No, I don't think it's ethical. However, I think it'd be a good idea to let them rot in a prison cell.
2007-09-08 13:39:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by F-Baby! 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think so. How can a system whose effectiveness in preventing or reducing crime is dubious and which risks executing innocent people be ethical???
You don't have to condone brutal crimes or want the criminals who commit them avoid a harsh punishment to ask whether the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime and whether it risks killing innocent people.
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 and can’t guarantee we won’t execute 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 trials, one to decide guilt and the second to decide the punishment) 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.
2007-09-08 20:56:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Susan S 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
in a way yes but that wouldn't repay their debt to sociaty,now maybe they could use some parts off them.arms,legs, heart liver lungs,,,anything but the brain would work,bout you?gotta go<>IS<>
2007-09-08 20:15:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by THE"IS" 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is neither ethical, moral nor justifiable. No civilised country executes its citizens, only barbarians do that.
2007-09-08 20:10:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by tentofield 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Is murder ethical? When someone kills his wife and kids and his mother and then says I don't want to die? To bad.
they didn't either. If you know they did it, yes it is ethical.
2007-09-08 20:08:27
·
answer #5
·
answered by Steven 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
They should slowly rot, not be quickly infused with a needle.
2007-09-08 20:42:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Navy Wifey Amanda 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think it is.
2007-09-08 20:07:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by punch 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No.
2007-09-08 21:39:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sunshine 6
·
0⤊
0⤋