What is your opinion regarding the use of the death penalty as a form of punishment?
Is there some other form of punishment you think would be better?
Answers:
I used to be pro-death penalty, but I have changed my stance, for several reasons:
1. By far the biggest reason is this: Sometimes our legal system gets it wrong. Look at all the criminals who are being released after years of imprisonment because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. No matter how rare it is, our government should not risk executing one single innocent person.
Really, that should be reason enough for most reasonable people. If you need more, read on:
2. Because of the extra expense of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.
3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best (I have seen studies that have actually shown the opposite effect--that violent crimes actually INCREASE in societies that employ the death penalty).
4. I also agree with those who say that death is too good for the dregs of our society. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age.
5. The U.S. government is supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. 1 Peter 3:9 argues AGAINST “eye for an eye”-type justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
I am unconditionally against capitol punishment. The government says we can't kill people, yet as punishment for killing someone, they go and kill you. That is total hypocrisy.
For people who would get the death penalty, I think they should just get a life sentence without the possibility of parole.
In response to people who say the death penalty is a good deterrent to prevent murders, look at Texas. They execute the most people in the country every year, yet have the highest crime rate. Doesn't seem to work.
SCOTT- if you ONLY see it as a form of prevention, why don't we just put everyone to death? That way, no one can be murdered.
Korey- DNA is not always 100%. Mistakes could be made when comparing DNA's or the DNA cops find at the scene supposedly "connecting" someone to a crime may have gotten there innocently.
People who say the death penalty should also be painful, are you aware of the protection from "cruel and unsual punishment," guarenteed by the eighth Amendment?
I say give the guilty a fair trial and burn em.....No repeat offenders....Nuf Said
I disagree with it only because we can make errors in judgement and you can't get out on appeal from death. Megan's Law for example was written about someone who raped and killed children. I would have no problem executing someone like that. Hell, I would pull the switch myself and not lose any sleep. But life imprison should be punishment enough.
Let the worst of the worst rot for the rest of their natural lives.
No, I think the death penalty is the most effective way to keep people from committing crimes.Can you imagine what it would be like if everyone knew they wouldn't be severely punished for their crimes.
Well the Death Penalty is never carried out except in Texas so it really does not make any.difference.
Form of death Penalty.Very painful!
Death Penalty...YES. Better? How about hard labor? I also think making criminals sit on death row for years and years is unethical and a ridiculous demand of taxpayers.
seems like it puts an end to a repeat offender to me!
The first answerer pretty much summed it up.
Who are the real killers if the government kills a guy for killing somebody because killing somebody is against the law?
The message we are supposed to learn from capital punishment is that life is valuable. But for every murder, there is another unneedless death.
And don't even get me started about the methods - some people sit there squirming and dieing for 30 minutes because of messed up lethal injections. How is that ethical.
I don't see the death penalty as a form of punishment, but rather a form of prevention. I've never heard of a person executed to come back and commit another crime.
One only need to put them self in the place of a death row inmate. You are poor, were poorly represented, and completely innocent. Now they are strapping you into the electric chair, or to the gurney. You know that most people who get the death penalty truly deserve it, but that matters little to you as they are about to snuff out your life for a crime you didn't commit. You will more than likely be forever defined as a hideous murderer, yet everyone says that the death penalty is just. I am sure that there is a special place in Heaven for the falsely executed, and a special place in Hell for his executors. This too, however, is little consolation as they hit that switch.
If DNA proves that a capital offense has been committed, AND a jury finds the defendant guilty, then the death penalty should be used.
If DNA evidence is not available, then they should not use the death penalty because too many cases have been coming into light whereas the prosecutors made very bad errors and the DNA evidence now proves the defendant innocent.
The death penalty is an effective method of preventing certain types of offenses, and an appropriate response to those crimes. There are, however, some problems I have with the way it is currently administered:
1) The time period from conviction to execution is far too long. This adversely effects the effectiveness of capital punishment as a deterrent and makes the suffering of the family's victims longer.
2) There seems to be a disparity concerning the victims' age and the administration of the death penalty. Murderers of younger victims (basically children) are less likely to be sentenced to death than murderers of adults. This makes no sense, and those who brutalize young children should be more likely to be sentenced to death than less.
3) There has been a movement in recent years to make the death penalty more humane. This is unnecessary and wrong-headed. Those who murder other people, particularly in a heinous manner, should not receive a humane, painless death. If it is painful--and they know this up-front, they are more likely to be deterred in their criminal activity.
The death penalty also offers prosecutors more of a bargaining tool in plea negotiations. Taking it off the table is doubly erroneous for this reason as well.
i think it is perfectly fair if you murder someone...
as to whether wrongfully taking taking a life merits his/her own life in return,believing one way or the other is a consequence of your mindset which formed by your to absorbing,in part, the thinking and opinion of others around you.religious notions about god,the nature(violent) of man in a state.the death penalty is more forfeiture than punishment ,,,,the anticipation of the convicted is partial punishment.,,,,,the government allows you the right to defend life,property,loved ones,at cost of life to the attacker(defence of property sometimes with less than lethal force)
I'm gonig to say that I disagree
A hot poker up the butt.
The Death Penalty is good...people who murder others should be punished severely. But not like, tortured or anything. That's not cool, but they shouldn't just let some rapist that killed a child just be sentenced for life. It's just not right.
The death penalty is not an effective way of preventing or reducing crime and it risks executions of innocent people.
Some people who answered your question are confused about the difference between deterrence and preventing recidivism (also called incapacitation.) Here are answers to questions often asked about the system, with sources listed below.
What about the risk of executing innocent people?
124 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence.
Doesn't DNA keep new cases like these from happening?
DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee against the execution of innocent people.
Doesn't the death penalty 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 that have it than in states that do not.
So, what are the alternatives?
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.
But isn't the death penalty cheaper than keeping criminals in prison?
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, largely because of the legal process. Extra costs include those due to the complicated nature of both the pre trial investigation and of the trials (involving 2 separate stages, mandated by the Supreme Court) in death penalty cases and subsequent appeals. There are more cost effective ways to prevent and control crime.
What about the very worst crimes?
The death penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was sentenced to death, let alone executed??
Doesn't the death penalty help families of murder victims?
Not necessarily. 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.
So, why don't we speed 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.
But don’t Americans prefer the death penalty as the most serious punishment?
Not any more. People are rethinking their views, given the facts and the records on innocent people sentenced to death. According to a Gallup Poll, in 2006, 47% of all Americans prefer capital punishment while 48% prefer life without parole. Americans are learning about the system and we are making up our minds based on facts, not eye for an eye sound bites.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment