benefits of death penalty?

Answer 1

Cheaper

Answer 2

The death penalty should be used when someone murders someone!!!! Why should that person get to live while the other person is dead??? The way I see it is the Murderer did the crime why should WE pay for his time. I don't believe that keeping someone in prison is cheaper then the death penalty. The person is going to appeal the case over and over again no matter what the crime is so that is a mute point!!! To feed a prisoner, the guards for the prisoner, clothes, showers, daily supplies, come one!!!! Oh not to mention the new Jails that will have to be built because we all know that is what happens when people go in but they don't come out (dead or alive)!!
I just thing the time should fit the crime so if the person takes alive he doesn't deserve his!!!

Answer 3

I think the urge to see the perpetrator of a horrendous crime killed is a normal and understandable human reaction. I was pro-death penalty for a long time, but I have changed my stance over the years, for several reasons:

1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes our legal system gets it wrong. Look at all the criminals who are being released after years of imprisonment because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. No matter how rare it is, our government should not risk executing one single innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people. If you need more, read on:

2. Because of the extra expense of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty states. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government becomes the bad parent who says, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

4. There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst of our criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.”

5. The U.S. government is supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Answer 4

If you want some facts, here are answers to questions asked about the death penalty, with sources listed below. Several people who already answered are wrong about costs, about the worst of the worst, about the slowness of the legal process and may not know about life without parole. I’ve starred the facts about these.

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, which is supposed to help us avoid executing innocent people. 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.

*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 5

There are a number of scenarios where killing can be justified, legally and morally.
With regard to the death penalty, the one argument against, that has any merit, is that often innocent people are executed. This is a fault with the judicial process rather then the penalty and should be addressed.
To deny the possibility of the death sentence is an abdication of responsibility and implicitly gives the power of life and death to those who are prepared to use it.
ie. the criminal.

I would like to see the question of the death penalty put to the vote at myverdict.net, to ascertain how people around the world feel about this.

Answer 6

One I can think of is that murderer(currently the only crime in which the death penalty is an option),will never be able to kill an innocent person again. The only way that I would ever agree to not having the death penalty would be if a life sentence actually meant that the criminal would spend the rest of their lives behind bars, in a prison that was escape proof.

Answer 7

It takes the worst of the worst off the streets without having to worry about them returning. Working in a prison it also helps inmates control themselves when becoming violent, because it is easier to catch the death penalty if your already incarcerated.

Answer 8

The death penalty keeps that person from ever committing another crime but they should not have 20 years of appeals, I say one appeal and that is it, this gives the murders one appeal more than the victims got.

Answer 9

creating a basis and a scare tactic to prevent future criminals from committing a crime of equal weight.

It is a faster process that does not require a convict to be in prison for 100+ years. So that has its benefits being less money wasted on food, medical bills, sleeping quarters, guards, faculties, etc.

Answer 10

It's not cheaper...the automatic appeals process for those sentenced to death cost more than keeping them in prison on average.

There are no benefits of the death penalty.