How come the european union does not use the death penalty?

Question

The death penalty is a right form of punnishment for the most serious crimes like murder.
How then can most european countries just have life imprisonment without parole as the punnishment for the most serious of crimes? I think the european union should reinstate the death penalty for all of its member states kinda of how america uses it for serious crimes over there.

We still can have a great human rights record like the usa and still impose the death penalty in serious crimes commited.

The european parliament should reconsider their issue on the death penalty and should pass a law having capital punishment
as a legal form of punishment.

Answer 1

Because they're civilized

Answer 2

The European Parliament doesn't have a voice in this matter, and in fact the European Parliament on numerous occasions have passed motions decrying the death penalty being used by other countries. The national governments must put it back on their statute books, but doing so would mean they could no longer stay in the EU.

The EU has under half the murder rate of the US. Only two EU countries have a higher murder rate. Germany's and Ireland's is a sixths of the US's and France and the UK a fifth.

I do have to say in terms of human rights war changes a country's attitude to universal human rights, as Guantanamo Bay and extraordinary rendition have proven. But the US also comes in 53rd in world rankings for press freedom. The top 15 are EU nations.

So overall Europe is very happy not having the death penalty. And for those who say about anti-death penalty and pro-choice hypocrites. Ireland and Malta do not have abortion and they are fiercely anti-death penalty nations.

Answer 3

The European community seems to be way ahead of us on this one. For many people this is a very emotional issue. But it needs to be decided on the basis of facts. 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, mostly because of the legal process. Anytime the death penalty is a possible sentence, extra costs start to mount up even before a trial, continuing through the uniquely complicated trial (actually 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.

Answer 4

Actually that is not quite true. In about 1992 when the Maastricht treaty was signed this enabled the death penalty. An example is Jean Charles De Menezes shot in 2005 by police in London.
This was covered up and the Government and the metropolitan police reckon it was a mistake. Details of this and the story behind can be found on the folowing page: http://www.eutruth.org.uk/

Hope this helps

Answer 5

The abolition of the death penalty is required to join the EU. Most democracies don’t have death penalty for ordinary crimes.

In ancient Rome, there was no death penalty for Roman citizens, unless for high treason.
Tuscany abolished the death penalty in 1786.

We have a lower violent crimes rate if compared to the US, so why should we change?

Answer 6

Because the death penalty has not proved to be a deterrent to crime. Additionally, the death penalty is permanent. This is all fine and good until you see how many people are released from prison because DNA evidence showed they did not commit the crime. What do you do if you already executed that person because of the outcry of the angry villagers? Oops, sorry, wrong guy...

Answer 7

Would Ferret mind to explain what is barbarian with the death penalty? Sadly, I had the opportunity to speak to about 15 persons sentenced to death, then by way of grace sentenced to life imprisonment for eventually having been relaxed after respectively 15 to 25 years of prison. And I have found long prison sentences far barbarian then death penalty.
Not every inmate shares conditions of Paris Hilton's imprisonment. Guantanamo is not the worst prison all over the world. Ferret has probably never been imprisoned, neither did he seek true information about the inmates' conditions of life. Personally, I would prefer a quick death to a long imprisonment, even if innocent. The most barbarian, with exception of torture, is certainly linking of long imprisonment with death sentence after, as practiced in the USA. To end with, everybody should alive to the fact inhabitants of the EU want their justice disposes of death penalty, and even showed their will in votes. But their votes were declared null and void because contrary to the previous decision of a few (unknown) persons. That is what is called western democracy.
Having read some answers, I find sad so many persons got manipulated to the point they take the manipulation for their own ideas.

Answer 8

Canada doesn't use the death penalty either. We have a lower per capita major crime rate than the States does.

Answer 9

Because they are a civilized people with a high sense of the value of the life, they have suffered in a bad manner along many years the mistake of death penalty. They know how much people suffers when such actuation is performed by some badly called republics.
They had to pass in the last century two horrible wars to realize about that, the price payed was too high. The lesson learned is very fresh.

Answer 10

The United States is not an example to aspire to for human rights.

Answer 11

Thank you for the laugh, I really needed a good cackle.
Great human rights record like the USA, lmao.