(Best argumentative opinion will get BEST ANSWER.) Why do we do this...?

DizziDazi

I am not saying that I fully believe in the death penalty, but I would like to argue the question from an objective standpoint.

In a perfect world, our society is based on capitalism and is designed to operate in a give/take manner. However, this is not a perfect world, and criminals (like murderers) are among the population who have nothing to give in return. The criminals who have a chance at changing are sent to prison in hopes of rehabilitation. I'm in no way saying that the system is perfect or that the system does a perfect job rehabilitating people.

Those who have comitted crimes devious enough to be considered uncorrectable are sentenced to either life in prison or the death penalty. When someone is sentenced to life in prison, that means that the state (or tax people's money) has to pay for that person to live for the rest of his/her life. Over the years, the prison population (including those inmates with life sentences) has increased remarkably. New prisions are being built on a daily basis, and the cost to support these individuals grows as well.

While the average Joe is out earning a living to support and feed his family, these inmates are given three meals per day, provided with recreation (television/cable in some instances), and given free medical care. The laws on how an inmate can be treated have become so strick that many believe that inmates actually have more rights than a free person. Some people have been known to commit crimes to go back to prison just for this type of support; a free roof over their heads. So, the question becomes where should society draw the line?

I realize that killing people to show people that killing people is wrong seems like flawed logic. But, if I had worked hard and tried to live ethically all my life only to find that one of my family members (my child for example) was the victim of a serial killer, I would shutter to think that my tax dollars were going toward buying anything for that individual.

Foreign Minister

The point of capital punishment is not to prove that killing is wrong. We assume that life is a person's natural right, so it is assumed that people realize that killing an innocent person is wrong. The purpose of capital punishment is deterrence. Imagine that two kids are playing. One kid sees a dog and kicks it. The dog bites the kid's face off. The other kid sees that and realizes that he would be better off to leave that dog alone. Because of the deterrent value, alot of innocent dogs are saved in this example.

catmandu

I'm logical, so I am neither for or against the death penalty.

Once a murderer is convicted, I think the punishment should fall to the closest family member or friend over 18 in the following order--spouse, father, mother, eldest offspring, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, closest friend.

Why? Because only the people closest to the victim knows what kind of pain they are in. Not some judge.

If my wife were killed, no one knows how I suffer but me, and how dare they presume to.

If the victims closest choses the death penalty--so be it. If they choose forgiveness and want them to be set free--so be it. This is a very personal thing and having some else choose the punishment for them is utterly insulting.

This should be the same for all crimes.

If someone steals a pack of gum from the local grocery store the owner of the store should set the punishment. Death penalty--if it hurt them that much so be it. Let them off scott free--so be it.

This is the only truly fair thing to do and I'll bet crime would drop drastically.

I know, I know. I'm an idiot. I've accepted the fact I'm the last logical being on this earth long ago. It's my cross to bear.

Great question though.

INTJ

An individual who qualifies for the death penalty must meet certain criteria by law and therefore forfeits their right to live among society. If I may get technical (which the law always is), WE do not kill people who kill people to show them it's wrong; the law does. Most people realize that they cannot kill someone in retaliation for an others death because we are all held to the same standard. What is that standard? The Law. It's like comparing the criminality of kidnapping to that of incarcerating an individual for crimes they've been convicted of. Technically, kidnappers are kidnapped by the BOP or DOC when they're sentenced to pay for their crimes. No one willingly goes to prison; however, we realize that we do not and cannot possibly hold the law to the same standard. The law was put into place to protect citizens and while some criminals will simply be segregated from society for the remainder of their natural lives, there are others who have committed acts so heinous that they must receive an even more severe punishment to differentiate between the severity's of the acts. The only punishment more severe than life in prison is death.

jenni_doll_1

I don't really see the death penalty as being about sending a message that killing is wrong or being vindictive, as it is about preventing further crime. It is based on the concept there are individuals who are so inherently evil, that the only way to truly protect the innocent people in society from them is to see that they are removed from that society forever. It is easy to say just put them in jail forever, assuming this will accomplish this task effectively, but, unfortunately, that is not necessarily alwasy true. Prisons fill up at some point, and often, even violent offenders are released earlier than anticipated because of overcrowding. The death penalty is final, and once carried out, it is a certainty that the criminal can never commit his heinous crime again. Of course all of human life is sacred, but it is most sacred to the one who holds it most sacred, and it's pretty evident that a convicted killer has already decided what his life and the lives of others are worth to him, nothing. If his rights and freedoms were valuable to him, he would have been thinking about that before he took those of another person. It is a sad thing we live in a world where the death penalty even has to exist, but we must ask ourselves what matters more, the rights of an individual, particularly a violent dangerous individual, or the rights of a society as a whole to be safe from that individuals potential actions? Is it really better we spend thousands of dollars in tax payers money to keep him alive for the next 50 years instead of a one time execution? Some would also say it's far more cruel and unusual punishment to lock up someone in prison for life than to more or less put him out of his misery right away and sentence him to death. Ultimately, capital punishment is a controversial subject for many, but I don't see it as much about vengeance as justice.

loves christmas lights

I think it is so that we do not have to pay for thier living expenses while they are in prison, we can just be done with them. We also kill, the court system kills to set an example that this could be your future if you pull the trigger.

pjkondorpoduszlo

I can't speak for anyone else; but I am against capital punishment. HOWEVER; I feel that there may be times where it is necessary to kill in order to PREVENT other people from being killed. Such as if there is a serial killer on the loose with a gun in hand, or in a time of war (which is different in each individual case).

angel baby

if a person kills someone...why should that person who killed fellow man have a right to live...his life should be taken as well. maybe then the jails would not be so full of people costing the tax payers money to have them in jail.

s.....

why should someone be alive when they took a life?

why should I have to pay for someone to have free room and board when they committed such a crime?

I dont look at it as killing someone, I look at it as punishment for their crime.... Capitol Punishment

touche? yes,

Happy <3

if you kill someone there are consequences
people dont want to die, so they shouldnt kill people,
i think the punishment is what keeps some from doing the crime, because they are scared of the punishment
and as far as killing them to prove its bad i dont think thats really what its for
they dont deserve the gift of living if they are going to steal that gift from someone else
like carma kinda, we dont need people who would commit brutal crimes on earth sitting in cells where we pay for them
they deserve to die
and if the possibility of getting the death sentence keeps some people from commiting crimes, then we have made an improvement already

divineintervener

In the pursuit of law and order, sometimes you must do things that seem wrong. People are much like wolves or dogs. If they know someone is weak they'll attack. You have to show people that crimes, such as murder, are not to be tolerated and will be met with swift retribution. So, if after 9/11 we did nothing and instead said that we will not stoop to the level of terrorists and kill people, we would have been attacked again. Don't believe me? Spain was attacked by terrorists and they pulled out of Iraq becaust that's what the terrorists said they wanted. They'ved since been attacked, if memory serves, twice by terrorist groups.

rich k

That is not the reason society kills people. The reasons are usually something on the order of Biblical retribution or to prevent them from killing someone else, killing someone to prove killing people is wrong would be absurd.

ch1llboy

To provide an example and dire consequence to such and action, though I would choose another route: public humiliation, solitary confinement, or another form of interpersonal punishment. from the child in grade school to the hardest criminal, we are most afraid and suffer the most in the absence and disdain of human contact.

game docter

some people have problems so they get mad or get sad esily. other people are just messed up they dont care about other people. so they muder for stupid reasons like "i want your tv" or i want your life insurance mony, dad and yes there are some sick people out there, but there really is no one reason that people kill. some kill to get into mobs or gangs, but get nothing in return. so if they kill then we kill then the brother or dad kills because he got killed it turns into i cycle that just keeps on going never ending killing machine. if you kill someone for killing he doesnt learn because he gets attention and then more people want attention so eventually we have to come to reality, if you kill, you die. even if you are still alive you are dead and you wonder, "why do we kill"?

muneka

for punishment...if there isnt a serious punishment for such a harsh crime ppl will kill like its nothing...they need to show an example of wat will happen if u commit such a cruel act...

Ms. Informed

people kill people who kill other people to satisfy "justice" that was decided by a group of 12 other people. it's a method that attempts to stop random people from exacting their own "justice" on the murder, which could then trigger someone else to exact their justice on the murderer who murdered the murderer...and so forth and so on.

E=MC2

Death is inevitable whether it comes naturally or unnaturally. People kill for love, hate, and to protect their money, fame and power. We kill to save others. We kill because it's the only way sometimes. We kill in the name of God. As long as their is life there will be killing in some manner. Read more of your history and you will see that great leaders and some dumb one agonize over this issue all of the time.

M S

it all comes down to revenge. that person killed someone that was important to someone else and so therefore many people want that person killed for taking someones life.
another view of it is stopping that person from killing. such as hitler or Stalin or other people who have killed a number of Innocent people. many want them dead ( if they are not dead already) to stop them.

others believe that killing is wrong, you can not play god and kill people. you can lock them up, however taking their life is not up to humans.

can you answer mine please?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AnxYXb4fCAe_yX11Gjqc66zsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20081216203358AApef2Y

promisinglight

it's all about motive in our society. we see the killing of a killer as being just. we are removing senseless violence form the world, replacing it with death as a punishment. i'm not saying it's right.. but most civilized societies use war as a way to eventually build a more peaceful society (getting rid of hilter, obviously, saved lives in the end. the war removed a lot of senseless violence). or the death penalty is used as a way to sometimes remove people who kill for unjustified reasons (not self-defense, etc). the system is often flawed but the intentions are to eventually not need to kill others because those who kill for no reason will be removed from society.. in theory.

crayonchic

How do u feel about the issue? Tone Tone

bree

Thats a really good question.
I suppose it doesnt show a great deal about how serious the act of killing is.

I think the idea of a death penalty for them is based on what people deserve for what they have done.. although I've always considered the death penalty to be an easy way out. The punishment has to be closely equal to what they have done.

Well yeah I dont think they actually kill people to show people that killing people is wrong,
but the punishment of killing people is usually inprisonment.. and the consequences of what people do it more of a threat than encouragement as to what is wrong.

People that get the death penalty isnt because its teaching people that death is wrong, it's just a reason to help stop people from doing so badly, a death penalty would certainly give somebody a second thought..

mitch

We want to relay the message that killing innocent people is wrong. Personally I think that it should be up to the victims family to decide if the person gets the death penalty or life in prison. They are the ones that lost someone due to the murderer, and if they will not feel better with an execution then why do it. It does not effect society the way it effects the victims family.

Mr Clean

to inevitably save lives

Lttlehrse

Why did the chicken cross the road?

When one man found that he could take what he wanted from another, the race began.

Those of us who claim to be "civilized" will proffer excuses, but today, like yesterday, know that the pecking order and the food chain are still in effect.

We are trained by theologians and our parents NOT to kill, and the representatives of the STATE teach and encourage killing.

Will there always be right and wrong? Yes. Will men continue to find reasons to kill one another? Yes.

Fo Shizzle

Well, sometimes the only way to ensure that someone stops killing others for good is to end that person's life. Sometimes inaction leads to greater harm than action. If a person isn't willing to stop killing on their own, some force against that person is required to protect others by stopping that person from harming others.

Like, Person A is on a killing spree, therefore person B kills person A, creating one more death but potentially stopping a great deal more.

I really don't think we execute people to show others that it in wrong. People already know it's wrong. We do it to say that people can't get away with it, and to get rid of people who do it so that they won't be a problem anymore. I prefer it because if you kill someone intentionally, then you deserve it, and it costs too much to keep prisoners in jail forever.

Gabrielle

It's really a spin off, if you will, of the primitive idea of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" mentality. It is no better than that and obviously no more effective than that.

Host of Threads

It would make more sense than keeping them jailed forever and costing money. But I heard it cost a buttload to kill them anyways.

Mostly because the ones that are killed will kill again or did something so heinous they must be removed from all society, even prison.

zzwonderboyzz

It is because we are a destructive world. It isn't our nature to want to kill each other, but our world has been set up by greed and corruption in a fashion in which murder is ever present. We think killing people is the only way to stop all this madness, but then other people kill those people because of this reason or that, and the cycle never ends.

princesslele1981

I think people put that punishment out because they think its the ultimate punishment... that by killing them, they are punished more then sitting jail... To me, I think its too easy, that they are let off without any punishment... I mean yes, they don't live anymore, but sometimes, I think they deserve more punishment for their crimes...

Like, here's an example... that mother who drowned both her little boys, I think they should tie her to a chair, throw her in a pool, and soon as she's out, bring her back to live and let her sit in jail knowing how her kids felt... If we just kill her, what does she learn?

I know, harsh, but hey, I don't like things being done to defenseless people, especially kids...

starlette321

its more of a justice thing. we cant let someone kill another person and do nothing to them..and most of society feels that they deserve what they did to their victim...death. it is kind of messed up in a way. but we have to slow down the process somehow. its like if someone hit you, you'd hit them back, to show them that hitting you was not okay. you know what i mean?

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: