If there was a vote on the death penalty would you support it or reject it and why?

I would support it.

Frisco415Â®

Yes the prisoners espicially the ones living of for life are draing up the tax payers money and second of all none of them living with the life sentence deserves to think about it pethos, murders, serial killers rapist,etc...

Brandon M

i would support it, and for it to be stronger in effect.

Moderates Unite!

I would support it, but I think it needs to be used carefully. Im actually of a mind that keeping someone locked in a box for 40 years is pretty harsh. Plus I dont know what happens in the afterlife. Why just usher a child murderer into the big sleep? Let em be married to bubba for about 20 years. Then I know they are spending time in hell.
JMHO

J K

I support the death penalty. What I don't support is the time it takes to carry it out.
Did you know that the average cause of death for death row inmates in California is "Natural Causes"?

chonnie

I would support but there would have to be absolutly no doubt.

Merryberry

I hesitate to say it, but I support it. The main reason is that I feel like the criminal justice system has become somewhat lax in punishing crimes. I don't think that murderers, child molestors, and rapists should live a somewhat comfy life in prison.

ddcdkd

support IT! people need to see what can happen to them.
They need to see there selves in pain!

They need to be hung outside of a courthouse.

Not really.

karen

support it!!! their not on death row for jay walking.

ace.frahm

I used to believe in it, but when 'W' was governor of TX and Gonzales was his atourney, they ignored evidence of innocence and courtroom misconduct in death penalty cases. That was unjust, and if even America can't render justice, then no one can.

So 'W' changed my mind. I now support life sentences only, and stripping presidents and governors of the power of the pardon. 'W' abused that power to commute Scooter Libby's sentence, a man who did not deserve it.

Huckabee abused the pardon when he was governor to release a rapist. He set the rapist free because the victim was a distant cousin of Bill Clinton, not because the rapist was innocent. That rapist then murdered another woman.

So if leaders can't have a pardon because they abuse it to cancel justice, then we can't allow the death penalty to exist either, because we make to many errors in capital cases and there would be no repreive with the pardons gone.

Lone Wolf

I am all about an eye for an eye, etc. However, given the many chances of someone getting convicted who is innocent, I have to vote against the death penalty. Life without the possibility of parole, and I don't mean in a country club atmosphere, is what I would go for. To chance putting to death an innocent person is something I'm not willing to do(how bad would that be?).
If there was a way to determine guilt "without a doubt" (which I doubt there is), I would go for the death penalty. Furthermore, the same manner in which they killed someone should be used on them (problem there is who does the dirty deed?). And a very limited, but well designed, appeals process. Without undue delay. I fear this is all unfeasable.

wiliemom

support, an eye for an eye

joWiTa

I would not support it... because if the main purpose of the law is to punish then justice cannot be distinguish from revenge... the law is meant to protect and killing a perpetrator is not really protecting because if it is why is it that there are still people doing the same crime even if they know that if they're caught they're dead?

Susan S

I would reject it. 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. Your question deserves facts with credible sources, not sound bites.

127 people on death rows 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.

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 donâ€™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.

Edit: The answer below mine refers to getting more bang for the buck from the death penalty. Costs of the death penalty are upfront, before and at the initial trial, and continue through the appeals process. (Last source explains why this is so.)
The basic reason is that constitutional requirements for due process - 14th amendment - apply. Not all supporters of the death penalty agree with this requirement, however. Most people, whatever their views of the death penalty, are troubled at the possibility of executing even one innocent person.

john e

I'm for it because God allows it in the bible. People who are against the death penalty are usually in favor of abortion.
Life is so important that anyone taking a life should receive the maximum punishment.

............................

It really only depends on what the person did. Please be more specific.

Amanda C

I would reject it. There are a few reasons i feel this way. First of all, i think that it would be worse to spend the rest of your life in jail locked up with murderers and rapists. Secondly, while our justice system is adaquet, it is absolutly not perfect. There have been many cases of inocent people being convicted and sentanced to death. This is a mistake that should NEVER be allowed to happen. Somebody mentioned the issue of money. You would think that it would cost more to house an inmate for life then it would to execute them, however, it turns out that it costs much more to execute and inmate than to house them for life. This is due to numorous courts of appeals which cost millions of dollars each time someone appeals. And you can't around the appeals because they are mandatory to "make sure" that the person is actually guily. And lastly, i am a christian and i believe that God is the only one who should decide whether someone should live or die.

dinsdale is my homeboy

REJECT IT!
killing for killing is completely stupid! why does doing what you're punishing them for doing make it ok again? it won't undo what they did! plus, there isn't usually enough evidence or it isn't positive who did the crime. i don't understand why prison for life isn't good enough.
if you disagree, watch the movie Dead Man Walking. you probably won't.

Angel SA

At one time I supported the death penalty; but not anymore. Today, I don't believe on the death penalty; because Today I don't believe on an "Eye for an Eye". I believe in loving unconditionally and forgiving our trespassers; and God is the only Judge.
If God forgave David a murder a sinner and made him King of Israel; so why should we judge anyone to death for their sins.

Col 1:13-14 - He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love,
in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.

kerobin17

Who in their sane minds would actually reject the death penalty?! I'm sure all these peace -loving weirdos will prob respond to this and have all their reasons lined up...

but for me, when you sit there and watch the news about some old pedophile guy raping and killing some poor families little 5 yr old blond daughter, you'd wish this country would do a lot more to him then some PAINLESS injection.

I'm sure the death of that little girl and so many others weren't painless..... If after you've put yourself in those parents position and STILL try to justify that the death penalty is bad, then you are a sick and sorry excuse for a human being.

pooled08

i'd support it. 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

boink

i never support death penalty...

Lauren Lala

Reject...it's not teaching anything it's just revenge. Karma takes care of that....jail time at least is torture and a lesson. Death is like the easy way out...and isn't everyone so against killing...for ex. the saying "guns don't kill people. People kill people." If we're so against people killing people wouldn't that be a little hypocritical? I shouldn't say much though because I am very much a hypocrite to a lot of things I say and do. haha.

â™ªThe Belgian Waffle Conspiracyâ™«â™¥

i would reject it b/c of the way they kill the person. what if it hurts them right before they die? they cant tell b/c the people are dead and they sure as hell cant ask them...besides, it seems like it would be even worse just to have life in prison...you would sit there, day after day, suffering the cruel penalties of the crime...it would probably be worse than dieing, unless you got send to hell when they killed you....

love lost

no, i would want no part in the deciding who lives and who dies. i would feel guilty...

Cristobal Salvaje

against it. I wonder how many Christians would be for it?

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: