Everything in moderation, and to be used in circumstances
Now im not saying for every racist, sexist person should be hanged, im saying mass murderers, dicatators, and massive pedophiles or racists. They took the persons human rights so they should be taken back off them. Or if a terrorist was caught and charged guilty of starting another 9/11 they deserved to be killed. I mean jails are not hard anymore and some have golf courses and so and nearly all have televisions
Posted by: AnonymousIm pro capital Punishment
I do think its a good punishment for it prevents future murders from happening around the world and in that persons own country. It is a helpful tool to make sure murderers are prevented from hurting another relative of the victim in the case of the court vs the defendant.
Posted by: AnonymousI believe that, death penalty is necessary for some criminals who do terrible crimes.
I strongly agree that should be government use death penalty for punishing heinous crimes because if don't do that other criminals will be continue on their terrible job which is killing other people or raping women. In fact, some criminals are very dangerous if they are stay alive in prisons or out side prisons, they may hurt other people,so we shouldn't give them opportunity to stay alive.
Posted by: A7aIn certain circumstances, the death penalty is necessary to uphold justice, because it is sometimes the only appropriate punishment.
In certain circumstances, the death penalty is necessary to uphold justice. Some crimes are so heinous that the death penalty is the only appropriate justice. When one person chooses to take a life, they should have to give up their life. Some criminals are beyond redemption, and no amount of imprisonment will ever rehabilitate them. These criminals are excellent candidates for the death penalty.
Posted by: jackprague94I do believe that the death penalty is necessary, in certain circumstances, to show criminals and potential criminals that heinous acts will not be permitted.
I believe that, in certain circumstances, such as serial murder and other perversely violent acts, the death penalty is necessary to uphold justice. It is most necessary, as a demonstration and warning to other potential criminals.
Posted by: ToughEfrain26I believe that the death penalty is necessary to uphold justice in the case of horrible crimes against people.
I believe that the death penalty is necessary to uphold justice in cases of horrific murders and torture. There are people who can't and won't be rehabilitated and those people who have committed horrible crimes should be put to death. We need to show criminals that we respect and will protect our citizens from terrible crimes and that we will seek the ultimate justice in the form of the death penalty.
Posted by: SilentIgnacioI support the death penalty in certain cases, such as when someone takes a life.
The death penalty should be an option for juries to deem needed or not. If a person has taken the lives of others, why should we, as citizens, have to pay to support that person for the remainder of their life, by feeding, housing, clothing, and taking care of them medically?
Posted by: WindyTrevor49The death penalty is necessary to uphold justice in certain circumstances because it is like a punishment for taxpayers to pay to keep alive serial killers or prisoners with obviously no remorse.
First of all, capital punishment should only be used for murder - along the lines of an eye for an eye. Then, the other criteria would be that this person would obviously do it again if let loose into society, like in cases of serial killers or someone who shows no remorse. These people are undue burdens to taxpayers, and it is almost like punishing the taxpayer when taxes pay to keep these offenders alive.
Posted by: eyeslikethatYes, because I believe some people can not be rehabilitated.
I do believe in the death penalty in certain circumstances. For example, if the prisoner is a serial killer or is unable to be rehabilitated, then it is justified. I think it is a waste of government money to keep these people alive. On the other hand, we must be certain of their guilt and their inability to change.
Posted by: M4rwInfernoYes, I think in certain situations there needs to be a death penalty, because the crimes committed are horrendous.
When an individual commits an evil crime they should be put to death and not just locked up in jail. There are too many inmates in prisons who are supported by the taxpayers' money. If there is overwhelming proof that the person committed the crime, then the death penalty should be used. I think it will act as a deterrent to others as well.
Posted by: SparkMyloYes; if someone has no chance of getting out of jail why should we pay to keep him alive?
It costs more than $30,000 per person per year to keep them in jail. If someone has no chance of getting out we should not let them stay and use up money; we should kill them. They did something bad and will never get out. Why hold them in jail where they can be kings and have good lives, still smoking and doing drugs? They don't have bills to worry about. I think we should save the money and time.
Posted by: J Humphrey 64Yes, death penalty is necessary sometimes because there are brutal killers that do not deserve to live out their life after the horrible acts they have committed.
In some cases, the death penalty is necessary because if it never happened, criminals, especially murderers would not pay for the horrible crimes they have committed. Some people murder children and/or entire families. It is not fair for them to have taken a life, or many lives, yet live out their life getting fed and sheltered while the victim's families suffer every day without their loved ones. Death penalties do not bring victims back, but it is sort of like an eye for an eye.
Posted by: I33IessThe death penalty is necessary to uphold justice to show that you can and will be punished for severe crimes.
The justice system isn't perfect, but if a crime can be shown without a doubt that it was committed by a certain person, then they should be put to death if the crime is severe enough. Why should the law-abiding citizens pay for someone to keep living a fairly comfortable life? That's not justice. Getting rid of the person who committed that certain crime would be a better way to take care of the problem and to let other would-be criminals know that committing those crimes isn't tolerated by the U.S. government.
Posted by: BDanielleSometimes, criminals must be put to death to prevent them from committing more crimes of murder behind bars.
Sometimes the death penalty is needed to uphold justice. In some cases, the criminals are so hard core that death is the only way to stop them from committing more crimes. For example, a gang leader can go to prison for life without parole but continue to run his empire behind bars. They can continue to murder and order murders even though they are behind bars. These hard core cases should be put to death.
Posted by: 54mP5KryPtoThe death penalty is necessary to uphold justice. Without the fear of consequences there would be chaos.
The death penalty is necessary to uphold justice. Where there are no consequences there is chaos. The fear of the death penalty may not deter every person from committing violent crime but those few exceptions do not invalidate capital punishment as a justifiable means of punishment or a good deterrent for future crime.
Posted by: TasticBranThe death penalty is necessary to uphold justice if a judge and jury convicts a defendant and sentences him or her to death.
The death penalty is necessary to uphold justice if a judge and jury convicts a defendant and sentences him or her to death. The legal system is set up where there are laws and there are consequences. Enforcement of those consequences are determined in the judicial system whereby a jury and judge makes the decisions. If those parties have sentenced someone to death, then it is necessary that the death penalty be instituted so because that was the verdict of the justice system.
Posted by: SandDariIn certain circumstances the death penalty is necessary to uphold justice.
There are certain criminals that I believe can never be rehabilitated. These people will never be able to live normally in society. The ones who would kill and destroy life without any type of remorse. It may sound callous of me but I do not believe this type of person should have the ability to live and breath on a daily basis. For those who have never had their lives touched by such a criminal may have issues with that statement, however, for those who have I am sure they understand. If someone had callously taken away one of my loved ones I would have no problem with that individual being put to death. After all they played judge, jury and executioner all by themselves and therefore do not deserve the right to live.
Posted by: w00tboycomicI wouldn't consider it just desserts, so much as making a lesson of people to signify justice.
Execution is a last resort punishment, for a capital offense of a great magnitude. If a person is proven of worth for it, usually there has been a high crime committed to warrant it. In these lines, it must be used as an example to deter other unnecessary murders.
Posted by: Bear
Officials who perform the executions of criminals are murderers.
The death penalty is murder.
"For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins” (Matthew 6:14-15).
You should forgive people! Not kill them! You are basically breaking the law by killing people. 130 innocent people have been killed. It is just wrong!Posted by: AnonymousWhy choose death instead of life in prison?
I believe as well that one might feel once the victim is dead you cannot bring them back and by using the death penalty you are not doing that in any way. As well, I have the belief that so many are convicted and sentenced to death row and are completely innocent and then they are killed and new evidence that proves they are completely not the person involved whatsoever that is what makes me so upset. Death has no second chances. I also don 't believe that just because someone killed another the way to deal with them is to take their life as well but rather sentence them to life in prison as long as it was a horrible and heinous crime.
Posted by: nicomccart67The death penalty serves no purpose, including that of "justice".
Justice is a very vague concept, and means something different to every person. Having the government kill people, however, is inherently unjust. First of all, there is no evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent to other crime. Additionally, the government routinely makes mistakes in everything that it does. Can we really trust it with the power to kill? Justice means fairness. The death penalty is not applied fairly, because the poor and minorities are much more likely to be executed. This is not justice, by any standard. It's also worth remembering that a life sentence without the possibility of parole, in many ways, can be worse than a death sentence. Prison is not a nice or pleasant place.
Posted by: P4cBranI do not believe in taking another life for the sake of justice.
My Christian upbringing, which reflects the Ten Commandments and particularly the commandment which states "Thou shall not kill", is testimony to my belief. Life without parole is ample punishment, albeit to the chagrin of taxpayers. It is not humane to take the life of another human being. There always would linger the possibility that the wrong person was executed.
Posted by: TricBuddyThe death penalty is never necessary
In order for the death penalty to be "necessary to uphold justice," there would need to be an occasion where it is unjust to not kill someone. No one has a right to end the life of a criminal who victimized them or their loved one.
Posted by: EmmeAnguris
