Its like the story i just read in english called the bet. I think that life imprisonment would be bad, but I believe in capital punishment more. (eye for eye, tooth for tooth sorta thing)
2007-11-11 14:19:07 · 11 answers · asked by Alex 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
i heard a good idea the other day.... my friend came up with the idea that we should send all the mass murderers, the mansons, mass rapists, etc over to iraq with only food, a knife, and a GPS so they dont come back over here. then if they make it for a month, let them come back over but put them in complete solitary
2007-11-11 14:38:55 · update #1
I agree with it 100%
2007-11-11 14:21:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't.... Reason being: States tell people they can't kill..... but yet the states turn around and kill through capital punishment.. That's being hypocritical.. Also, in a "functioning, democratic society" how can we put people on death row, when we KNOW at some point an Innocent person is going to be executed??? Now granted that doesn't happen often, but my informed guess is that its has happened. The Criminal Justice system isn't and never will be perfect...... I don't think it's right for people to murder other human beings but unfortuately it happens whatever the justification may be. My best friend was murdered and I still don't believe in capital punishment- someone else dying won't bring my friend back. There is no justice when someone is murdered. Life in prison is cheaper anyway... Death sentence appeals take at least 7-8 years (or longer depending on the state) to get thru the courts. By the time tax payers pay for court fees, faxes, attorney fees, paralegals, etc, its much cheaper to let killers rot in a cell.....
2016-04-03 08:42:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
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.
124 people on death rows have been released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. 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.
2007-11-12 01:15:43 · answer #3 · answered by Susan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"an eye for an eye makes a blind world"
Gandhi
I believe that gruesome crimes justify capital punishment...
however i dont believe in it because you could be put to death and later be proven innocent....Its happened before, it will happen again..
Canada got rid of the Death Penalty and its crime rate dropped... just a note
Norway dosent have the Death Penalty and its crime rate is the lowest in the world.. another note
I have used this in debate...
I ask "Have you ever talked in class".. They answer "Yes"
I ask "So you talked in class even though it was against the rules"... they answer "Yes"...
i ask "So you knew the consequence of talking in class, but you did it anyway"...they answer again, "yes"....
"So would a bad person break the law, no matter the consequence?".... They cant answer
Bad people will do bad things.
2007-11-11 14:29:04 · answer #4 · answered by Atomic New Theory 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Too many ethical problems with it.
I don't think death would be the ultimate punishment, rather would be for life in complete isolation. That would be the ultimate punishment IMO.
Think about it. Locked in a cell, no books, no TV, not seeing anyone, not talking to anyone , etc...until you die.
This punishment would make me think twice .
2007-11-11 14:32:49 · answer #5 · answered by alpla 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If there are 100% proof on the perpetrator, capital punishment is justifiable on some serious crime, e.g. series-killing.
There was an old chinese saying on using force: do not kill innocent people and do not invade an innocent city.
In human right, every human being deserve fair trials.
2007-11-11 14:32:36 · answer #6 · answered by giginotgigi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When it comes to the issue of capital punishment, I am indecisive. I am someone who believes in human rights, however, when you kill multiple people, you do not deserve life.
2007-11-11 14:30:29 · answer #7 · answered by ga_tx_1992 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Some people are too vile to live. Capital punishment isn't murder.
2007-11-11 14:25:24 · answer #8 · answered by Tessie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes i beleve in it 100% only because is to me it's the right thing to do showing that you cant get away with really bad things like a federal crimes
2007-11-11 14:28:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i do
there are some possible crimes so horrific, so inhuman, that i think we should hang the perp to make sure that he'll never commit another.
2007-11-11 14:23:22 · answer #10 · answered by Spock (rhp) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋