Death penalty?

Question

Can someone please explain, without the name calling and lib/con nonsense, why they are against the death penalty in cases where the perp so clearly deserves it? These scumbags that shot the NYC cops, between the three of them haven't lived a clean day in their miserable lives, the chick in Ohio that killed her infant by cooking her in a microwave, or the two girls who stranggled a 91 year old woman for a gold chain and some bath towels.
Again, without the name calling, can someone against the death penalty explain their rational to me in a clear intellectual explanation?

fredlikespie -- Prison is place where the criminal mind is sharpened. Rehabilitation comes from the individual, like someone who has stopped smoking or drinking, if the person dosn't want to be rehabed it will not take.
If they have mental problems I feel for ya but you still did what you did and your mental problems dont give you the right to take away my wife or daughter.
Substance abuse? Tough -- I'm sure most don't have the same amount of sympathy for a smoker with cancer that they do for a crack addict -- They both caused their own problem.
Troubled social situations?? Again not the rest of societies problem, your wife left you, can't buy a new car?? Handle it like the rest of us -- everybody's got problems.
Trumatic experience -- I get what your saying but again that doesn't give you the right to do it to someone else.

me -- perp is short for perpetrator which in interchangeable with "subject", "defendant" or any other non-offensive term you would like to use so that's not name calling.

As for scumbags, none of these animals have showed a shred of human decency which would elevate them to anything comparable to a normal person

Answer 1

The system itself is flawed. Here are answers to questions about the practical aspects of the death penalty system, with sources listed below. Until we find a way to correct the flaws, life without parole is the way to go.

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. In fact, a number of exonerations occurred in cases where the defendent had confessed (having been coerced or manipulated into doing so.) Examples: Earl Washington, Gary Gauger, - see the last source I listed.

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.

Answer 2

I think the urge to see the perpetrator of a horrendous crime (like the ones you mentioned) 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. Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. 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 3

This is a very good question. I am very excited to see what others write. However, I don't think you are going to get an opinion without a lib/con view point. It seems EVERYTHING in this country, now-a-days, has to be on one side or the other. Nobody is ever in between. You are either right or wrong (depending on your view point).

I agree with you. I think those people should die, and not in a humane way such as lethal injection. They should be tortured as they tortured there victims. Our most severe punishment, the death penalty, isn't severe enough these days.

These people commit the most evil murders you can't even imagine, and get off with time in a mental ward or life in prison. In my opinion it is an outrage. The legal system is a joke. And it is because there are a certain group of people who believe that these people deserve a right to live even though they didn't allow that same right for their victims (sorry, I'm just as guilty when it comes to choosing sides).

EDIT: A person a couple of answers down says people can get better with help. I will concede to that thought, but what good does that do for a man/woman with life in jail and no parole. Go watch any documentary on any prison in the country. That person is more dangerous than anyone. He/She has nothing to lose and will, more often than not, hurt a guard or fellow inmate to prove a point. These people are still a threat to society and waste valuable tax dollars. And we should try to help them why?

I hope this helped. Have a good one.

Answer 4

I oppose the death penalty because the law where i come from works with the belief that however severe a crime may be a criminal can change and become a better person if they recieve professional help, dicipline and counceling.

People do not act in acceptable ways because they may have;
1- Deep Mental Problems
2- Substance addiction
3- Troubled social situations or
4- had a traumatic experience themselfs (monkey see, monkey do. Molestered children ofter become abusers themselfs)

If you fix these problems, you can reform an individual person into a model citizen.

It is quite juvenile to retreat to "eye-for-eye" tactics if you have an underfunded, corrupt justice system. Execution is cheap and satifies the masses.

I am not justifying the actions of the people you speak of, but you must remember that you recieve information about them as presented by the media. The sole pupose of the media is to create profit by providing an interesting story for the target audience. Such a story can be easily fabricated to enhance it's entertainment value, and, in turn, create revenue.

Place the life of one peson's in another's hand and you are asking for the disasterous result.

Answer 5

Personally, no I can't...to me some people are just too far gone and crossed to many lines that I have lost hope and faith in them.

However, the theory, if you are a Christian (and I try to be...but cooking your baby in the microwave is too over the top even for me...I would vote to fry her in O'le "Sparky") you are taught to "Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged" and only God had the right to judge a person and take their life and no man ever has the right morally (and many feel, legally) take the life of another. The other camp on this the "Psychology" camp that says that the person must be "sick" or "suffering some sort of disorder" or be "mentally retarded" or have a "chemical dependency" that need the appropriate treatment and they will be all better and rehabilitated if we invest enough tax dollars and time (ok, at least that is their theory).

Answer 6

I'd be more than happy to explain why! Do these scumbags deserve to be punished for their horrible and treacherous acts? Absolutely! I just don't think that the best punishment is death. The fact that many people in not only this country but around the world still have the ideology of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" shows that we have made very little progression from the laws of the past. Taking away virtually every civil right he or she once had by keeping that person in jail for the rest of his or her life is by far the best and most justified punishment. Remember that the majority of such treacherous murders are done in such a quick moment of rage but realize that many supporters of the death penalty do virtually the same thing by getting in such a fit of range that that person killed someone that the only thing they can think of is death to that person. So rather than the government killing somebody for killing someone which makes them hypocritical, we need for find better solutions and punishment as a result of such horrible acts such as the ones you just mentioned above. Life in prison is enough in my opinion, but if that doesn't satisfy you, then perhaps you should try brainstorming other ideas rather than just death. You might actually surprise yourself!

Answer 7

Without name calling and your question has "perp" & "scumbag"?

Because murder is wrong. And the death penalty is murder, the actions of the defendants is wrong too and they should be punished by spending the rest of their lives in jail.

But the sin of murder does not justify the sin of murder.