Are you for or against the death penalty?

Answer 1

I believe in eye-for-an-eye, so yes I believe in the death penalty. In other countries where they practice this crime is almost nonexistant. All we would have to do is make an example of a couple people and word would spread.

Repeat offenders often commit their crimes knowing they are going to end up back in prison. They don't care....3 squares and a cot for free!! But if the consequences for say robbing a convenience store would be to cut off the hand that stole I think most criminals would rethink their plans.

Answer 2

Against. 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 thinking about these.

125 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 those 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 3

As a *moral* issue, I'm for it.

As a *practical* issue, I'm against it.

If I could be confident that ONLY the guilty would ever be executed, I'd be for it.

But there's been just FAR too many people who've been "convicted beyond reasonable doubt" later proven innocent for me to be confident of that.

For example;
A guy in PA was actually executed for murdering his wife, who then turned up alive and well and living with her boyfriend under an assumed name.

A guy in Texas was executed for killing a store clerk during a robbery. After he was executed it turned out he was in jail when the robbery happened. He'd claimed that at trail - but the State had papers showing he'd been released the day before the crime. Turns out it was a typo - and that typo cost him his life for a crime he didn't commit.

Even if prosecutors "played fair" and all wrongfull convictions were purely accidental I might still support the death penalty, because mistakes would be so rare - but they don't.

Texas just released a guy called Willie Williams after he served over 21 years for two almost identical rapes committed in the same housing project only a few days apart.

What the DA never told the defense was that there were three other rapes matching the exact same method in the same housing project AFTER Williams was arrested. They also never told the defense that the rape kit (Taken before DNA testing was used in Texas)

When his lawyer heard about that he managed to get the rape kits from Williams cases tested - and the DNA was a hit on the guy who was serving time for the later three rapes.

Look at some of the other examples on the link below.

Richard

Answer 4

Against

Answer 5

Against.

Answer 6

For it. While some innocent people HAVE been wrongfully executed, thats too small of a number to compare to those who have been RIGHTfully executed. Yes, some people have been proven innocent after their execution but what about all the people who were killed by escaped inmates, thsoe released after doing their time, and those released on parole?

We have to remember that keeping murderers alive keeps the chances of them striking again alive as well. I dont think a killer should be allowed to watch tv and work out and play basketball while some family grieves for their relative who was shot to death for 20 dollars in a convenience store robbery. (not an actual incident just imaginative.)

Answer 7

I am for the Death Penalty!! What gives a convicted murderer the right to have everything free, they seem to live better in the jail than they did when they were out. They even get a steady paycheck for working in the prison, how is that fair?? Plus the fact that it would make it alot easier and more convient for someone to murder someone knowing they can appeal and live for free while doing it.

Answer 8

Against, after doing a lot of research, there were quite a few people on death row who, after further investigation particularly due to the DNA testing, were proved to be innocent. How many others were executed who may have been innocent ?

Answer 9

For

Answer 10

agasint. i think it's ignorant and stupid to kill somone in turn for what ever crime they commited when you can just send them to prison for the rest of their life and make them suffer there instead.