 
|
Susan S
 |
Why would Britain want to copy a flawed American system. The death penalty is not effective in preventing or reducing crime and it risks the exectution of innocent people. Here are answers to questions asked about the practical aspects of the system. The sources are 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.
BTW, some people mistake deterrence (persuading others not to commit the crime for which someone was punished) with incapacitation (preventing recidivism.)
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.
Note to sweepea: The studies you are referring to are seriously flawed. You can read about them, see the actual studies or just the abstracts and read some of the discussion about them at
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org.
Click on deterrence and then on recent deterrence studies. |
|
Mr Sceptic
 |
Easy question.
Wrong, on a moral and a practical level.
I don't believe I or anyone acting for me has the right to kill other than in self defence. I don't believe the death penalty has any deterrent effect.
I do know that Angela Canning, Sally Clark, the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six were all wrongly convicted of murder and might have hanged wrongly, had the sentence been available. |
|
lovemelovemybum
 |
I believe the death penalty is wrong. How can you punish murder by killing someone? Does that make any sense. If it is wrong to kill it is wrong no matter who does it. Don't get me wrong if anyone hurt my family I would want to kill them but that is an emotional response and we have a duty not to be led by emotion but by reasoning when deciding such laws. |
|
malasharrock
|
No I don't believe we have a right to take someones life. They should either go to prison for the rest of their natural life or they should be offered the opportunity to do voluntary euthanasia. |
|
♥sandpaper kisses♥ >^..^<
|
no i don't, the death penalty is wrong, if someone commits a crime then they should do their time in prison, why should we decide if they live or die, we shouldn't have the right to choose that about someone. |
|
Jack
 |
The death penalty doesn't work. All civilized countries abandoned it years ago..... |
|
Patricia M
 |
As someone who has had a family member murdered, I can only say this.
I believe in the death penalty for people who have committed crimes NOT of passion, such as premeditated murder, infantcide, murder while committing a crime, etc.
Other murders are on a case by case basis. For example, if someone is protecting the life of another, in a fight, or something along those lines, I believe in redemption (think Con Air). If they are abused and kill their abuser, again, they are protecting the life of another, either themselves or their children, etc. |
|
ron c
|
the death penalty doesn't prevent crimes in the UK a few 100 years ago you could be hung for stealing people still stole. America has the death penalty and people are still committing crimes that will land them on death row. it does not and has never stopped people committing crimes. most murders are not committed by serial killing nut jobs but by every day people who get in an argument that goes deadly wrong. the abused wife who finally snaps etc etc. its not even that much of a punishment because they are died and gone no more suffering. i think the death penalty is about revenge pure and simple. an eye for and eye and the world will soon be blind |
|
Rossy Boy
|
I don't think the death penalty will come back because Britain won't want to make another mistake like they did with Derek Bentley in 1953.
They sentenced him to death because he was with his friend who murdered a police officer. Derek didn't do anything.
His friend wasn't sentenced to death because he was 16 & Derek was 19. |
|
willliewaggler
|
The death penalty should not be brought back It is far too final and does not allow for mistakes to be rectified, or at least not continued.
What most people call 'rights' are actually licences. Such things can be revoked under certain conditions. One of these is freedom. Freedom to live your life in the way you choose is licensed. If you go beyond the limits of what it is acceptable to do , freedom can be revoked and you can be imprisoned.
However, there are some things that are rights and as such cannot be revoked. Such rights are inviolable and are free-standing, in that they are not affected by any other consideration. Such a right is the right to life. Taking someone's life can never be justified. Imprisoning someone for many years to account for a crime is acceptable and proper.
The death penalty is a way of preventing people from committng crimes, simply because if people are dead, they cannot do anything.
An eye for an eye is an ancient concept, from the Old Testament. It's interesting to contract the Old and New Testament ideals of vengeance and compassion (turning the other cheek). Revenge does not lead to justice. Revenge is merely anger turned against the person that wronged you.
Some people can change their ways, some people can rehabilitate, others not. It is a fine line, but killing someone off prevents anyone finding out whether they could reintegrate. |
|
homemanager22
 |
i don't think the death penalty is right. i feel that there have been far too many cases where people have spent years in Jail only to be released due to miscarriages of justice. These people would have been dead instead!! |
|
shannie
|
Depending on the crime, and the person's history, in some cases, the death penalty is good. Innocent people die at the hands of murderers, and they should be taken off the earth for their crimes of hate. My grandmother was murdered by a serial killer in 1946, and he was put to death a year or so later, in all, he killed 6 people |
|
gortamor
|
I do not believe in bringing the death penalty back to UK. If someone is found guilty of a horrendous crime, such as murder, rape or child molesting, they should be in prison for life, with no chance to get out.
Shall UK then go back to the days where people were drawn and quartered, or hung, or burnt at the stake - for sure and that's what some would want next. |
|
Maon
|
I think death is too sweet for some people! and that when someone commit an horrible crime they should go in jail for life.
I don't think psychopaths and paedophiles change there ways!
but I also don't think that we will change violence by being violent ourselves so no to death penalties yes to life sentences.
That is a great question by the way. |
|
tehabwa
|
Oh, UK.
I'm a Yank, but oppose the death penalty.
BTW, the "eye for an eye" was actually meant to be a maximum, not a minimum. That is, if someone takes your eye out, you shouldn't KILL them for it -- inflict a more severe punishment -- but do no more than whatever it was they did.
Or so I've heard.
We do know that people HAVE changed; we can't predict who will and who won't, but if we didn't kill them we could learn more about this whole thing.
There's also the question "How many innocent people is it OK to murder because the death penalty was misapplied, and how are you going to restore them to life?" kinda question.
Although I oppose the death penalty on the grounds that it's barbaric, disgusting, and sub-human, I also like to raise the issue of murdering people who didn't do it. |
|
G O
|
The only time the death penalty should be used is for Mass Murders or Serial Killers.
Most other murders are done out of rage or the killer is trying to cover there tracks and usally have done such a crime. |
|
dollybird
|
the death penalty should be reserved for the most serious of crimes such as murder and repeat paedophile offenders. the death penatly however i do not think will prevent these crimes as the people who murder and abuse children are sick and their actions will not be stopped by the threat of hanging, they just cant help it. it will however save the rest of us paying to keep the sh*ts in relative luxury for the rest of their lives or paying for their protection upon release from prison. these types of criminals cannot change their ways. as for all other sorts of criminals the sentances should be harsher, jails should contain nothing except a concrete bed, matress and bucket. they should be let out for 1 hour a day to empty bucket wash and exercise. can you image a 18 year old being sent to a prison like this for any length of time and the reoffending ? i think not ! it is time for someone with some balls to stand up for the law abiding public and tell the human rights namby pambies to bugger off. |
|
angrymammal
|
There is NO justification for the death penalty |
|
PATRICK
 |
yes hanging should be brought back as a punishment |
|
fcuk_knows
|
No, No , No and Yes
Next question...
btw the death penalty will kind of rule out anyone repeating a crime (which is the whole point non?)
Having read the above 'answers' the amount of utter crap people spout on here never fails to amaze me...i dont know why should be used to it by now... |
|
mikail brown
|
Death penalty is wrong .but we coud flog people ,put them in stocks ,march them up and down the streets put them on cleaning up the streets . |
|
wf12adrian
|
Yes I do. They should also ban drug taking even for personal use |
|
tsuma534
|
I don't believe that death is any sort of penalty itself.
I believe that there are two reasonable approaches for some crimes:
1)It is our job to penalize the guilty. Then some people who have committed the worst, most horrible crimes, should die in suffering.
2)We shouldn't penalize the guilty. You may for example say, it's in a God's hands. Then they should be painlessly put to death.
But some "people" should no longer live in a society because they are too dangerous. For example, i don't believe that a frequent rapist will change his way.
The death penalty is 100% effective in preventing people from committing further crimes.
I believe that rape, and a premeditated murder should end with death penalty. And I don't think It's an eye for an eye. Those "eyes" are priceless and death won't make it even. It's just one of the ways which may be successful in providing order to a society. |
|
Lilu
|
I believe people should have a second chance and pardoned. BUT, I understand that some psycho (serial killer, serial paedophilia offenders) and the mass murderer (we call them terrorist) are hard to be forgiven. Death penalty perhaps deter them some of them but won't deter the terrorist. |
|
Mr Abba
 |
It depends on the crime, but i do believe the death penalty can be a good thing. |
|
JP
|
I believe that Britain should reinstate the death penalty. I also believe that it is a suitable way to punish people for committing horrific crimes, like murderers or repeat rapists. I'm certain that it's a way of preventing some people from committing such crimes as well. Someone might think about killing someone, but then think about dieing themselves if they're caught. It also keeps people who have already committed a crime from committing it again if they know they'll get the death penalty.
As for believing in "An eye for an eye", only to an extent. I'm not sure that everyone should have done to them what they've done. Some people actually just make horrible mistakes and regret it for the rest of their lives. I believe that some people are capable of changing as well. Not everyone who ever committed a crime or done something wrong has done it repeatedly. People are capable of changing. |
|
soulieupnorth
|
hang em high now lets think about this yes i do think hanging would stop these crimes certainly with so many gun and knife killing going on how ever what happens when you are in fight say and the person falls down hits their head on the pavement and dies is that a crime where you should be hung!!
But if you go out with a gun, knife or bomb and kill someone then you should forfeit your life.
So yes bring back the death by hanging |
|
|
|
|
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
