 
|
Savory Sue
|
Yes, it just needs to be faster and cheaper |
|
Barbara Doll to you
 |
Putting them to sleep is a much better way of putting it. |
|
asyraf
|
no, because human soul is not in another human decided or determination.. human soul are gift and promises from the god and other human are not deserve to broke the promises and decided the death penalty easily.. |
|
Susan S
|
No. You don't have to sympathize with criminals or want them to avoid terrible punishments for terrible crimes to ask if the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime, to look at alternatives and to think about the risks of executing innocent people. Here are sopme facts (with sources) about the death penalty system in the USA.
127 people on death rows released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.
The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reliable study shows the death penalty deters others. To deter others a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don’t.
We have a good alternative, life without parole, on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure, swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the 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. |
|
[..w..a..h..i..d..a..]
|
no only god can judge us . . . why should we take someones life anyway, even if it was really bad, just leave them in prison. in my opinion no1 should get killed by noone |
|
J-J Adams
|
No - just look at the USA. All of the southern states have the death penalty and nearly all of the convicts who get executed are black. These were the slave states of the confederacy. It's a horrible system. |
|
Mick B
|
We should it gets rid of societies problems as well as the criminals problem. We may point to miscarriages of justice in the past but the evidence is far more searching now e.g. D.N.A. and juries are also more searching. We should certainly rid the world of these nuts as a deterrent |
|
Dafydd
|
No. There is a possibility that innocent suspects could be executed. Look at the number of miscarriages of justice that have occurred over the years. You can release someone from prison whose conviction has been overturned, but you can't bring back someone from the dead. In any case I find the whole idea of capital punishment repugnant. And I am proud of that opinion. |
|
Birdie2006
|
So long as the proof is beyond doubt and the crime is worthy of the punishment. |
|
Martha Z
|
absolutely yes. |
|
angrymammal
|
No, the state should not sanction murder as retribution |
|
pooled08
|
Yes, I do. Here's why:
-it serves due justice (the punishment fits the crime), and serving due justice is the NO.1 job of a court of law (preventing crime is NOT their job)
-it shows that we are tough on crime
-it gets bang for the taxpayers buck
-criminals given the DP have a 0% recidivism rate
-It holds people responcible for the horrible content of their character. This fulfills what MLKJ always wanted: judge not by the color of your skin, but by the content of your character. The characterof these criminals warrants death
-It holds the criminal responcible for his actions
-appeals and **** aside, it's cheaper then prison
-it decreases the prison population, which saves even more taxpayers money
-Because the death penalty is the punishment given by a neutrel judge, there is no vengance in it. Therefore, there is no moral objection to be had with the death penalty.
-The death penalty defends human rights by establishing a mentality that "we will not tolerate any violation of any innocent person's human right's |
|
Sαмміе Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ
 |
Yes.
Excuse my rather harsh view, but I believe that if a criminal murders an innocent person, they themselves should be killed.
Problems can be sorted out without resorting to violence, and in some cases, death. |
|
missclare69
|
yes i do agree with it, it is showing the people whos boss and therefore there is less crime. i even wish we had it in uk. thats just my opinion anyway. thanks, i also think there should be cutting off the hands to for thieves and castration for men who rape. |
|
Ben
 |
no. to kill the offender makes you no better than them. |
|
nukehoop
 |
I do support the death penalty.
No repeat offenders! |
|
monkseeker44
 |
I believe that there should be more time before the death penalty for the person to think about the fact that they are going to die and there is nothing they can do about it. |
|
tom777gormley
 |
That Is a very serious question,ethically, and morally. My stand on It It Is Yes,we should have the death penalty.What with such advances as DNA, and all the rest of the technology we have the percentage o[f almost certainties of "The Truth".
I also feel that the way the world Is going (No Question, or rather, the people In this world). Crime, seriously bad crime Is going up and up. We have to be seen to be tough or Or will just go on the as It Is and innocent people will die In the most horrible ways.
We are far to liberal, with "ALL the bleeding heart clubs and the so called human rights?.
Tom 777. |
|
Scott S
|
for murder yes (uk) |
|
Jupiter
|
Absolutely, some people shouldn't be alive. |
|
Mr Rosenkrantz
|
If it acts as a deterrent and results in fewer murders, yes. |
|
chris
|
Well I do agree with it if there is no question that the offender is guilty of a murder that is eye for an eye that sort of thing.Unfortunately they don't have it in the UK and the prisons are over crowded and are letting offenders out early to cope with this which is just crazy.Also for things like rape the courts should castrate the offender the same for child abuse.And if someone stole a loaf of bread they should be made to work a week at wall mart loll. |
|
Matty
|
Yes. And with DNA testing sometimes its almost entirely certain you have the right person. Im interested as to why if 73% of the population of the UK agree with it then why is it not happening? That human toilet Abu Hamza is trying to fight his extradition (finally) to the USA as they have the death penalty. Im concerned hes going to wriggle out of it because we are so liberal and it offends me utterly. Some human beings (Ian Huntley springs to mind) can never ever be rehabilitated and reintroduced to society, so why on earth is he still alive? |
|
amz
|
yes but if they just do it with an injection....maybe for people who are a threat to others especially kids!!or with them we could just chop off their ding dong lol |
|
CR
|
It depends on the extent of the crime. |
|
itsagggghost
 |
Yes.bring it back.BUT who ever goes to the gallows the authorities must be 100% Not 99.9% that the person they are going to kill is the person who did it. |
|
JR
|
Yes and I wish they would use it more often then they do. |
|
wizjp
|
THere are people out there doing things so evil to innocent people that the only fair justice is forfit of their lives. |
|
|
|
|
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
