Death penalty? Yes/No?

Question

I agree with Cherry

Answer 1

Who are we to decide who gets to live and who gets to die? But i do believe that we should have self-suffieient prision so prisioners don't get more funding than schools do. No death penalty, and don't give murders free shelter and a free bed

Answer 2

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.

126 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

Depends upon the severity of the crime.

If someon went out and maliciously killed 15 people and shows NO remorse. Than yes I think the death penalty should be applied.

I think there should be a period of time to see if people can be rehabilitated before being executed.

There are women on death row who killed their abusive husbandsand serial killers who killed many people and just have life in prison.

Answer 4

No. I don't consider myself all that religious or anything, but I really feel that deciding whether or not someone lives or dies (no matter how much of a monster they may be) is not up us, and not a choice we should be making. I do, however, believe that we should lock murderers and rapists and pedophiles away and then literally throw away the keys forever. Any less of a jail term for them would be too short, imo.

Answer 5

Y'know, I've pondered this one myself. Different states have different laws. Look at California and then look at Texas. Texas doesn't mess around while California death row inmates are allowed to have a website, post pictures and talk about their feelings with pen pals. The monster that raped and murdered Polly Klaas has colored pics of him showing off his tattoos and has a blog talking about how emotional and misunderstood he is. Our tax dollars are paying for that man to stay alive and I really don't understand why. He is not repenting for his sins and he will never be reformed.
I think it depends upon the crime you committed and if you can be reformed. People murder for different reasons. Some were under the influence of drugs, some were sick of being beat up on by their husbands and defended themselves and some are sociopaths who can't live in a normal society.
But, yes, I do believe in the death penalty. Some people are just too dangerous to live among our children.
Most death row inmates die from old age. Do you know how expensive it is to clothe, feed and shelter one person for a year on death row?
Jeffrey Dahlmer raped, killed and ate parts of at least thirteen men. As punishment, the government was planning to feed, clothe, educate, medicate, entertain, and legally represent him for the rest of his life. Families of his victims would pay taxes, in part, to keep Dahlmer comfortable, warm in winter and cool in summer.

Answer 6

no because how does that solve anything... the way they put people to death is a series of injections of different solutions, so its not painful for very long even if at all. the experience of death, i imagine, is not comfortable in the first place, but it makes them numb basically so it's weird...but if someone killed my family or my best friend or someone really close to me... death is to easy, death doesn't' amount to suffering like many people imagine it does...but this is on personal opinion. so i would want for this said person who killed someone close to me to be put in a windowless cell with loud neighbors and an aluminum toilet...

plus, the death penalty has killed innocent people... if they placed an innocent person into jail for life...then found they were innocent, they could let them go and trade him for the guilty one... you can't do that with death, you just kill 2 people for one crime that one didn't even commit.

Answer 7

NO!Even In the most bizarre cases the death penalty is too good for them! Why let them off the hook, they should be made to deal with their crimes and on judgement day they will meet their executioner*

Answer 8

I believe it depends on the situation.

Usually on gruesome, terrible people
are sentenced to death,
and that's because they clearly did it,
and what they did was terrible.

Part of me says it's good, they don't deserve
to live, but then again no matter what
they're forgiven by God, and I then believe
it's better for them to just sit the rest
of their sorry lives in jail, living with that guilt...
Somehow I believe that's worth than death.

Answer 9

What's the point? Killing a person is, in effect, allowing them to get away with it.

Far better to put them all in *real* prisons {the sort we used to have, where there wasn't a tv in every room and prisoners had to wear uniforms}, and the worst offenders in solitary confinement.

Answer 10

Never- let them rot in solitary confinement for the rest of their pathetic lives but not in the ground. They do not deserve the easy way out.