English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

37 answers

yes for murder, terrorism, rape, child killers and pedophiles

2007-11-28 02:25:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

First, take a look at how it has worked in the USA, and the alternatives. You don't have to sympathize with criminals or want them to avoid a terrible punishment to ask if the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime and to think about the risks of executing innocent people. Your question is much too important to settle without answers to these. (sources below)

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.

2007-11-28 05:06:04 · answer #2 · answered by Susan S 7 · 2 0

If there is a cast iron guarantee that the person is guilty, then, yes. I think that the death penalty could be a wee bit dodgy in light of the numerous sentences that huv been overturned due tae new evidence!! How grotty wid ye feel if it wiz proven that the guy/wifie who hud been sent tae the gallows, eventually wiz totally cleared o' the crime??

2007-11-28 03:46:10 · answer #3 · answered by Angela M 7 · 1 1

I see the pitchfork brigade are out in force again. The answer is no, murder is murder whether carried out by an individual or the state. And remember, an eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind.

It doesn't work as a deterrent, one look across the pond proves that, and in a recently survey death row prisoners said they would rather die than face life in jail with no parole. So lets not give them the easy way out, they fear life in jail with no parol more than death so that should be the punishment.

The death penalty has no place in a civilised society.

2007-11-28 02:44:33 · answer #4 · answered by derbyandrew 4 · 2 2

no, i think we should have chain gangs and stuff like they do in the USA. prision is meant to be a punishment. in the uk they get tvs, video games, time to do what they want ect they get money allowances too so they can get cigerettes! once the criminal is dead thats it they dont learn a lesson from it. life should mean life and they should work every day of it for the public with a guard with a rifle pointing at their back!
we need so much done with roads etc in the uk why dont we send all the criminals out in a chain gang and get them to damned well do it, and not get paid either. they should give something back to the public. but let me guess its against their human rights for them to have to actually do some work! prision should send a shiver down the spine so that people dont want to return there ever again no matter what. that dont work in the uk!

2007-11-28 02:34:01 · answer #5 · answered by bebishenron 4 · 5 0

In certain cases I would have to say yes. Especially if they admitted it. But also I like the stocks idea, and chaingangs. I definitly think prisons focus far too much on the prisoners 'rights', I think they should just be happy they have the right to live, eat, and not be dead. Prison should be a punishment, I also think violent criminals, ie. rapists, murderers, peodophiles. should be branded in full view, upon release so others know who they are dealing with, and can avoid them. They should not be granted anonymity, time served or not, I want to know if the guy painting my house or cleaning my yard, has raped little girls in the past.

2007-11-28 03:26:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

It doesn't seem to work in the USA. How about having perspex cages in town centres and fill them up with the violent muggers etc instead? Make them dress up in silly clothes as well, that might work, they don't like being humiliated. A modern version of the stocks has to be better than a fine which they don't pay anyway. Strewth! to think I consider myself a liberal.

2007-11-28 02:45:49 · answer #7 · answered by Ern T 6 · 2 0

I have been told by a policeman there is more crime in the borough of Brixton this year than there was for the year of 1945 for the whole country. Makes you think doesn't it?

OK we are wealthier, have more to steal, and have a lot more people - but that cannot explain more than 50% of it can it?

I blame social breakdown and lack of discipline. Parenting skills are extremely poor or non existent in broken homes. We have lost a whole generation of young working class people to crime, drugs, alcohol and despair.

2007-11-28 02:36:58 · answer #8 · answered by Saucy B 6 · 1 1

Tricky question.
In theory if there is NO DOUBT, then I would say YES!!. Unfortunately there have been proved discrepancies in the past of people being hanged and found innocent years later.
So, in the light of that. I would have to say NO!

You can let someone out of prison if they are found innocent. You cannot bring someone back to life, if they are dead.

2007-11-28 02:38:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I do yes. I always said we cant play god and life for a life is like two wrongs don't make a right. However people don't have fear anymore, as a child I was scared of being in trouble with a teacher - now they don't care, and grow up into monsters. People are not afraid of prison now. Bring back the death penalty and that will make them think twice

2007-11-28 02:40:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Yes I think it should be reinstated with regards to the recent murder of an innocent woman.

2007-11-28 02:33:12 · answer #11 · answered by Squirrel 4 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers