An argument against the death penalty.?

Not Ecky Boy

Even in the best judicial systems in the world, i.e., Western Europe, it is estimated that as many as 10% of people found guilty of ANY crime are, in fact, innocent.

I believe that to NOT have the death penalty, is the sign of a civilised country. As a European, I am proud we led the way in this.

Much better to leave a person in jail for the rest of his life. Forensics are advancing all the time,. and many convicted murderers can, in fact be proved innocent years later.
The common argument is that they get it too easy in prison- i'.e., colour televisions. I think that would be the ultimate torture- to have to watch television for the rest of your life.

My final argument is this. Texas has the death penalty. In the entire history of Texas, only ONE governor ever attended every single execution during his term of office. George Bush.

I rest my case....

beasties70

It's not a deterrent.

It's too drawn out.

It's too expensive.

And I'm sure an argument of morality can be made....but not by me....I'd kill someone who harmed my family in a heartbeat. Wouldn't even need a chair or lethal injection....a baseball bat will do just fine.

starlet108

I agree with you 100%. The justice system in this country is too corrupt and people would lose their lives only to be found innocent after the event. What I do think though is that life in prison should mean LIFE and that it should be a lifetime of hard labour. Make them pay for the crime xxxxxxxx

PhD

I completely concur.

The fact that the death penalty does not deter crime is nowhere better illustrated that in the USA where they are almost unique in being a democracy that retains the death penalty, and where they also have an incredibly high homicide rate!

Morally, it is hardly a good way to condemn violence, by using violence: to show repugnance for murder by committing murder!

Finally, as you quite rightly remark, mistakes are made, still, in assigning guilt. Only the death penalty makes it certyain that no restitution can be made to those wrongly convicted.

teflon88

1 every human being despite what they have done deserves the chance to rehabilitate; thus the death penalty utterly abolishes any chance of this obviously
2 why commit the same crime that is trying to be deterred (ie murder); almost hypocritical isn't it?

Shaun N

I agree with you in regards to not agreeing with the death penalty, However, what country are you in? The U.S. has not abolished the death penalty... it varies state to state, except in Federal matters. For example, Michigan doesn't have the death penalty, but if you commit certain Federal crimes in Michigan you can receive the death penalty.
I don't know if someone would be getting off easy with the death penalty, they sit in a single man cell for years, appealling their verdict before being executed.
I agree that it doesn't deter or prevent serious crimes, and I don't believe in the death penalty, I do believe that innocent people have been executed on too many occasions, and I know it sounds strange but I would feel the same way if I was looking at someone who killed my loved one and they were facing the death penalty.
I often wondered, if we give the death penalty to a murderer, when they are executed, isn't it fair to say that the executioner is a murderer also?

fivetoze

you have to makew a decision as to wether to incarcerate, or incinerate.

on humanitarian grounds, teh death penalty is as severe a penalty as one can set, but its only a deterrent if its used wisely and correctly... ie. no more state sanctioned killing of people for anythng less than murder rape or child abuse. but this is England, and we dont execute prisoners..and 30 years in HMP isnt the nightmare it once was.. (i know, im a convicted armed robber) today, well its 3 squares, and colour telly...with no responsibilities or obligations. being banged up in todays prison system is a paid holiday.

i actually did time with the sons of annie macguire, (the guilford four &associates) they didnt get a fair deal, and indeed they were innocent, i was long gone when they got released, paddy went in as a young kid... and i read a piece on him in the times a few years back, those years in Aylesbury prison..well they effect your whole life thereafter...i'm the same. and its been such a deterrrent that for 28 years ive stayed out...

but it only works because i have a reason to stay away from crime and criminality, i have responsibilities, obligations, and everything else which goes along with having a stable family life, i value my freedom... and being in a wheelchair makes doing a runner a little difficult!

but the death penalty, what does it say about the lawmakers? we here in blighty give people the chance to reform their lifes, make ammends, and become members of society. you kill someone and its all over, it says we cant be bothered with you, your dog poo on my shoe... to be scraped away and discarded. wheres the incentive in that?

the death penalty whilst barbaric does have an incentive...avoid the rope. i think we ought to reintroduce the drop. with DNA and advances in forensics, we have less opportunities for istakes to be made. yes miscariages of justice will still occur, and unless the supporting evidence is 100% watertight..theres no death penalty. just imprisonment.

if the drop were reintroduced, and they were automatic sentences, ie perp kills plod... perp kills kids, perp pervs kids, class A dealers... (they might as well be selling kalshnikovs and ammunition) and sort out the law... i shoot someone, i get life...fair enough..but if im pissed as a fart and plough into the school crossing lady killing her and three kids... i might get 5 years... the law is as unblanced as teh rest of the society it purports to protect. get rid of archaic terms, and bring it upto date. dont take away the judges ability to judge and mete senternce... but make certain crimes have an obligatory sentencing requirement.

Laurence B

I agrre with one of your points. Its wrong to kill people, amd even so it's an easy way out for thiose scum who have murdered. A better alternative is to send them into jail fo life.

Blue Steel & Lace

Who speaks for the victims of those we execute?

All over the country, news stories bemoan and hype the countdown to execution number 1,000. People are upset because a man took 34 minutes to die from lethal injection.
But where are the stories regarding the ripple effects of the heinous crimes that these murderers were executed for committing? Who is counting the victims?

A conservative estimate puts the number of victims of these 1,000 murderers at 1,895. Why do we hear so much about the killers and so little about the victims and their loved ones who are left behind to pick up the pieces?

This is a small sampling of case histories:

Melvin and Linda Lorenz and their son Richard were killed by Roger Stafford. Melvin stopped on a highway near Purcell, Okla., to help what he thought was a woman whose car had broken down, but instead was ambushed by Stafford and his brother, using Stafford's wife as bait. Less than a month after these horrific murders, the trio killed six employees of a steak house in Oklahoma City.

In 1985, 13-year-old Karen Patterson was shot to death in her bed in North Charleston, S.C. Her killer was a neighbor who had already served 10 years of a life sentence for murdering his half-brother Charles in 1970. Joe Atkins cut the Pattersons' phone lines, then entered bearing a machete, a sawed-off shotgun, and a pistol. Karen's parents were chased out of their home by Atkins. Karen's mom ran to the Atkins home nearby, where Joe then murdered his adopted father, Benjamin Atkins, 75, who had worked to persuade parole authorities to release Joe from the life sentence.

When Katy Davis observed three strangers outside her Austin, Texas, apartment, she walked away. Returning later, she was attacked and forced to open the door by Charles Rector, on parole for a previous murder. The men ransacked her apartment, abducted her and took her to a lake where she was beaten, gang-raped, shot in the head and repeatedly forced underwater until she drowned.

Ruby Longsworth of Pasadena, Texas, met Jeffrey Barney through a prison ministry, then helped him get paroled from an auto-theft sentence. Her kindness was repaid when Barney raped and sodomized her, then strangled her with a cord. She had made the mistake of calling Barney "a bum" after she had gotten to know him better.

In 1965, Robert Massie murdered mother of two Mildred Weiss in San Gabriel, Calif., during a follow-home robbery. Hours before execution, a stay was issued so Massie could testify against his accomplice. Massie's sentence was commuted to life when the Supreme Court halted executions in 1972. Receiving an undeserved second chance, Massie was paroled, but eight months later robbed and murdered businessman Boris Naumoff in San Francisco.

Faith Hathaway was 17 when she was murdered by Robert Willie, whose story became the inspiration for the film "Dead Man Walking." Hathaway had just graduated from high school and was leaving for the Army the next day. She was abducted after leaving a farewell party in Mandeville, La. Willie and accomplice Joseph Vaccaro had been on an 8-day murder, robbery and rape spree. Hathaway was raped by both assailants and stabbed 17 times. She was raped again after she died.

Kenneth Boyd murdered his estranged wife Julie and his father-in-law, Dillard Curry in Rockingham County, N.C. Julie and her children were living with Curry. Boyd entered the home and shot them both in the presence of his own children, then ages 13, 12 and 10.

We must think about the lives that all 1,895 murdered victims affected. Every one had families, friends, relatives, co-workers, neighbors. The combined loss is incalculable.

There is no end to horror stories like these. Jurors, who represent us, hear about horrific crimes and make tough but appropriate decisions. With a yearly average of 15,000 murders, the fact that we are reaching 1,000 executions in only a little more than 30 years is proof that capital punishment has been reserved for the worst of the worst.

The attention given to the question of pain or suffering during the execution of convicted murderers is repugnant, especially when the loudest voices think the death of a convicted murderer is a tragedy. Yet the deaths and suffering of countless victims is only an easily-ignored statistic.

â™£ My Brainhurts â™£

I am in total agreement with you, it is my firm belief that any Country that uses the Death Penalty has no right to coincide it's self civilised.

Bel

Difficult question to answer, but considering the light treatment some violent and evil people get in jail, all at the taxpayer's expense, it's no wonder that people consider the death penalty an option.
Best thing to do to people who have committed serious crimes is to lock them in a soundproof room with the victim's family.

Tallboy

1. It is not a deterrent. It is a punishment.
2. Suffering and prison is a contradiction in terms. TV's, Gyms, No constructive work.
The news has just said a man has been arrested for killing the girls in Ipswich. If he's guilty tell me again why he or persons like him should not hang, otherwise explain why 10 - 15 years inside then coming out to a fully furnished house and benefits, a Social Worker to run around after them, is justified as punishment.

EC2talk2

I think we should have the Death Penalty, it should be applied right after the definitive Found Guilty veredict...not after 15 or 20 years..This is a very contradictory topic...because as you have mention some one innocent might be misjudge and sent o his/her death, but as forensic technology advances these mistakes hopefuly will be minimized to "0" but I am in favor of the D.P.

correrafan

I agree with you. The most compelling reason for abolishing the death penalty is the remote chance that a truly innocent person might be put to death. Even a really, really remote chance is too great a chance in my book. The legal system is too corrupt to allow it to have such absolute power.

SteveT

I agree, the deat penalty should not be restored.

As another argument just look at those "lethal injections" in Florida that take forty minutes to kill you

Mark Paul the 1st

it costs to much to keep losers alive

George

With respect, I think your line of thought is deffective and part of the reason why we have got to this situation in UK.

There is an argument as to whether or not it is a deterrent.

Well there is one way to put that question to rest.
I say bring back the death penalty for a trial period (say 5 years)
First take a careful count of the number of specified crimes committed in (say) the 5 preceeding years.
Then administer the death penalty rigorously for the next 5 years and monitor the situation. Obviously we would want to be 100% certain that a person was guilty but apparently this is now possible with DNA testing.
Specified crimes should be pre meditated murder, genuine rape, drug peddling.
The term pre meditated murder should include those killings carried out by motor car where the driver was under the influence of drink, drugs or using a mobile 'phone where this can be shown to have caused the killing.
I believe that this would change people's attitudes to the value of human life.
We would all understand that we have a responsibility towards our fellow man and woman and people who are careless with this should pay the price - their own life.

jack lewis

With modern forensics we now in a position to bring back the death penalty in Britain in my opinion. I believe it should apply to Murderers and Child Rapists. Do you think its civilised to allow out multiple child killers after a few years? and why should the taxpayer have to pay for them ?

60s Chick

I am with you completely.

peanut1973

I agree with you. Condoning the killing of somebody else makes society no better than the convicted ciminal. If we are to maintain cililty in our world we must avoid reinstating the death penalty at all costs.

Veritas

The arguments for and against the death penalty have been aired many times, However, on balance, I am against it. Lets personalise it. There are people, including women it would seem, who are quite prepared to leave their homes in the morning, probably kissing the kids or spouse goodbye (have a nice day dear and all that), and then going off to work to kill someone they don't know, and someone who hasn't done them any personal harm. Now, one has to wonder what sort of people they are: Sociopaths, or Psychopaths, perhaps. Would they be prepared to execute members of their own family? if not, why not? They must believe very strongly in the death penalty. After all, the condemned will have a family somewhere. It would be an interesting question to put to others who believe in the death penalty: whether they would be as keen if it was a member of their family. It's always easier when it is someone else.

I have never understood why, in America, it is necessary to have a system that keeps people on death row for many years, which is quite a sentence in itself with death hanging over your head, and then to execute them in front of an audience of 200 people plus. I am asking why they need to be there? Gawping voyeurs.

It really is, quite sick. As women tend to personalise things, I would seriously question their motives for being involved in this process, albeit that it tends to mimic a hospital surgical procedure. Remember, it is nearly always men that are being executed. Could it be providing feminists with their ultimate power trip over men?

I don't like the death penalty. It serves no purpose. You are right it does not deter crime because most people who commit a crime don't think they will get court.

honeybee_lll

There are alot of people that agree with the death sentence, but I think they should suffer in prison. This way if someone was later found out to be innocent they would still be alive to try to get on with there lives. However, if someone is admitted or caught in the act that is a different story.

Wanderer

The death penalty seems appropriate for certain heinous crimes.However it is no deterrent because:
1st the criminal does not expect to get caught
2nd the criminal doesn 't care
Furthermore a penalty of death is getting of easy compared to sitting in a 6 by 8 hole for the rest of his life with no chance of getting out ever .Think about that before yelling kill them.

Zobostic

My only arguement against the death penalty is that the State gets involved. An eye for an eye is not a government issue, it's personal. Friends and family should be allowed to deal directly with anyone who has harmed thier family member, and they should be allowed to deal with it in any way that brings them closure. No questions asked.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: