The Death Penalty?

Question

Should it be ever be used? For which crimes?

Answer 1

I'm on death row right now, and it's a valid form of punishment. I know that I will never kill anyone again, after they kill me.
They could've tried to rehabilitate me, but there's only a 75% chance that it would work.
Why take that big of a risk?
My last request is for chocolate pudding. MMMM.... pudding.

Answer 2

It should not. Here are answers to questions about the practical aspects of the death penalty system and alternatives, with sources 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. When the death penalty is a possible sentence, extra costs mount up even before trial, continuing through the uniquely complicated trial (actually 2 separate stages, mandated by the Supreme Court) in death penalty cases, and 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 3

I don't think it should ever be considered as a punishment. 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 4

I am 100% FOR the death penalty...I do not want my tax dollars going to the purpose of keeping a convicted murderer alive for 50 years when there is no chance (barring an overturning) that he is getting out. I think biological (DNA or something similar) evidence should be a requirement to get the death penalty for someone, so we know we're not executing the wrong person, but I think our government has better places to put our tax dollars than into keeping ruthless murderers alive.

I think there are certain crimes where it does apply: murder, kidnapping, molesting a child if either of the other two is also proven, or attempted murder of a cop (police dogs are part of the force, they are included), and I think it should be administered in as close a tit-for-tat manner as possible...no more lethal injection for a violent stabbing.

"Forgiveness is between them and God...it's my job to arrange the meeting."
--John W. Creasy, "Man on Fire"

Answer 5

If more inmates got the death penalty I bet there would be a drop in murders. Jail isn't all that bad for the monsters that commit these unthinkable crimes....they get 3 cooked meals a day, access to a weight room, internet, outside time, TV, etc. Thats more than the homeless people have and the homeless don't murder people. If they are given the death penalty we don't have to pay for them to eat, relax in the AC, and watch TV. Then I bet they think twice before committing a murder....

Answer 6

If there is absolute proof that a person has done a hanis crime then that person should get the death penalty.

Answer 7

want to stop crime?
Allow Lie detectors to be used in Court Cases
that along with DNA evidence should prove guilt or innocence beyond ANY doubt in Capitol Cases
Then I say
LET THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME
Wtch rape murder and child molestation slow to a trickle of the former statistics.

Answer 8

For mass murderers, serial rapists and child molesters. Death. There's no way any of them can reformed. And the damage they do goes on for generations.

Death to them all.

Answer 9

Now!!!!
My kind of subject : )

Not only

Should they re-introduce the

Death Penalty...

I would love to see

Public hanging brought back.

And lets start
with

Manson, Charley.

Answer 10

No ---I firmly that anyone that bad deserves to rot in prison.
Keeping them in the torture chamber that is prison is cheaper that paying for all of the millions in appeals.
Then when they are gone perhaps ---only maybe will they have paid for the pain they have caused !