually did to his victim(s). It has to be pretty bad to warrant capital punishment.
Regarding the issue of safety, such depraved individuals are a menace as long as they remain alive. They will kill again and again if given the chance. If they escape or have occasion to attack corrections personnel or other inmates any other death they cause is the fault of the system for not executing him/her to begin with.
I further believe that it needs to be expanded to include pedophiles, too.
If someone tries to make a issue of the fact that a disproportionate number of black inmates have death sentences or a disproportionate number of blacks who killed whites as opposed to blacks killing blacks get the death penalty, that is subterfuge. A black is much more likely to receive a death penalty for killing a white because most of white people killed are strangers to the black perpetrator and die in the course of the commission of another felony such as car jacking or robbery. Most blacks that are killed by other blacks knew the killer and died in a crime of passion. The same is true about most whites killed by whites. These cases are usually second degree murder or even manslaughter, neither of which is elegiable for capital punishement.
Capital punishment is a deterrent. I cite the case of Colin Ferguson, the Long Island Rail Road killer. At the time Ferguson committed his crimes, capital punishment had been abolished in New York. While he was in jail, awaiting trial, the death penalty was reinstated. Because his crimes were covered by existing law he was not elegiable for the death penalty.
However, he did not know this. When he found out that the death penalty was reinstated, he broke down sobbing and begging for his life. No matter how hard the corrections officers tried to convince him he was inelegible, he refused to believe them and begged for his life.
Finally, they got the Assistant District Attorney to tell him personally. Only after the DA's repeated reassurances was he finally convinced. It is a good example of a mass murder that probably would not have occurred had the death penalty been in place. He feared death, he did not fear life in prison.
Some may claim that it is not a deterrance. It is not possible to know how many crimes did not occurr because of a derrant. But it is also clear that a lot of criminals plead guilty to avoid even being exposed to capital punishment.
2007-05-02 06:57:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jacob W 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Capital punishment is a deterent to crime, with no recidivism. No one who has ever been executed has committed another crime.
The problem with our current capital punishment is that it takes to long. Some people die of old age before they are exectuted.
We might also want to look into more Captiol punishment.
2007-05-02 06:29:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I feel child rape and sodomy should be considered as punishable by death.
2007-05-02 06:44:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Handy man 5
·
0⤊
0⤋