Isn't it time the US got into line and abolished capital punishment?

Question

Apart from a few of the states the US clings to the death penalty. In Brit and elsewhere it has long been abolished. Isn't it high time the US got into line with the civilized world? It has been proved time after time that people have been mis-convicted and once you've killed them you can't bring them back and apologize to them.

Supplementary question - You wouldn't normally expect one country to have death penalty in one part of it yet none in another part, yet this is what happens in the US. Plus they have different ways of killing in different parts. Isn't this all too weird?

[lahockeyg] If this is your personal experience then I'm sure we all sympathize and hope that you receive the support you need. But what you are talking about is Revenge. And as for taxpayers' money would you prefer that is be spent on more guns and bombs and continual citizen surveillance.

Answer 1

Cheers to that Buddy!
You're absolutely right.

Answer 2

Celtish, aren't you aware of the Mary Winkler case? It seems that my country has nullified the death penalty (at least for murderesses). In fact, looking at the same case, one may infer that we're phasing out imprisonment as well. Yes, in the enlightened years to come, that 67 day confinement will probably be considered rather harsh. And so our Poor Colonies are careening down the path of Liberal Enlightenment! I'm surprised that an exponent of "civilized" (read "hard left") Europe cannot appreciate our Progress. --Carlos

Answer 3

I agree with you, but criticism from abroad doesn't really help changes minds here. In the USA, more people are rethinking their views on the death penalty and this process should be encouraged.

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.

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 4

The Brits had the most efficient and humane Capital Punishment in the world in the late 19th and early 20th century. It has its place. And a well done hanging is the best way to handle it.

Answer 5

if somebody murders yet somebody else in a henious and unexcusable way. they themselves could ought to stand the comparable punishment. there could be,of direction exceptions jointly with somebody who kills an interloper in there abode, or somebody who's shown to be mentally ill and no longer able to tell top from incorrect. as for the colour of the guy, it shouldnt count no count if or no longer they are white ,black, yellow, or green. crime is crime ...additionally , i doubt the U.N. is going to sway america stance on the project nor could it. and your uncle sounds unbelievably racist for thinking that blacks shouldnt be held to the comparable effects as everyone else. if the area have been reversed what could he think of? if a white guy comes out and says the whites shouldnt get the dying penalty yet its ok for blacks? i wager he could think of very in yet in any different case approximately that and actually he's pointing out the comparable good place

Answer 6

Perhaps it is so that we can talk more freely about the capital punishment practices of other countries without being hypocritical about it. Perhaps we should when we consider what it puts the victim's family through. Perhaps we should when we continue to look at it through barbaric practices and think "he deserved it." Its basis had at one time been built on example to get a point across.

Answer 7

There is nothing weird about it. It's called states rights. Each state sets it's own criminal penalties.

Answer 8

Nope. There are some inherently evil bastards out there doing things to defenseless children that deserve no less than the revocation of their lives as a penalty. Not revenge; justice.

Answer 9

could of gone without the finger pointing celtish, but I share your views.

Answer 10

How would you punish someone who sexually assualted, tortured and then killed your only child? Would paying taxes so that individual could eat three square meals a day, provide shelter, education, clothing, medical assistance, etc., is that what you would prefer?