Will the death penalty be abolished?

Question

The death penalty is a violation of fundamental human rights, and it should be abolished around the world, South Africa's Desmond Tutu wrote in a comment piece in The Guardian on Tuesday.

I agree with Tutu. As much as we want vile, murderous scum to be punished, it has to be accepted that the death penalty is not a deterrent.

Your thoughts please.

Answer 1

Americans are rethinking this issue and I hope it will be abolished here. 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.

Answer 2

The question is pretty misleading. It is not about abolishing death penalty but to change the way we administer it. Meaning, death penalty stays and how it will be mete out would depend on a case-by-case basis. If we understand this, then we know the answer should be yes we should change the way how it should be administered; and no we should not abolish it as it is an effective deterrent to those thinking of committing a serious offence in Singapore. Not trying to be a saint here or play hero, but people do deserve a 2nd chance. However, whether they deserve it or not is a very subjective matter. I would think that the current system makes it easier for the judge. You do something wrong and deserve a death penalty they administer it. If you change the way it is going to be carried out. Then, inconsistencies and problems may arise. So, the current system is working and it is giving the judge less pain so keep it. In this instance, the Msian guy, does he really deserve a death sentence, based on the evidence collected? Yes? However, can the law exhibits some humanity? Give him another chance? Yes, the president of Singapore can do that. So there is an avenue to pardon a death penalty and it lies on the hand of our President. So if you look from that angle, the death row prisoner does have a last avenue to stay alive. It depends on the President. So, to all...Just stay good and be nice. Dont flout the law, I mean serious ones. Otherwise your life will be on a hanging loop....

Answer 3

Here in the UK we abolished it a while ago. The horrific case this week, of a childkiller finally being brought to justice, after an innocent man was jailed, highlights the permanent mistakes that could have occurred if we still had the death penalty.
However, life should mean life. And for those who complain about the cost of keeping people in prison for the rest of their natural lives, do compare the cost of the appeal cases, which go on for many years.
Yes, we do doubt that some people should be allowed to live after the atrocities they committed, but there are many more cases which are miscarriages of justice.

Answer 4

the death penatly isnt a deterant and it should be abolished everywhere.
also there are miscarriages of justice all the time which can cause massive problems if the defendent is dead.
Also in the Uk there are only around 25 people who are lifers (these are people who will never be allowed parole) Im not sure of the stats elsewhere but im sure there are more people killed by the death pentaly in other paces.
the first answerer made a good point- if it happened to my family ........................ however this is the very reason why the victims dont make the law

Answer 5

Sorry to disagree with you. The ultimate penalty should stand if the accused is proved without any reasonable doubt to be proved guilty. I am not in favour of the jury system as proved in the OJ.Simpson case. I think that professional jury's should be employed who are well versed on the law and used in cases where the death penalty is available . Then justice will be done and seen

Answer 6

It should be, you only need to look at America to see that it doesn't work, and thats before you even consider human rights (which people will of course say you give up when you commit a crime)

And look at Lesley Molseed's case and that dreadful miscarriage of justice? what would have happened if he had been killed by the state? It was bad enough that he died almost as soon as he was released in any case.

Answer 7

I agree on the grounds that it's to good and easy for them and I'd prefer scum to get proper punishment.
Saying that though,If these scum ever came in contact with my family,I wouldn't like to say what I would do.

Your right though.The death penalty isn't a deterrent.

Answer 8

I support the death penalty. They suffer during the 12 years long process. Fruthermore I don't loke the idea of paying food, clothing shelter out of my tax money for someone who wont see the light of day.

Answer 9

Capital punishment is not a deterrent,,with over 10,000 murders in the US alone each year the death penalty in some states is no deterrent,,,The Death penalty is outlawed within any EU member states,,,,my opinion ? the death penalty should be scrapped across the globe,,it is no deterrent,,,

Answer 10

If we consider ourselves civilized then we need to say no to the death penalty.Much as it may seem that capitol punishment is the correct way to go we need to consider what the motive for this is.