Can you give me at least or 2 questions about death penalty?

Question

anything about death penalty. I'm doing this for my english class and need to make up some more questions. So please help me.

Answer 1

1- Does it hurt?

2- If I was executed for murder, would it prevent me from
doing another murder?

3- Is there any proof that murder rate has increased since
the death penalty was abolished?

4- When the death penalty was fully ongoing were we just
obeying the bible "A eye for an eye"?.

5- If question 4 is correct, why did Jesus tell us to forgive our
enemies, and turn the other cheek?

6- Did all the executioners have to be without sin? Didn't
Jesus also say " Let he who is without sin, cast the first
stone"?

Then the age old question.
7- Why when a condemned man or woman is going to be killed by lethal injection is the needle sterilised first?

I am not religious, I am atheist so this was not intended to be a boost for any religion. But I have often wondered why so many man made laws contradict the Christian religion, no use me asking Christians that question, I would just get hundreds of quotes from their new testament.

Answer 2

Here they are, with answers and sources:

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.

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, which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.

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

Yes, they have proven that states with the death penalty have as much crime as states that don't.Theirfore it is not a deterant for violent crime.
Also they have exacuted inocent people in the past.I also believe that some police stations will acuse anyone just to make them look good,so some poor guy takes the wrap and he does not have enough money for a decent defense.Then they railroad the poor guy.This is not always the case,but I will bet that 99% of people on death row are poor and uneducated,which makes them even more vulnerable.
Hope this helps!!By the way I am against the death penalty,if they did it let them suffer in jail and rot!!!

Answer 4

It would sort of help to know if you guys were generally for the death penalty or against it.

There are a lot of issues to debate about it.

The people who agree with the death penalty generally feel:
It is a strong deterrent
It means we don't have to feed someone in prison

The people who oppose the death penalty generally feel:
It is not a strong deterrent
By putting a human being to death, we are being as bad as that human being ... it's another form of murder
What if we got it wrong and sentenced the wrong man?

So naturally the questions would have to be:

Is it a strong deterrent to crime? Does it lower crime rates?

Is ordering a person to be killed (for example, because they have killed someone else) morally right? Or is it wrong still?

Can it be shown that being in prison changes the behaviour of the prisoners? Do they behave better when they are released?

Answer 5

Many persons nonetheless appear to believe that it is a well inspiration, irrespective of miscarriages of justice (which so much persons are not conscious of). There are 3 feasible explanations for judicial punishment: reform, revenge and deterrence. The indisputable fact that governments do not appear to take into account the ones in any form of logical manner once they make a decision what penalty is correct is most likely one cause for inconsistent sentencing. As regards the loss of life penalty, reform naturally does not come into it because the prisoner finally ends up lifeless. Deterrence is a questionable cause because it does not appear to discourage. Murder turns out to bring on on the equal fee whether or not the loss of life penalty is in drive or no longer. Albert Pierrepoint, the UK's final leader executioner as much as abolition in 1965, concluded after a existence wherein he finished greater than six hundred persons by means of placing that he used to be towards the loss of life penalty considering that it's not an robust deterrent. So lots of the ones he finished dedicated homicide "within the warmth of the second". In his possess phrases, "I have come to the belief that executions remedy not anything, and are handiest an antiquated relic of a primitive want for revenge which takes the convenient manner and palms over the accountability for revenge to different persons...The challenge with the loss of life penalty has continuously been that no person desired it for every body, however every body differed approximately who must get off." People could use deterrence as a cause for the loss of life penalty however the data do not aid it. That brings us directly to the 3rd cause: revenge. The handiest feasible cause why the loss of life penalty continues to be supported is a primitive want for revenge, and the truth that the bible helps it. The USA is way more devout than every other nation within the western civilised global, and is the one one that also makes use of the loss of life penalty. I are not able to feel the 2 are not associated.