Death Penalty?

Susan S

I agree with you. Fortunately more and more Americans are learning about how the death penalty system actually functions. Here is some of what we know, with sources below.

127 people on death rows have been released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, canâ€™t guarantee we wonâ€™t execute innocent people. (Some answerers are mistaken on this)

The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reliable study shows the death penalty deters others. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that donâ€™t.

We have a good alternative, life without parole, on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.

The death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison, mostly because of the upfront costs (before and during the initial trial) of 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 have testified 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. Speed up the process and we will execute innocent people.

Sources:

Death Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo. Org, for stats on executions, reports on costs, deterrence studies, links to FBI crime stats and links to testimony (at state legislatures) of victims' family members.

FBI http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_04.html

The Innocence Project, www.innocenceproject.org

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo. Org/COcosttestimony.pdf page 3 and 4 about upfront costs of the death penalty.

http://www.njadp.org/forms/signon-survivor.html for statements of victimsâ€™ families in New Jersey

Froggie

I was always of the opinion that to keep people alive in jail was costing the government (which means tax payers) alot of money and if they have murdered someone then its the eye for an eye, but have had to look at it from a different perspective, my brothers a policeman and even though he had agreed with me before, he changed his mind as if someone has comitted a murder and the penalty for that is death, then what is stopping them from killing as many people as they can, especially people in the front line like police who are trying to apprehend them, to make the place safer for us, and lets be honest, how many of you out there would be willing to be in that position? No job is worth losing your like, especially for those nutters who just dont care about anybody, so, its a real dilemma, but thats my opinion anyway, hope that helps you, goodluck!

Richard S

Ignoring the morality of it, a death penalty assumes a flawless judicial system. How many people have been convicted of a crime, only to have new evidence proving their innocence, free them (with a large cash settlement as compensation) twenty years later? Admittedly, a really small percentage. But the point is valid - people make mistakes, 'evidence' can be misleading, and even the smallest of chances that an innocent person could be executed by the state is unacceptable.

AndThenThereWasLight

I agree with you

To Andria: of course one would want to kill the perpetrator of such heinous crimes but that does not make it right.

John C

My two cents:

The "Killings others to show killing is bad makes no sense", would be like saying to someone arguing the abuse of prison: "Abusing others emotionally and physically like sending them to prison and treating them like a dog by putting them in a cage, forcing them to be naked, Tasing them because they don't follow instructions; simply to show abusing others and hurting other sis bad, makes no sense" You can apply that arguement to everyone.

THE FACT IS.. the Death Penalty TODAY is NOT a deterent to crime. After 20 years of appeals and time gone by, the reality of the crime that sent the person to Death has lost its appeal and people sympathise for that person. The sentence is by our PEERS, our neighbors, and the sentence is death. They chose death for that person, and the government should carry out that sentence. The sentence is not prison for 20 + years and rediculous appeals that cost tax payers billions of dollars, the sentence is death.

There is a verse in the Bible that I whole heartedly agree with, Ecclesiastes 8:11 says, "Because SENTENCE against an evil work is NOT EXECUTED SPEEDILY, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil."

Because the SENTENCE against the evil work is no executed or carried out speedily, people do NOT fear the consequences. Our prisons are full of people watching TV, going to work out, play basketball, etc., that their is no deterent.

IF, DNA and the smoking gun are 100% accurate and the jury of their peers sentence them to death, then within 30 days the sentence (death) should be carried out speedily.

To me that would be and IS a deterent. It works in many other countries and it would slow down the most dispicable crimes. Try smuggling Herroin into Singapore... they will hang you. (now I don't agree with that penalty for the crime, it is THEIR law as a soverign nation and they don't have the same drug problems we do) Its much harder to find a drug smuggler to go to Singapore than it is to find one to come to the U.S. That's my point!! It is a deterent, for MOST people. Some will always take that risk. They always have and always will, but we don't stop putting people in prison because people knowingly commit crimes that send them to prison.

If they KNOWING do the crime with the penalty.. Kill a cop for example... then it is the criminal who understands the risks.. the death penalty. And it should be carried out SPEEDILY.

ALSO, in regards to the INNOCENT people who have died. Why not do away with prisons, because obviously some have been falsely accused and spent years in prions, unfairly. Away from any normal life. Isn't that abuse? The fact is, most people on death row ARE guilty, most people in prison are guilty, and most people in both areas were not Choir Boys that suddenly found themselves in prison as they were just minding their own business. My point here, is that although it is unfortunate, sometimes they locked up a person for rape and perhaps in this ONE case he actually did NOT rape the person, but yet, his CRIMINAL history is lengthy.. it happens and when police see a lengthly criminal record on a suspect... it logically gives them more pause to consider this in fact is the person... Watch an episode of 48 Hours of this.

UPDATE: It simply would cost much less if judgement was carried out sooner. That is why it costs more. Most people are not in prison for 20 years or more, so that is why the average prison costs are less.

auniquorn

There are justifications for both sides, however... the cost of the death penalty would be much lower if they'd actually fulfill any of them in under 20 years. Just how many appeals does someone deserve? It would probably be a better deterrent then, too.

Keith Sypler

Well really i agree with what you're saying and you're definately right! it makes no sense whatsoever but then again i believe in retaliation (unfortunately but then again who doesn't?) So if someone gets killed by someone. the person who killed that innocent bystander should die...

Memnoch

My view on it is while you have a right to life you can give up your rights. If you murder someone you have given up your right to life. Just as if you rob a bank they lock you up and bye bye freedom. At least for a few years. As for the cost difference, well you could humanly kill someone less than $100 we just feel the need to do things in the most exstravegant way possible.

fusco1977

eye for an eye , rapist should be neutered like a dog, or cut off the culprit completely. good people suffer for a lifetime.

Manny D

The Death Penalty should be brought back. The only reason it is not a deterrent to crime right now is because it is not being used right. If someone is put on death row today, he/she still has probably over 20 years before they finally carry out the sentence. To make the death penalty a deterrent, the death penalty should be carried out NO LONGER than 2 years after the sentence is handed down. Make it happen that fast and then it will become a deterrent and work how it is supposed to be. Have you noticed though, that most, not all, but most people who are against the death penalty, are all in favor of abortion?

Dan

It should be allowed especially for murder or drug smuggling.

Society does not need these people. There is no place for them. Keeping them for life in jail will only require more funding.

If they pose a danger, then it's best to get rid of them before they do society harm.

starglowshady

well i think it should be brought back in a big way... dna will prove people guilty now and innocent not guilty ...so there shouldnt be any mistakes... yes ill tell you this why i think it should be ..2 little girls playing in the grandmas yard while she made lunch a man calls them by the fence ask if they saw his puppy they said no he grabbed the 4 year old took her to a abanded house raped her repeatedly ..the other little girl told the grandma a man took her it took 2 days for the cops to find this man... and when he showed them the little girl she was broken in half in a pool of blood naked... can you imagen that being your little girl and now in the news papper he wants a new trial he says he never got his rights read to him ...i say put an execution on national tv so anyone that gets the urge too kill someone will see what happens when you fry it will keep crime down i bet..... see there not sitten in prison suffering for the crimes they commit there thinking of ways too get out of it ......

Andria S

If you walked in and saw your mother raped and then murdered would you want that person dead? How about your daughter? Your sister?

Lets say, that its your daughter who is 3 years old and she just got brutally raped and then the perpetrator beat her to death. Would you want them dead?

eye for an eye. Id want the Mother F*cker to suffer then die.

think about it as your most beloved who had been murdered. Should that person not suffer the same fate. ?
well thats a bunch sh*t 2.5 million??? I dont know wher the goverment gets off by saying it cost that much . cause it would cost me 3.25
$3.00 to the mexican to dig the hole and 25 cents for the bullet.

asianman

Killing other people makes it impossible to kill more people. I think it is going to be very hard for Tim McVeigh to bomb another Federal Building. I bet Tookie Williams will find it much harder to blow the face off of another hotel clerk.

Why does allowing evil people to kill seem like compassion to you?

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: