a fair nation executes criminals that commit the worst crimes.
2007-09-26 13:01:14 · 8 answers · asked by WJ 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yeah do they execute the millionaires murderers?! and if they let a jury give the death penalty what about let a jury decide how much to give in a lawsuit instead of a proactive politician overthrowing the Constitution and taking away your right to a fair trial with their tort reform?!
2007-09-26 13:07:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
You already received a lot of very good answers. I don't know what country you live in but you should take a look at the experience of the USA with the death penalty. Look at some facts and check out the sources (below).
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?
Risks of executing innocent people- is this moral???
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 which is supposed to prevent the execution of innocent people.
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. Moral???
2007-09-27 14:40:30 · answer #2 · answered by Susan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Have you seen the laws in Texas???
Personally I think all states should have the death penalty but at the same time each state has a certain record of those falsely accused so maybe it should go by that.
Of course this assumes your asking from America.
Good Luck and God Bless
2007-09-26 20:04:36 · answer #3 · answered by Old Wise One 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Amazing how little you know about the rest of the world.
Most of the world's developed nations don't have the death penalty. In their eyes, we lack moral standing because we execute the mentally ill.
2007-09-26 20:05:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
NO. a fair nation does not abuse power having the power to execute one person for a person that has already been killed is simply vengence/revenge, not justice.
We will be a superior nation when we are moral ourselves.
2007-09-26 20:32:14 · answer #5 · answered by Olivia C 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The death penalty does not deter crime. Besides, if you are awaiting the death penalty, you can kill as many people as you want because they can only execute you once.
2007-09-26 20:10:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
According to who? You? I don't agree at all. That is completely subjective. Morals are also about compassion, and fairness does not mean executing people.
2007-09-26 20:21:16 · answer #7 · answered by Eisbär 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Aah, but how can we be sure who committed them?
2007-09-26 20:06:37 · answer #8 · answered by Lynn M 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋