I voted yes to this question because of the principle, but I would also say no. The reason I say no is because I personally feel like it's a worse punishment to let someone rot in a jail cell until they die than just kill them and end it quick, in very easy and painless ways. Sometimes granting them a grand feast as their "last request meal" before that kill them. Honestly if i were him and I had a choice between living for years and years in a box wasting away and never given a chance to leave or have anything, or just be killed and over with, I would choose death. It seems much less painful and much easier. However, at the same time I know in prison they are sometimes treated very well with a lot of privileges that they don't deserve so, again I'm 50/50.
But on to the moral aspect of this question. What he did violated every law and right existing. He violated natural rights, governmental rights, and God's laws by committing this murder. How he went about doing it really shows his guilt, it was not a crime of passion or justifiable in anyway. He deserves the harshest of punishments. An eye for an eye. He caused all this suffering for these people, there's really no way to repay that. He killed three people, he can't be killed three times or have his father and sister killed to show him how it feels. It would be wrong to kill them because of what he did. So there really is no equal pay based on what he did.
A debate question that this also touches on is whether the death penalty is acceptable or not. And honestly, I can't say. It's not right to take a life you did not make. So I would not kill someone. And I can't delegate that right to someone else and say "the state can kill him" because it's not my right to delegate. And I'm not a statist. But I believe that death is sometimes too easy. I don't see it as a cruel treatment like some do because I believe being tortured and killed in medieval ways would be much worse.
This man deserves the death penalty. Not only did he commit murder but the way he did it is at the height of depravity.
However, I'm against the death penalty. Morally I think that any adult who plans a murder and who didn't have a somewhat good reason (relatively speaking, I'm not saying that the murder is good in these cases just that the person might not be a complete monster) such as infidelity deserves death.
But I recognize that no jury is infallible and it can not be made infallible. People make mistakes, and so it is always possible that someone may be wrongfully convicted. The only way to avoid wrongful convictions is to not have the death penalty. There is no way of writing a law so only people who are obviously guilty will get the death penalty. You can't just legislate away human error.
There's also the fact that appeals wind up costing tax payers more than if we give people life in prison. As much as this man may deserve death taxpayers don't deserve to part with their hard earned money just to give a criminal what he deserves.
So while I am against the death penalty for pragmatic reasons (saving tax money) and for moral reasons (since morally we shouldn't risk innocent life just to give death to people who deserve it) I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep if they decide to execute this depraved monster.
When someone clearly has the intention of murder on their minds and that action leads to the death of three people then yes this man should be given the death penalty. He had premeditation when they plan all along was to kill his wife. The fact that this man killed two people just to get to her proves that he should be given death.
Yes, it is my belief that that kind of pre meditated murder on three people of the same family deserves the death penalty. One should take into account, however, his mental health. However, a triple homicide that planned out deserves severe punishments such as the death penalty. I think it is in everyones best interest to give the death penalty to this criminal.
First, I wholeheartedly believe that what this man did is awful in every way. This is the absolute worst of humanity. I think he deserves punishment. But I also believe all of human life is precious and we should not take the life of another person. I think instead of the death penalty, this man should receive life in prison without any opportunity of parole.
While crime such as these are clearly committed by an incredibly dangerous person who should never be allowed to live in the general community ever again, it is not moral to subject any person to the death penalty. The death penalty represents only a primal impulse to deliver violence to the worst criminals and does not serve either deterrent rates or justice.
The death penalty only works on people who are afraid to die. This guy deserves punishment but the death penalty clearly does not scare him. S s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s