For people who are AGAINST the death penalty...?

Question

what are your reasons?

Answer 1

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 2

It is a madmade system therefore it is not perfect. Even one innocent person that has been executed is one too many. And there HAVE been innocent people executed and many more on Death Row that have been exonerated. Another reason is because you have people's lives in the hands of people....lawyers who are more interested in winning than the truth. That is their job security. If they lose every case, they won't have a job for long. You see it everyday where all they have to do is test a gun or something like that to find out if someone is guilty or innocent and the DA's don't want to do that because if it turned out that the person was innocent, then they'd have more work to do to find the real guilty person. It's a flawed system that is run by humans who are, well, human. Plus, it is not evenly applied which makes it unfair to begin with. Why should one person get the death penalty and someone else not who committed the same crime and with the same circumstances? In that case, the one who has enough money will not get the death penalty every time.

Answer 3

Because it is nothing more than state-sanctioned murder.

Because it is not a deterrent.

Because it is nothing but revenge - it changes nothing.

Because life in prison without parole accomplishes the same thing; removes the person from society forever.

Because no one has the right to take a human life.

Because it is cheaper to house the person for life than it is to pay for the 15-20 years of appeals.

Because the U.S. is the ONLY industrialized country who still has a death penalty.

Because I don't like being a citizen of a country that thinks it's OK to murder it's own citizens...legally.

Because DNA has freed several hundred people from death row who would have been executed and not been guilty.

Because putting to death one innocent person diminishes us as a people.

And, finally, there is no need for it.

Answer 4

The US 'system' is why I am against it. If poor, black men of low intelligence were not disproportionately represented I would not really have a prob as I know that I would kill the person who murdered my child with my bare hands (and yes, I do also know that laws should not be made on emotional decisions!), and those are the kind of murders I would want the death penalty for (all sadistic sexual murders).

Answer 5

It is too expensive due to legal fees associated with the appeal process. Not to mention the prospect of executing an innocent.

Life in prison effectively removes the threat they pose to society, and I sincerely doubt the death penalty deters anyone from committing a crime.

Answer 6

Murder is always wrong. It is as wrong to kill the murderer as it was for him to kill his victim. I don't believe that murder is wrong until it comes down to punishing a murderer. Our government says that murder is a crime but the death penalty is legal. That makes no sense. It's black and white, plain and simple. Murder is a crime, no matter who the victim is.

Answer 7

theres a term called slippery slope- philosophy- and it states that once u start doing something its harder to stop....for instance drugs, once u start doing them u find urself hard to stop......talking,,, once u start u dont want to stop.......etc....and by doing this the gov't. would be sending the wrong message to the people- it's ok to kill as long as u can justify it

Answer 8

I'm all for it.... as soon as there are as many rich murderers sitting on death row as poor ones. :)

Answer 9

You shouldn't kill other living things, even when the other living thing commited a sevier crime.