Do you believe that the death penality should be expanded to include other henious crimes and carried out?

Question

Swiftly say within 180 days, which allows time for one appeal?
Why are pro chicers against executing a killer, rapist childmolester but for killing a baby?

"What gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument — whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/death_penalty_deterrence_8;_ylt=Ame0Qd0Rc3xaST1i9BEOumsE1vAI

Answer 1

I am an absolute proponent for the death penalty. I always hear from people that we don't have the right to take a human life. In my opinion, there are people who have forfeited their right to continue living by their own heinous actions.

The appeals process IS far too long and convoluted.

As far as "cruel and unusual punishment" goes, we are far too concerned with the feelings of those that have earned the ultimate punishment. If they've earned the death penalty why shouldn't they suffer? Someone somewhere suffered for the actions, why should I care if they suffer a few moments of pain before they go off to meet their god?

Answer 2

Canada has no death penalty. Its population is the same as the state of California.

California has the death penalty and 2500 murders a year. Canada has around 500 a year. Four people were put to death last year in the california penal system.

I therefore declare that those four executions led to an additional four hundered murders each.

2500 - 500 = 2000 / 5 = 400 homicides for every additional person put to death by the state.

(junk science. There is no way of determining wether or not death penalty prevents homicides. But, we do know that in general, states without the death penalty have less homicide than those that do. Does not mean the death penalty causes more homicides. But, it doesnt appear to be an effective way of preventing homicide.)

Answer 3

1.) I'm for the death penalty
2.) I'm pro-choice

I believe, if you take it upon yourself to murder another human being, not in the case of self-defense, but just out of pure malliciousness, you need to be killed.

I was watching the CNN story, about how this man put his baby in a microwave ~ he needs to be killed.

Extreme cruelty against humanity should cost a person the ultimate penalty - death.

As for my beliefs in being pro choice - If a woman chose to have sex with someone, she should not be allowed to have an abortion. Even if she used protection, and it didn't work.

In the case of rape, a woman has every right to have an abortion. It would be more unethical of us, to allow a woman who has already been victimized to go under the pains, and stresses of pregnancy and childbirth, for the sake of a child who will be a constant reminder to her of her victimizer.

Answer 4

I would have to say only premeditated murder should be a crime punishable by death. However, I could certainly condone life without possibility of parole for other violent crimes...especially repeat offenders.

Answer 5

I am pro death penality. We should extend it to child molesters, rapists and kidnappers.
But we also better make sure we have the right person responsible for the crime!

Answer 6

I believe that anyone who is on death row and DNA proves beyond a doubt that he/she is guilty, should be put to death almost instantly with no opportunity to waste our time and money with appeals.

As far as rapists and child molesters go. Let them stay in prison for life. Child molesters in particular, are despised by fellow prisoners and are forced to pay their dues time and time again. They learn in short order, what it feels like to be molested!

Answer 7

Absolutely i believe in the death penalty - it costs the government a huge chunk of it's budget keeping prisoners in prison & paying the price for their continued crimes when they leave jail. I say put them out of their misery, put society out of misery & save a few good dollars - kill em i say.

Answer 8

yes No repeat offenders. Also Make it a Pay Per View special in Madison Square Garden sell tickets and Pay down the National debt in weeks!

Answer 9

Child Molesters/abductors, Baby Killers?Mutilators, Killers~White supremacists~Yes~!~
Don't even allow them to repeat their behavior~
And get rid of this "mentally retarded" are accused crap~
If they are smart enough to kill someone they are smart enough to know it's wrong~
Stop worrying about the pot smokers and crack down on some butts!
I believe that we spend too much time on "petty" crimes>>>
And instead of locking these people up while we feed and house them~
Design real working programs that contribute to society~
Make them work~really work~
These nuts are the one's that belong in this war~
Not good strong Americans who are losing there lives daily~
If they like to kill people send them someplace they can~
I know many people are innocent in many cases~
Crack down on the judicial system~

Answer 10

As far as a financial burden to taxpayers, it is cheaper to keep a prisoner in jail for life than to execute them. 180 days seems a little short for an appeal. However, I am for expanding the death penalty to include pedophiles, multiple convictions for drunk driving and rapists.