The Death Penalty? Yes or No?

Rommel

yes! and for those that say it does not derer crime, 1950.s they had the death penalty and there was an average of three murders a year. 2008! 'no death penalty....about one murder a day!....i think the figures speak for them selves. and i might ad that 'interestingly' in the 1950s i didn't know any! families that didn't keep a gun of one kind or another. frankly government statistics are bull sh*t and don't ad up AT ALL.

monkeyface

Absolutely.
If you take a life then your own life should be forfeit.

â™¥STREAKERâ™¥Â©â„—â€

I can say it has never left Texas. Captial Punishment of the World.

MadMan

The death penalty does not deter crime.

jellyinsideout

Yes we have DNA now so why not

robert c

Yes!

maryann

Yes life for a life
They have DNA today so they could'nt be wrong

I dont know about a deterrent but the prisons would'nt be so overcrowded

danor

YES! Putting murderers in jail is definetly not a detterant, thats why there are so many of them and the prisons are overloaded.

Butch UK

the death penalty, is a crud tool to see justice done , it is meant as a deterrent but never was but what it did was to appease the public outrage of another murder, of all the corporal punishments it is the least embarrassing imagine public flogging of ASBO's old and young , the stocks for public drunkenness, I for one think that hanging is not a deterrent , but believe my outrage for the senseless knifing of people in our streets needs appeasing, hang em all.

Dean O

YES

fireblood

YES.and backdate it too.

Tallboy

Yes. It is not a deterrent it is a punishment! Evil doers should know what is waiting for them. With DNA the chances of mistakes are very slim.

philandbren@btinternet.com

without a doubt yes

Serena Katsy

it depends, usually no...

colour.thesmallone

i think the death penalty should only be used for rapists and child molesterers.

Bad girl again

the death penalty has deter ed crime every time it has been used. They have never murdered again. Maybe those lefties who do not want the death penalty should just view it as a very late term abortion.

bertram baines

not with a corrupt police force!

Gothic E

People say that capitol punishment doesnâ€™t deter acts of killing
Well they are half right.
People are accustoming to what they see, if you donâ€™t show people being punished, itâ€™s not real enough.
Televise it; show the murder on a medium that other killers do watch.
Show them being led to the room where they get their injection.
Watch them crying as they are strapped in, show a close up of the executioner sticking that needle into his arm, and then zoom the camera back.
Pull a curtain in front of the assailant, only showing his silhouette as he sleeps for that last time.
THEN YOU WILL SEE HOW IT DOES WORK.

Another point is; we already give police the power over life and death.
We issue them a gun.

Hideyoshi

Oh HELL no...

getagrip

It could only become a deterrent if they followed through with the punishment alot faster than what they do now. Where's the punishment when you can file an appeal after appeal after appeal? That can last in most states 10-20 years. I say, if you're found guilty, you get one appeal. Then punished.

bails

No. It doesn't work in the US so why do you think it would work in the UK

Outrider

Yes, they never come back.

Firebird

No

Two wrongs do not make a right

Redmonk

First point: Not having a death penalty is not a deterrent against crimes of murder, it just means that murder is no worse a crime than robbing a bank. In fact robbing a bank would warrant a bigger jail sentence.

Yes, as some say there may be mistakes made and the wrong people be tried and executed but with modern detection techniques and DNA, the likelihood of mistakes has been greatly reduced

The Victim gets lost in a murder enquiry and the murderers
rights are of priority, low sentences and time out for good behaviour mean hardly any sentence at all.

For those that say mistakes happen, how far should we go with this? Should we also do away with prison sentences in case the person in the dock is in fact innocent? Exactly how far do you go with liberalisation?

The Victim has been ignored for so long (remember he or she was alive once) do the victims rights of life stop when they are dead? Do we just ignore the victims families who want revenge and justice.

A life for a life makes sense, we have no deterrent that stops murderers chancing their luck, no deterrent means more murder and that's what we have got.

The death penalty must be bought back to deal with the present situation and provide justice for Victim and family.

ATB Red

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."

Goethe

No. DP has been proven not to be a deterrent to future crimes. Murder and violent crime rates are similar in states with and without the Death penalty.

Tiger

on one hand it can be an effective way to punish people and cut down on costs: more money is spent on a prisoners meal than in an NHS hospital, they also get sky t.v and various other comforts. for many it may be the only fair way of punishment for MAJOR crimes.

on the other hand, you cannot pardon a dead person: people are occasionally wrongly convicted and if they have been executed yu cannot pardon them, which may be seen as being a tad unfair...

hope i could help x

SmileForMySniper

No. because it clearly states in the 8th amendment-
This amendment prohibits excessive bail or fines, as well as cruel and unusual punishment. Death is pretty much cruel and unusual.

allowing the death penalty is unconstitutional, and should be abolished in every state.

Mee

No definitely not. Can you imagine if someone in your family or friendship circle was wrongly convicted?

Mr Sceptic

First point - it may be the ultimate penalty, but there is no evidence from anywhere in the world that it acts as a deterrent.

Depends what you want to do - if you want to exact revenge on the worst in our society, and prevent them carrying out further crime the death penalty works a treat.

It does, however, put witnesses to crimes in greater danger of themselves being 'removed' if the criminal, having carried out a capital crime fears the death penalty.

And mistakes are made - ask Angela Canning, the Birmingham 6 or the Guildford 4.

I don't think that the death penalty is ever due a comeback.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: