Argue for or against the death penalty. Do you think the threat of the death penalty is successful or unsucces

Question

Argue for or against the death penalty. Do you think the threat of the death penalty is successful or unsuccessful in discouraging people from committing murder? Why or why not? Do you think the death penalty is an acceptable punishment or that it is unconstitutional?

Answer 1

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 the legal system gets it wrong. Look at all the people who have been 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, the 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 2

The more I learn about the death penalty, the more I oppose it.

I see two major arguments made for the death penalty: Revenge and deterrence. I’ll address each one separately and then add some additional points below.

Revenge:
The criminal justice system is supposed to be about justice, not revenge. If we execute a criminal out of revenge, we are no better than the criminal. As part of this, people often say that it will give the families of the victim relief or closure. I have seen nothing that leads me to believe this is the case. Conversely, I have seen in many instances where the families expressed remorse and sadness due to the execution.

Deterrence:
The fact is, the death penalty does not work as a deterrence to crime. The Death Penalty Information Center fact sheet located at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FactSheet.pdf states in part:

· “According to a survey of the former and present presidents of the country's top academic criminological societies, 84% of these experts rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. (Radelet & Akers, 1996)”

· “Consistent with previous years, the 2004 FBI Uniform Crime Report showed that the South had the highest murder rate. The South accounts for over 80% of executions. The Northeast, which has less than 1% of all executions, again had the lowest murder rate.”

Other Issues:
Permanence – The death penalty once applied is permanent. This would not be a big deal I suppose if we could guarantee that an innocent person never would be executed. However this is just not the case. If you spend any time on the website http://www.innocenceproject.org/ you will see 205 people that were cleared because of DNA evidence. These people spent sometimes 20 years in jail, many on death row for a crime that it was later proved they did not commit. I have always believed “better that a guilt man goes free than to impression or execute an innocent man”. Some people fervently disagree with that statement. I expect the story would change if they were the innocent one.

Costs – Many people believe that executing criminals is less expensive than keeping them in prison for life. Again this is simply not the case. There are two factors that drive up the cost of death penalty cases, the mandatory and automatic appeal process that is built in to ensure the death penalty is fair and appropriate in the case and the additional cost of maintaining a “death row”. The Death Penalty Information Center fact sheet states in part:

· “The California death penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million per year beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life.”

· “In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992).”

Racism – There is an imbalance in how and when the death penalty is sought. Additionally, it appears to me that the death penalty is used in a disproportionate number of cases involving minorities particularly blacks. The Death Penalty Information Center fact sheet contains a great analysis of race and the death penalty.

In conclusion, I feel it is time to end the death penalty as I believe it does not serve the interest of justice.

Answer 3

The death penalty is not an effective way to prevent or to reduce crime and it risks executions of innocent people.

The first answer you received is correct on the facts. Several people who answered after him are mistaken on some of the facts.

Here are some specifics the first answer left out.

124 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence.

DNA doesn't keep new cases like these from happening. It is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee against the execution of innocent people.

To deter others, a punishment must be swift and sure. The death penalty is neither. 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.

The death penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers.

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

The Death penalty Works !! Example Let's take a Child Molester that has killed his victims . A Democrat appointed Liberal Judge will give him a light sentence then guess what ? He gets out of Prison and more children die. The ACLU (who coincidentally are Liberals too) have Paid for Molesters defense many times getting them off the hook. They brag about the Death Penalty being to cruel and forgetting the fact of what this piece of sh*t did to the little child. The Death Penalty Guarantees That Molester wont ever hurt another child ! So How can that not be a good thing

Answer 5

Well lets take a look at the death penalty, they sit on death row for what 10-20 years appealing there sentence so this means that the tax payers are paying for his dumb a$$ to sit there and do this. And yes there has been a few people who have been executed and was innocent. but times has changed there is dna evidence forensic scientist ect.

for the victoms family that these men/women has murdered, they are paying the gov by their hard earned money (taxes) to keep this murderes alive. now is that justice? These men and women arent being punished by sitting in prison eating 3 meals a day,roof over there head, free medical, tv,warm bed to sleep in at night shall I go on? they live better then some people that strugle every day to get food and shelter for there family.I say that the prison life is way to easy and going to prison doesnt deter anyone from doing a crime. Hell most of them are repeaters. why doesnt the gov get off there lazy butts and make these prisons a living hell where no one would want to go back.

Yes I am all for the death penalty if they did the crime do the time. as the bible says Eye for an Eye. Tooth for a thooth ect,

Answer 6

The threat of the death penalty is unsuccessful. You just have to look at the high levels of violent crime in USA to prove that the threat of the death penalty does not work.

Answer 7

you somewhat have been given the better area to argue. listed right here are some arguments (see the internet internet site under for helping evidence): - blunders take place. in the final 35 years in the U.S., one hundred thirty human beings have been launched from dying row with the aid of fact they have been exonerated by using DNA evidence (DNA isn't attainable in maximum homicide situations). - It expenses taxpayers lots extra to execute somebody than to imprison them for existence. - Violent crime quotes are greater in dying penalty jurisdictions. - it somewhat is unevenly and arbitrarily utilized. - Jesus became into against it (see Matthew 5:7 & 5:38-39, James 4:12, Romans 12:17-21, and John 8:7). - existence without parole (LWOP) is on the books in maximum states now, and it potential what it says. people who get this sentence are taken off the streets. For reliable.

Answer 8

I don't think it has any effect on whether people commit murder because if it did there wouldn't be so many convicted murderers that have been declared competent to stand trial however I think it is an acceptable form of punishment because I can tell you if it were someone that I loved that was murdered I would want to pull the switch myself. Or, inject the meds now-a-days.

Answer 9

It's very successful , not one convict has returned to create more mayhem on society. The death penalty was the choice of the convicted person , they choose not to live by the law.

Answer 10

Of course we should have the death penalty. The question is not whether it deters crime, it assures that the person who is executed will NEVER commit another crime. It should be mandatory for convicted murderers, rapists and child molesters. If we passed this, it would deter some and the rest would be dead. That's a win-win situation.