Death penalty for:
Murder
Rape
Child Rape (this should be automatic)
2007-07-18 16:53:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Coach 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
I don't think so. The death penalty is not an effective way of preventing or reducing crime and it risks executing innocent people. Here are answers to questions about the death penalty system and its alternatives.
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. Americans are learning about the system and we are making up our minds based on facts, not eye for an eye sound bites.
2007-07-19 02:01:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by Susan S 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I guess you mean "First Degree Murder" (premeditated murders, and murders involving certain especially dangerous felonies, such as arson or rape.)
But let's say you are raped by a psycho HIV+; you get infected plus a broken soul and he gets 5 years (yes rapists should get life sentence but our laws don't care about women) he goes on parole in 2 years (to rape more girls), one day you decide go to his home and you just empty a gun over him; Do you deserve death penalty? It was a premeditated murder and probably the paper wont tell your side of the story.
So I think that each case should be seen one by one; we can't just say "OK needle for all and let's go".
Besides there are many innocent people sitting on death row that years later have been found to be Innocent (and once you execute someone by mistake, you can undo that).
Evidence can be misinterpreted, confessions can be faked, witnesses can be wrong; unless you have a high resolution camera recording a murder there is no way to be absolutely sure about who did the crime.
Life-sentece could be good if done right (no parole ever, no early release for "good behavior", no seeing or talking to anyone, and to spend the rest of their life on a 4' x 8' cage until the day the murderer die).
2007-07-18 17:25:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it is situational. Let us say a person finds their spouse cheating on them, kills them in the heat of the moment. That person deserves jail time and lots of it. Do they really deserve death? Or the person who is young, naive, and brainwashed by those around him. Does he deserve death or maybe he should be given a chance to change. A good movie for that kind of thing would be American History X.
Now when I lived in Arizona their was a serial killer who was shooting random people. When they caught him and asked why he said he was bored. Now someone who shoots people for sport, yeah, I can see killing them. Someone who tortures, rapes, then kills their victim, I can see putting them to death. The death penalty has always been and always should be an extreme punishment for the most extreme of acts.
2007-07-18 16:53:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Memnoch 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Meant to do it" -- does that mean only premeditated or intentional murder?
Or do you include reckless manslaughter -- where the person didn't mean to kill anyone but was deliberately reckless about the possibility?
Do you include heat of passion manslaughter -- where the person is so enraged that they kill someone in that fury? Such as coming into the room just after a burglar has raped your daughter and killing the burglar out of furious rage and for revenge?
Do you include negligent homicide -- where the person never even thought someone could have died as a result of what the did?
It's not so clean cut a question..... even if you support the death penalty in some situations. Where do you draw the line?
2007-07-18 16:53:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
There are degress of murder. Someone who kills another without intent to do so is not given the death penalty. Someone who plans out a murder received the maximum sentence.
2007-07-18 16:56:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Regardless as to why, I do not have the right to murder another human being. It was wrong for the murderer to commit the crime but that does not give me the right to take another life. Doing so makes me no different than the murderer.
2007-07-18 16:53:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Death Sentence for killing? No.
Death Sentence for murder? Yes.
2007-07-18 16:50:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes for any kind of Homicide.
No for self defense.
A murderer is only able to begin repentance in the spirit world.
2007-07-18 16:55:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by duhanlorian 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
yeah i think its fair punishment. actually no its not fair.... they had a choice to kill them.. the person that got killed didnt have the choice of living or dying..
2007-07-18 16:54:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋