Death Penalty: For or Against?

Question

What is your arguement either way?

Answer 1

Against.

3 people murdered my grandmom. As my third grade daughter said at the time "Mom, if we kill them, they win. They make us as bad as they are."

She makes a good point.

Answer 2

I oppose the death penalty because it is not an effective way to prevent or reduce crime and risks executing innocent people. Here are answers to questions about the practical aspects of the death penalty system, with sources listed below.

What about the risk of executing innocent people?
124 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence.

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. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in states that do not.

So, what are the alternatives?
Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure and swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole is less expensive than the death penalty.

But isn't the death penalty cheaper than keeping criminals in prison?
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, largely because of the legal process. Extra costs include those 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 and subsequent appeals. There are more cost effective ways to prevent and control crime.

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?
Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. 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.

Answer 3

I am against the death penalty in each and every case.

I believe that it is beyond the scope of human reason to decide when another human deserves to be pusnished with death. It can never be undone.

It is wrong to ask another human being to administer murder as a punishment. You can never un-murder someone. A person may decide s/he was justified in administering the execution of a prisoner at 30, but their death penalty philosophy my change at 60. That person cannot undue the execution. The executioner has to live with the fact that s/he murdered someone for ever.

What if a person was executed by mistake. The person doesn't get their life back. The family doean't get that person back. And again, the executioner has to live with the fact that they executed an innocent person for the rest of their life.

What kind of society would ask fellow citizens to sentence and administer the punishment of execution and forever live with the consequences on it's behalf?

Answer 4

I'm for it but I can also see the reasons for being against it. Many who live deserve death, and many who die deserve life. BUT if a guy murdered/raped/molested/ect. your child/wife/husband/or whoever you're close to and love, wouldn't you want to see justice served upon them, and I'm sorry to say this, but justice is pretty much revenge prettied up. So if you get your revenge on someone, you bring your own personnal justice to them. Same with the death penalty, if you rape or kill or whatever you deserve the worst of fate, no last rights, no nothing. So think about that some.

Answer 5

FOR: I guess it depends on how much society is prepared to spend housing and rehabilitating criminals. How many prisons can society afford to build? What happens when there is a depression, or other factors that prevent us from looking after all the criminals in this country? Do we look after our law abiding citizens, hungry children, or do we build more prisons? Sometimes society can't do everything, and I think that if it can be proved by dna, etc. that a person killed another person intentionally, then that person should die also. I also feel that a society's first duty is to its children and women. If a society cannot protect its women and children, then it is not much of a society. Rape of children, and all other sick acts done by child abusers, should also be punished by the death penalty.

Answer 6

I'm for it in the extreme cases only. But we, as a whole, seem not to *ever* be able to stop at the extremes and eventually start shouting for the blood 14 year old imbeciles - demanding that they be tried and punished as adults. It's sad to watch that slide into mob mentality and the only way to stop it is to simply say NO to capital punishment.

Answer 7

Against.

Answer 8

Definitely for it. I asked my older brother, (who's a ret.
cop), at a party recently: "Was it really necessary to
execute Saddam Hussein?"
Dave replied: "What if he'd escaped prison and killed
some people?"
I had to nod. "Point taken," I said.
Charles Manson and Osama bin Laden have not
been directly charged with 1st degree murder. But
do they deserve the death penalty for their horrific
crimes against manking? Indeed, they do.
And I sincerely hope Charles M. , Osama b. L.,
and everyone else like them are in for what they
deserve, too.

Answer 9

I'm against it, because we as a species are barely able to make it through a single day without misinterpreting 95% of
everything we experience in that day. How on earth do we consider ourselves capable of passing terminal judgement on someone, when we can barely decide which ignorant television program to watch with our pizza and beer tonight.

Answer 10

I'm for it, because God requires it.. Let me tell you sister, it is not a revenge thing it is part of the everlasting covenant that God made with Noah after the flood. In Genesis 9:5&6 God told Noah... And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

No place does Jesus say that this law is void. We have failed miserably in this country and around the world. We who do not dispence God's justice in accordance to his word will have to answer for it. This does not mean we do not forgive a murderer, we must forgive just like the Amish did in Lancater County PA. But the murderer must be put to death if proven to be so beyond the shadow of all doubt. This is God's law.

What is really sad in this country is that over 40 million babies and counting have been murdered here by the ghastly proceedure of abortion. Here are innocent precious souls being slaughtered daily while perverted mass killers and child molesters watch TV in air conditioned cells at the taxpayer expence. We have sunk to a very low level.

Deuteronomy 27:25 Cursed be he that taketh reward to slay an innocent person. And all the people shall say, Amen.

Amen Cap'n Arlo

Answer 11

Against. Judges and juries make mistakes, and the death-penalty is irreversible. Also, killing people to prove killing is wrong does nothing except inspire psychopaths to run for elected office.