Are you for or against the death penalty?

Question

I am interested in everyones opinion as to why your for or against the death penalty.

Answer 1

You've received a lot of serious answers, most of them right about the facts. You don't have to condone brutal crimes or want the criminals who commit them to avoid a harsh punishment to ask whether the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime and whether it risks killing innocent people. Summing things up, with sources-

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.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. 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.

Answer 2

We have a prison problem not because we keep these people alive, but because we have alot of people in jail for petty crimes like possession of Marijuana. As far as the death penalty goes, at this very moment, i'm against it. Not for any moral standpoint because i don't really give a ****. I just don't like the way the system is set up so taht people on Death Row cost an average of 1 million dollars per person due to countless court costs, and other expenses. In death row they are given alot of extra attention whether it be security, or legal. or otherwise. Even the injection that they give most prisoners is a very expensive chemical designed to make death painless. Due to our legal system, i would prefer making a murderer stay in jail for life because it ends up being alot cheaper keeping a prisoner there than in the halls of Death Row

Answer 3

Against. It costs far more in the expert testimony, psychological testing, double trials (penalty phase must be separate) maintenance of single cell jail cell (no sharing on death row) and the costs of all the endless appeals. I don't want to waste tax money on a murderer. Keeping them locked up in general population for life (that is, until they die) is a better option.

Oh - and of course you can't undo it if you execute the wrong person. The US government says that around 80 people were wrongly put to death last century - in other words, they were innocent, or there was sufficient doubt that they should not have been found guilty.

Answer 4

I'm against the death penalty because no one knows for certain what's on the other side, so we could be doing the condemned a big favor.

Is death really a punishment? We simply can not say with any amount of certainty.

Peace

Jim

.

Answer 5

Absolutely against it.

It is cruel and unusual punishment.
It is uncivilised.
It is not a deterrent. (look at the murder rates of the countries that have abolished it and those that haven't)
It is akin to torture.
It cannot be reversed.
It brings those who do it down to the level of worse than a murderer because of its clinical deliverance.
It is arbitrarily administered to the less able.
The line between two individuals receiving it. Where would you draw the line? So just don't have it all so line need be drawn.
It is costly.
It does not allow for redemption.
It's not our right to take life.

Answer 6

I am for it only if there is no shadow of daubt.
I think a case should be reviewed by a panel of judges after the case close and within 6 month after the trail the person should be put to death.

Answer 7

I am against it simply for one reason. Death is an easy way out. To live locked in a little cell for the remainder of your days is a far worse punishment. To live each day, especially in utah, in a jail with that guilt and nothing to do but think about the wrongs that you have done would be hell on earth.

Answer 8

For it!!!!! Because if the crime that they committed is bad enough to consider death, then they need,...........death.
The whole thought of someone being killed i am not for, but if the person did something bad enough to deserve death, they should die.

*Not a nice, quick death, i think they should deserve an electricution, or even being hanged........they should deal with law like they did back in the old days, just tar and feather the person after a fair trial and make them walk down the street to their death while people throw stones and whatever else at them.



* I would feel really bad if the person was innocent, thats why they need to be careful with the "fair trial"

Answer 9

i am for it.....these people know the difference between right and wrong.....so, if they do the crime they get the death penalty.....lets stop paying for their needs and do what has to be done. do you know how well they get treated in prison???? i suggest you research it....

Answer 10

against ... why?

it doesn't detour anyone from committing a heinous crime, and it costs more than incarceration

it would only work if we caught the guy red-handed, took him out behind the barn and shot him ... but I digress :P