Do you believe that death penalty is needed in the USA? Do you think that it should be abolished in the US?

Question

Why United States of America is among such countries as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, China, Cuba, Egypt, Uganda and some other third world countries which still have death penalty and continuously carry execution of people.

Answer 1

The state has no business killing it's citizens. Throw them in jail for life.

There is absolutely no 100 percent way to be sure one is guilty and therefore every time the state kills an innocent person it makes a murderer out of every single tax payer. I don't want murder done in my name.

EDIT Common Sense. Innocent people end up on death row all the time. I New York state alone 123 people who were on death row were exonerated via things like DNA evidence or bad trials.

"Chance of Error: Many convicted murderers are later found innocent, and have been pardoned. It is impossible to pardon a corpse. In 1987, a study was published by the Stanford Law Review. They found some evidence that suggested that at least 350 people between 1900 and 1985 in America might have been innocent of the crime for which they were convicted, and could have been sentenced to death. 139 "were sentenced to death and as many as 23 were executed."

A study by Columbia University professor James Liebman examined thousands of capital sentences that had been reviewed by courts in 34 states from 1973 to 1995. ""An astonishing 82 percent of death row inmates did not deserve to receive the death penalty,"" he said in his conclusion. ""One in twenty death row inmates is later found not guilty.""

Since 1973, 123 people in 25 states have been released from death row because they were not guilty. In addition, seven people have been executed even though they were probably innocent. A study published in the Stanford Law Review documents 350 capital convictions in this century, in which it was later proven that the convict had not committed the crime. Of those, 25 convicts were executed while others spent decades of their lives in prison. Fifty-five of the 350 cases took place in the 1970s, and another 20 of them between l980 and l985.

Our criminal justice system cannot be made fail-safe because it is run by human beings, who are fallible. Executions of innocent persons occur.

Answer 2

The death penalty is an ineffective way of preventing or reducing crime and it risks executions of innocent people.
Some people don't know the facts. Here are a few, with sources.

Risks of executing innocent people-
124 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence. DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides and isn’t a guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.

The death penalty doesn't 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 don’t.

We have a good alternative. 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.

Death penalty costs. 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 start mounting up before trial, continue through the uniquely complicated trial in death penalty cases (actually 2 separate stages, mandated by the Supreme Court), and appeals.

The death penalty doesn't apply to people with money. Its not reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?

The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. 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.

Problems with speeding 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.

Edit: For Alpha Male, you are mistaken about homicide rates and executions. Take a look at the sources (below)

Answer 3

I think it should be allowed. I don't think it should be abolished. Even though America has the death penalty, it's not used very often and it's not easy to convict someone for a crime that's even elligible for the death penalty. The difference between the US and Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, China, Cuba, Egypt, Uganda and other third world countries is that we're a free liberal democracy with a constitution and civil liberties. We don't execute people for any reason other than 1st degree murder...and even then it's not always used. In those countries you can get killed just for speaking out against the government or by having a different religion. The question your asking is a loaded one, so what if I put a twist on it and said that America is one of the few developed nations that hasn't criminalized holocaust denial like France, Germany, Spain, Austria, Switzerland, Poland, Portugal, Belgium and Lithuania...should we abolish holocaust denial too? I'm not saying your opinion on the death penalty is invalid, but your reasoning in comparing it to unfree 3rd world nations is flawed.

Answer 4

The death penalty should only be used if there is forensic evidence or some other type of evidence that with out a doubt can prove someone commited the crime. Putting a person in prison for life is a good punishment...but why should tax dollars pay for that persons food/clothing/jail cell/etc. If you commit a crime so violent or hanus then you do not deserve to live. In this day and age more and more people are sympathetic and try to understand why people do things and then rehabilitate them. In some cases that is a good tool to use. However most cases are more then deserving enough for the death penalty. It may not deter people from committing severe crimes but it will permanently stop them from committing one again in the future. Capital punishment should not be looked at as a primitive way of dealing with severe criminals. It is an effective way to rid our population of murderers,child molesters,rapists etc. If anything capital punishment should be carried out much more hastily once a ruling has been made. There is no reason for anyone to be on death row for more then 6 months.

Answer 5

I am totally against the death penalty, simply because of the way it's carried out. After years and years of trials, re-trials, appeals and whatever, a wonton murderer is put down the way you'd put down a favored pet. How in heck can that be a deterrent? The whole purpose behind punishment is to deter others from doing the same thing so this just ain't gonna work.

Until they go back to making executions so distasteful that no one will want to go out that way, life imprisonment is still the best bet, but it's got to be done like they do in Supermax. 23 out of every 24 spent in a 4 x 12 concrete room with no view and no amenities followed by one hour of pacing up and down a 4 x 12 exercise corridor.

Answer 6

The death penalty is not needed in the USA. It should also be abolished. Our parents always told us to not seek revenge, but the death penalty encourages it. Also, every year innocent people undergo lethal injection, which is really sad.

Answer 7

Abolish it like most other civilized industrialized nation. It has been consistantly proven to serve only as a means of revenge and not as penalty. It does not deter someone from commiting a crime and innocent people have been killed by the state. You have a list of nations that have the death penalty. You can add North Korea to that list. Is this the group of countries we want to be grouped with? Apparently so because we seem to keep the death penalty in existance.

Answer 8

The death penalty is not necessary in the USA excluding enemy combatants.
Citizens should have to commit treason to be executed.
so lets execute Sean Penn, Susan Surandan, Danny Glover, and the Dixey Skunks.

Answer 9

Gosh, your Avatar scares the bajeebus out of me.

::cowers::

Oh wait....

::reads the question::

I find the death penalty to be ridiculously hypocritical and am not for it. Not only that, too many innocent people end up on death row. I could stomach it more if I know for certain, 100%, that the person convicted is guilty... but that's not usually the case.

Answer 10

The death penalty is a proven deterrent. Heinous crimes are lower in states that have the death penalty. The same goes for allowing concealed weapons. Apparently, crazy people don't like targets that can shoot back.