Do you agree with Capital Punishment?? ?

T C

No, the reason is not just that the wrong person may be put to death (although that is a pretty good reason) but it is also that people who commit horrendous crimes should be given time to face up to the crimes, death would be a short and a quick escape.

Another issue of course is that the death penalty seems to fall disproportionately on those with learning difficulties. It needs to be clarified what the cause of this is.

Is it miscarriage of justice that falls on those most easy to blame? Is it that people with learning difficulties are more likely to commit serious crime? Is it that those with learning difficulties have less chance of defending themselves?

These questions and probably others need to be properly explored in order to examine the benefits and disadvantages of using the death penalty.

Charles S

No. I disagree with it for the simple reason that you cannot correct a mistake.

Susan S

When you look at the death penalty system in action, you realize that the only purpose it serves is retribution or revenge, it is seriously (and intrinsically) flawed in application and that there is a serious and continuing risk of executing innocent people. And, it costs much more than life in prison. (Sources below.)

130 people wrongfully convicted people were sentenced to death and were fortunate to be released, eventually. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, canâ€™t guarantee we wonâ€™t execute innocent people. If someone is convicted and later found innocent you can release him from prison, but not from the grave.

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.

Life without parole, on the books in 48 states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending 23 of 24 hours a day locked in a tiny cell is not a picnic. 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 of legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people. (upfront = pre trial and trial level)

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?

Families of murder victims are not unanimous about the death penalty. However, even families who have supported the death penalty in principal 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 on why the death penalty is so expensive

http://www.njadp.org/forms/signon-survivor.html, www.mvfhr.org and
www.mvfr.org for statements of victimsâ€™ families

The Wanderer

this is part of something i wrote for a paper not so long ago

Spanish inquisition, In 358 years, executed only 2000 people. To put this into some sort of prospective in 26 years alone the state of Texas has used execution as a form of punishment to execute 400 inmates. Also since 1977, the United States has executed 1122 inmates. As of the 23.09.2008. As you can see, the numbers above put the whole idea of the Spanish inquisition as some sort of bloodthirsty origination into prospective. so what does that make the USA

on balance in executing someone you can never correct a mistake. you can't just say whoops sorry wrong man. so no i disagree with Capital Punishment.

swot

no, simply because if there is a miscarriage of justice then an innocent person has been executed.

Shockwave

As humans, we have no right in choosing who lives and dies, that's the role of the higher powers, aka God, Allah, Buddha etc so as to not offend anyone religiously.

Personally I say I don't agree with it. It's really wrong.

mpt-matthew

Capital punishment i think is necessary in some cases.
we have full prisons, and this would be one way (there is a much better one, but that isn't to do with capital punishment), to reduce the numbers a little and help provide justice for the family's.
capital punishment should not take place unless the evidence is overwhelming towards the conviction,
we need harsher punishment in this country, we are way to slack, and we let people out of jail early. jail is not so much of a punishment anyway, see jail debate http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ao09oyl3rKSJAK70pkk9KDYhBgx.;_ylv=3?qid=20081019165049AAM0lv4,

El Guapo

I supported capital punishment for a long time, but the more I learned about it, the more I came to oppose it. In the end, several factors changed my mind:

1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 30 years in the U.S., over 100 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty â€œbeyond a reasonable doubt.â€ Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. So, as long as the death penalty is in place, you are pretty much GUARANTEED to occasionally execute an innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people to oppose it. If you need more, read on:

2. Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending 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. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida â€“ the most active execution state at the time â€“ to carry out his final murder spree). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2), which drains resources from police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murderâ€¦by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, â€˜do as I say, not as I do.â€™

4. Thereâ€™s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DONâ€™T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, â€œI wish you had killed me.â€ Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."

5. Most governments are 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. The New Testament (starring Jesus) is primarily ANTI-death penalty. For example, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus praises mercy (Matthew 5:7) and rejects â€œan eye for an eyeâ€ (Matthew 5:38-39). James 4:12 says that GOD is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Samâ˜®

No.
But i agree with human rights.

â€¢â˜…Clumsy_Girl

great answers from everyone ..

I just want to say one thing jade. No one has the right to take another persons life...leave that to God!

wartz

I'm opposed to it because it only would work if murderers were capable of rational thought instead of being motivated by alcohol, drugs and testosterone.

The death penalty may be a regular feature in the news but in real life, it isn't even a blip on the criminal radar screen and hasn't been significant for over a century. During the last 100 years, the most people executed in one year was 198 in 1935. For a nation of 300 million people that is statistically zero and the 50 or so in 2007 is absolutely insignificant when compared with the number of murders that happen.

If it was done away with entirely the savings could be spent in ways that prevent murders. Most of the expense is up front at the investigation and trial stage and serves only to let grandstanding prosecutors pander to the public by showing how tough they are.

There may be a great amount of support for the death penalty but I don't think most people realize how much of a nothing it really is. In my state, California, there has been about one execution every three years since the death penalty was reinstated. There are over 600 inmates on death row so at that rate it will take 1,800 years to kill them all provided we don't get any more. The most common cause of death on death row is natural causes followed by suicide. Lethal injection is a distant third.

The expense of keeping capital punishment is enormous. For example, the state of Maryland figures it has spent $37 Million EACH for the executions it has carried out since reinstating the death penalty. When you look at the costs, this is a criminal waste of the public's money.

BlueApple

Yes.
My argument is short.

Baby P.

haggesitze

No.
It is barbaric and brutalizes the society that uses it. There is an unhealthy, disgusting voyeurism about it that is fed by the media.

It serves no purpose except for revenge. In the US you can actually see that it is no deterrent, just by comparing states with and without it.

Innocent people have been executed.

Unless the judicial system is absolutely flawless - as no human system ever can be - it is plainly wrong. The judicial systems in any so-called Western democracy are heavily weighed in favour of the rich and educated.

Niamh

No Jade B I do not agree with CP. Never, ever, ever. God made life and only he has the right to take life. We have evil people in this world who take lives. What if we executed a person who was then proven innocent? Currently we have DNA etc. What if, in future, something came along that ousted DNA? An innocent person could then have been murdered.

The executioner, does he have the right to take a life? It's not just a job. He/she is a killer.

Additionally, if the person is guilty, I have no problem paying my taxes to keep these people locked up. One of the worst things we can do is take away someones freedom. And, if the person is guilty, they suffer in this life, how long that is we do not know? Also they are then doomed to an agonising life in Hell.

In my final year of school, some years back now, my teacher made me argument the other point of view of condoning Capital Punishment. I writhed. I see both aspects but choose to stay with my initial opinion.

Conte

No.In a civilized society there are many ways to make non-compliant citizens compliant with social laws without using atavistic, revengeful and gruel penalties like a death sentence.

sparkey

for certain crimes yes
child killers
rapists
etc

robert c

Yes!I agree with Capital Punishment.I consider it inhumane to keep a person incarcerated for 50 years or more.
The crimes I would invoke this punishment would be for crimes such as child murders and terrorism.

Gary L

I think that capital punishment is a barbaric act that belongs in the middle ages, and I would vote to bring it back tomorrow given half a chance.

With the advances in investigative procedures, the risk of hanging an innocent is very much reduced, and this could be offset by making it law that the conviction must be 100% solid before the taking of a life could be sanctioned. If not 100%, then the sentence should be life, meaning exactly that until proof is found one way or another.

People state that there is no evidence to suggest that CP works, however those that experienced it will not be released, they will certainly not re-offend and the victims (those that lived) will be able to sleep at night (sometimes). As to whether it detered them in any way, that is something you will not be able to ask, neither will you be paying Â£40,000 per year in order to keep them in relative comfort.

What I do see around me is a total disregard for life and a complete failure of the justice system. People break the law today (inclusive of capital crimes) in the certain knowledge that the sentence will in no way reflect what they have done.

If this sort of crime happened to any of my friends or family, whether it was right or wrong, I would want to see justice done, even if it meant after that persons sentence was completed. You can call it revenge if you want & maybe it is, but I would want to ensure that they never did it again.

rhodeswatson

I do. I do because there are some crimes that are so vicious, so evil and horrible that death is the only punishment that's suitable.If you don't agree, then I'm going to tell you to imagine yourself as a victim. If you still don't agree then I think you don't have a very good imagination.

angel

I'm kind of mixed about it because sometimes they do have the wrong person, it's horrible to find out that an innocent person was killed for a crime they didn't commit. But if it is positively proven that they are the one that did it then I think being put to sleep is too easy. The person/ people they killed didn't get that option so they shouldn't either. They should die the same way the person/people they killed did plus worse!!

maccees

I agree with it! How should somebody be allowed to live after murdering somebody. Take the current "baby p" case. The so called Parents that did those things to an innocent young boy should be made to go through exactly what he was MADE to go through. And before all you anti Capital punishment people start saying "the executioner is just as bad as the criminal, just give them a pistol with one bullet in and leave them in a room with no windows and the "i know a song that will get on your nerves" playing constantly day an night. Another good point is that these cold blooded killers are put away for a "life sentence, but come out within 15 years for good behaviour. GOOD BEHAVIOUR?!?! Lets all just ignore the fact that he/she killed an Innocent person and let him out because he was nice to all of the other prisoners.

Earl s

amazing, all stages of a death penalty trial are much more expensive than a life imprisonment one.

Be that as it may, I still believe in execution to be sure the criminal never does it again.

Asdfsdf S

it depends wot u mean by capital punishment. If you mean kings speacial move from tekken, i say no. It is extremely unfair on the other person as the range and power is massive. how the hell are u supposed to defend against it.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: