Is the death penalty justified?
The Death Penalty has a place in American justice.
The Death penalty is needed in America. I believe that it is a strong deterrent for criminals. Texas has the death penalty, and it works great for us. The only problem is that they stay on death row too long. Why keep a person in prison for life when you can save the state money and just execute them. It is not like they have not been convicted by a jury of an act of murder. I really don't by the whole pain and suffering argument. Who cares if they are in pain? They are being put to death for a reason.
Posted by: BriaBlackenJustice
The death penalty, in some cases, must be done. It is very hard for a rational person to argue against this. There are surely some cases in which the death penalty should be used. For example, let us think about Hitler. This man and his perverted beliefs was responsible for the killings of millions of innocent human beings. Everyone from men, women, children, and even babies. He was also responsible for one of the worst atrocities ever made in the history of mankind. Namely, the holocaust.
The death penalty is the only appropriate punishment for this monster and his heinous crimes. I believe that we are completely justified in punishing people like Hitler with the death penalty because they really deserve it. Indeed, if the punishment should fit the crime, then the death penalty is what fits these heinous crimes made by Hitler. Anything less would be a failure to approximate justice and to carry out minimally deterrence..Posted by: ClashSocial Contract!
A sever violation of the social contract can only equate to a severe punishment in return. Not one of suffering and cruelty, yet simply the sanction of one's life due to the lack of deservingness. You can't stand here and look me in the eye and tell me that a man who would brutally murdered his wife and kids deserves the privaledge of living in this world. One who shot down an innocent man in cold blood. You can not tell me that the woman who shot down the life of an innocent 14 year old kid in my neighborhood deserves the privaledge to flourish in the beautiful planet. Capital Punishment in justified only in the case of a fair retribution for a ravage crime comitted.
Posted by: AnonymousDeterrence
Deterrence means that when people are punished, they are likely to still re-commit the crime. Therefore, imprisonment does nothing and further steps must be taken. Another reason why the death penalty is OK is because it saves money, because the gov. does not need to spend on food, water, facilities, etc. for the person at jail.
Posted by: sankcoolFor someone to get the death penalty, there must be overwhelming evidence showing that the person did the crime.
The death penalty is justified because some crimes are only punished by inflicting the same type of pain and suffering on the criminal as the criminal inflicted on the victim. This must only occur when without a shadow of a doubt that crime was committed by the criminal on death row. If there is a shadow of a doubt, life in prison is sufficient.
Posted by: R3ubHockeyIt won't stop everyone but it will stop some.
Some is better than none. Although the death penalty should be altered, it should be more public and cheaper. Bring back the cost effective hanging. It will save the taxpayers money and by making it public it will remind people how serious the community is about it. This would not necessarily be pretty but not all pretty things are effective.
Posted by: AnonymousYes
In the most extreme or heinous of crimes, the death penalty could easily be justified. Its just a matter of which style of Death Penalty should be implemented and which crimes it should be an option for.
Posted by: imabenchCrime deterent
if you end someone's life, if you murder someone, then you deserve to be murdered as well, its simple as that. An eye for an eye. If you murder someone in cold blood by the laws of common sense you deserve equal severity in your punishment as in the crime you committed. that is what our society should demand lest we become unjust in our judgement and let the scales of justice tip too far. Also if the immediate and only sentencing for murder was death then i would think murder rates might considerably drop.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is
Only for really serious crimes though. Let's say someone killed and massacred 20 people, then this person obviously deserves the Capitol Punishment! I believe that it is only justified for huge crimes such as mass murder or mass rape though.
Posted by: 1dustpeltI am for the death penalty when a person commits a horrible crime.
I am for the death penalty when a person commits a horrible crime. There are so many murderers in prison right now that taxpayers are paying for. When someone kills an innocent person they deserve to be sentenced to death. A life in prison, not having to work does not do justice to a prisoner that committed a horrible crime.
Posted by: RaouICyberOnly if its done properly
The death sentence in America fails because of the unnecessary and expensive methods used for the execution. A cheaper and more ugly form of punishment, like long drop hanging, or single shot to the head, would serve as a cheap and strong deterrent for the scum who commit these horrible crimes and are rewarded with warm beads, hot food and not having to work for any of it.
That said, this punishment should only be authorized if indisputable evidence such as DNA is found.Posted by: AnonymousRead the news
Read any article about some criminal going around raping, killing, kidnapping or harming dozens of people and tell me they don deserve a slow painful death. Like criminals are really afraid of going to prison where you live for free on everyone's dime. These guys don't care what law you pass to make yourself feel better thinking that makes you safe because at the end of the day they do not give a rats ass what a law says they do not fear a law. Death penalty is a great way lower the number of innocent people dying from criminals because for the most part people fear death and pain and depending on the crime committed to the victims we should make the penalty more painful but obviously give time to full investigate the crime before judgement should be passed down or force them to work themselves to death sounds like a good way to give back to the society while to avoid the death penalty if you really want to do so.
Posted by: Anonymousyes it is
The death penalty is justified because criminals such as rapists and murders can't be easily forgiven for the horrible crimes they have committed in their lives. The families of the victims will feel more secure knowing that this person who caused them harm is now been executed and is not dead.
Posted by: AnonymousThere is only one way to pay for taking the life of another, not in self-defense, and that is to give your life in return.
Were I to take someone's car, the expectation of the law is that I give the car back and pay retribution. If I steal someone's identity, then I need to pay the penalty in kind for the crime. Since all law-breaking requires a roughly equal restitution for what has been taken, so too is the death penalty the only true way to pay restitution for taking the life of another.
Posted by: MariaRIt's not fair
The death penalty is justified if for nothing else but protecting other convicts. Some people in with the murderers, rapers and, psychopaths are only there for robbing a bank or other offences that are enough to land them in a high security center but not enough to be near the evil psychos in the prison. The felon in max prison for corruption and treason should not have to share a lunch table with a serial child molester.
Posted by: TehPhilosoraptorWalk in somebody else's shoes
How would you feel if a member of your family was brutally murdered? I know we can't let our feelings take control of our actions but puting a highly dangerous criminal to death is the most effective way of preventing them from committing any more crime or taking any more lives.
Posted by: AnonymousEnsurance
Death penalty is only implemented on the most serious crimes. people usually get life imprisonment. And if you think about it, at some point corporal punishment IS required to ensure you that that person will not be committing the same types of crimes onto other people.
Posted by: charlietangoNo. Theoretical disagreements on the importance of the death penalty for retributive purposes are understandable. In practice, the system is rife with injustice. Too many of the innocent die.
The New Yorker's widely discussed September 7, 2009 article, "Trial by Fire", by David Grann, makes a persuasive and exhaustively researched case that Texas executed an innocent man when it killed Cameron Todd Willingham. Other cases raise similar questions. The number of people who have been exonerated by DNA evidence, others' belated confessions, or revelations of exculpatory evidence is now frighteningly high. These cases highlight the fragility of the system. Consider too that district attorneys who often push for the death penalty are often running for higher office. And fleeting, uninformed public passions can come to influence what ought to be solemn and at least somewhat objective decisions. The system also discriminates against African-Americans by sentencing killers of white people to death disproportionately often compared to killers of African-Americans. Irreversible decisions should not be made by a system so demonstrably flawed.
Posted by: M4I4cFeIineYes, i think the death penalty is justified.
I feel that the death penalty is definitely justified. Only the worst criminals receive the death penalty, those who have murdered. I feel that criminals that murder innocent people deserve the death penalty because they are receiving the same punishment they unjustly thrust onto someone else. The punishment fits the crime. If you kill, you will be killed.
Posted by: esmond10I believe that the death penalty is justified under certain crimes.
If a person takes an other person's life and it is not in self defense or preventing a crime then yes that person should be put to death. If the criminal that kills a person does it just because or for fun then why should he not be put to death did he give his victim any sympathy I don't think so or the person would not have been killed so yes under certain crimes this should be a punishment.
Posted by: 5h4rkEmarYes...life is beautiful and some people don't deserve it.
Humans have a remarkable ability to adjust and persevere. Even people who suffer through some of the worst experiences imaginable (like sexual abuse, war atrocities, etc.) manage to live and find joy and beauty. I think it is human nature to seek these things out to give life meaning. I also think that if someone commits a heinous crime, they should not have the opportunity to experience that joy. I know prison is no picnic, and maybe I have watched too many episodes of Oz, but it is possible to adapt to the limitations of prison and create a life. The arts, learning, relationships, power...these things are all possible in prison. Child molesters, rapists, mass murders...these people do not deserve to ever experience any of the joys life has to offer. Most of us are probably uncomfortable with the idea of literally letting them rot in an isolated room, so the death penalty is the only option.
Posted by: heather101I completely support the death penalty because the principle of just retribution is fundamental to the civility of our society.
The ideas that the death penalty is inhumane or ineffective as a deterrent to crime are both incorrect. Proverbs 19 says that a hot tempered man must pay the penalty, if you rescue a hot tempered man you will have to do it again. If there is no penalty there is no order. As for the question of the death penalty being inhumane, the death penalty is a just penalty for a person who has maliciously taken human life.
Posted by: TasticBranOf course
Do you know about Ohwonchun, the guy who killed a woman who lived in Suwon, Korea and sliced her corpse? Also, do you know that the jail where he will be imprisoned? It’s Cheonan foreign prison, and it is better than Korean army’s facility. Also, there are Samulnori rooms, TVs, training rooms, a library, etc. This facility is operated by our taxes. Don’t you think that it’s just wasting money and why didn’t the judge finally decided him to die? Also, the bullet to kill the prisoner is much cheaper than for the prison.
Posted by: AnonymousThe death penalty is justified due to the reason that the person who was put on trial has had to have committed horrid crimes against humanity.
I believe that the death penalty is justified because the person who was put on trial must have done something really bad. Usually, the person who gets this high of a punishment must have killed other people and this definitely is justifiable to give the person the same treatment. If someone has taken peoples lives, it shows that they do not care for their own, and what better way to get rid of them instead of by giving them the death penalty.
Posted by: N34rIyGaIvYes it is justified, prison is too expensive for them.
Of course. Do you know about Ohwonchun, the guy who killed a woman who lived in Suwon, Korea and sliced her corpse? Also, do you know the jail where he will be imprisoned? It’s Cheonan foreign prison, and it is better than the Korean army’s facility. Also, there are Samulnori rooms, TVs, training rooms, a library, etc. This facility is operated by our taxes. It’s just wasting money, why didn't the judge finally decide for him to die? The bullet to kill the prisoner is much cheaper than the prison.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is my belief that there is occasion for just about anything.
But before you can decide if it is morally justifiable you must first ask, how do you value death? A man who murders and feels no remorse, he obviously sees no value in living, so death is justifiable. It is never the right of another to choose whether a person is worth the death penalty. A person decides that by his actions. Death is always sad, but not always pointless. In a strong enough case, death can be justified.
Posted by: Skylark_FunderbergYes!
If someone kills another then they deserve the same. If you are that low then you deserve to be treated that way. Think about if an animal attacks a human or another animal one of the first options is to put the animal down. It should be the same for humans, I believe that the punishments for crimes be the same as the crime that was committed. So if you rape someone then you should be raped, if you kill someone then you should be killed. Also you should be killed the same way that you used to kill someone. If you shoot them you should be shot, if you run them over then you should be run over, if you torture someone then you should be tortured. End of story but the government is too soft to let that happen.
Posted by: jmr354For certain things
If someone killed another human, or mentally, emotionally, seriously hurt that person (i.e. crippling, etc.) Then it is most definitely justified, especially if the victim was a young person. However, I guess it all depends on just exactly how serious the crime was. Things like drug dealing and such, though, should not be punished with the death penalty.
Posted by: AnonymousVictims Families Are Entitled To Retribution.
The state has replaced the family of a murder victim as the instrument of retribution. The family of the murder victim had the duty under ancient custom to revenge murder. Revenge killing often resorted to terrible violence cycles and breaches of the peace. There was no due process, and innocent people as well as the guilty were killed. Capital punishment, while not procedurally perfect, ensures the due process of the courts. It also deters murder (although this is disputed by some research). Serial killers, mass murderers, and spree killers murder in cold blood, destroy families, and terrorize communities. They are sociopathic and seldom show remorse (other than being caught). Other cold blooded killers should be dealt with on a case by case basis, with the trier of fact weighing the aggravating and mitigating factors. There should not be capital punishment without overwhelming proof of guilt. In short, victims families and society, are entitled to retribution.
Posted by: AnonymousI support the death penalty, depending on the nature of the crime.
I support the death penalty and feel that it is justifiable in cases that concern premeditative murder. Although we don't traditionally live in an "eye for an eye" criminal system, I do feel that taking an innocent life regardless of the circumstance should immediately remove all civil and human rights associated with the perpetrator. These people have clearly shown that they cannot show empathy or demonstrate sincere remorse for their deeds. Having them as a part of the system while clogging a cell for an indefinite amount of time seems wasteful to me. Having said that, not all murderers should receive the death penalty. In cases of drunk driving accidents, these people should spend the rest of their lives experiencing the anguish and pain that they caused another family. Some, if not most of these people are able to feel more empathy for their mistake and would try to at least better themselves in the system. But indeed, I do feel that the death penalty is an appropriate measure for those who deserve the "eye for an eye" kind of treatment.
Posted by: P0nyChaIOf course.
You shouldn't just kill any old person, but if you've repeatedly committed crimes of rape/murder with no signs of repentance, DIE!
Posted by: AlwaysMoreThanYouYes it is justified, prison is too expensive for them.
Of course. Do you know about Ohwonchun, the guy who killed a woman who lived in Suwon, Korea and sliced her corpse? Also, do you know the jail where he will be imprisoned? It’s Cheonan foreign prison, and it is better than the Korean army’s facility. Also, there are Samulnori rooms, TVs, training rooms, a library, etc. This facility is operated by our taxes. It’s just wasting money, why didn't the judge finally decide for him to die? The bullet to kill the prisoner is much cheaper than the prison.
Posted by: AnonymousYes it is justified, prison is too expensive for them.
Of course. Do you know about Ohwonchun, the guy who killed a woman who lived in Suwon, Korea and sliced her corpse? Also, do you know the jail where he will be imprisoned? It’s Cheonan foreign prison, and it is better than the Korean army’s facility. Also, there are Samulnori rooms, TVs, training rooms, a library, etc. This facility is operated by our taxes. It’s just wasting money, why didn't the judge finally decide for him to die? The bullet to kill the prisoner is much cheaper than the prison.
Posted by: AnonymousThe death penalty is justified because in some cases someone cannot be reformed.
The death penalty is justified because there are some criminals that cannot be reformed. Additionally, some people argue death is excessive and serving jail time is sufficient enough. However, why should taxpayers have to foot the bill to keep a criminal alive that, perhaps in some cases, took the life of someone else? That is completely unfair and the money could be better spent on the education system or public infrastructure.
Posted by: SandDariIn cases of mass murder
For smaller homicide cases, life in prison.
Posted by: EvanKThink about it...
With advances in forensic sciences and more advanced training for detectives, I do believe that it is a justified punishment. The Constitution states that "A man is given the rights of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness," and the Constitution states that if a person is convicted of a crime, then they can have those rights stripped away: Liberty (or freedom) is being sent to prison, Pursuit of Happiness (or money) by fines, and Life (life) by execution. It is, in my opinion, that more people deserve the electric chair/lethal injection/gas chambers than those who don't.
Posted by: ZacharyDamonThis monsters should not be allowed to walk on the face of the earth
Some of these people have killed and raped. They are dangerous to society.they are malicious and they continue to be a threat to people and they walk free and enjoy the joys of life while their victims live in fear,always remembering the incident. While others are not even alive to. They are the reason people can't walk alone at night without fear,the reason people's doors are always locked. They don't deserve to walk on the face of the earth. They are monsters therefore the death penalty is justified.
Posted by: AnonymousAn eye for an eye
There are too many criminals in America, that much is obvious. The problem we face with criminals however, is slapping them on the wrist and letting them go. Putting criminals in prison does not serve a great purpose. Sure, some people have done something not so extreme that does deserve jail time. Something such as dealing illegal narcotics, or stealing someone's property. However people who unjustly take someone else's life should have the same done unto them.
Posted by: DebatingInfernolife for a life
if you end someone's life, if you murder someone, then you deserve to be murdered as well, its simple as that. An eye for an eye. If you murder someone in cold blood by the laws of common sense you deserve equal severity in your punishment as in the crime you committed. that is what our society should demand lest we become unjust in our judgement and let the scales of justice tip too far. Also if the immediate and only sentencing for murder was death then i would think murder rates might considerably drop.
Posted by: AnonymousBetter allocation of natural resources
If you commit a crime you deserved to be punished, I believe that most people will agree with this. You can either put the criminal in prison or kill them. By putting them in prison, you are basically wasting taxpayer's money to keep them alive. The irony is that they cause harm to society and then society pays money to keep them alive, so that one day they can come back out and cause harm once more. By killing criminals, it is the best way to eradicate the evil people from this world. They will no longer be able to disrupt society since they are now dead and others will learn that the consequences of committing crime will be death. Best of all, no resources will be lost apart from the execution fee which will be billed to the criminal's family. It is a waste of resources to feed criminals that have already proven themselves as criminals. Those who commit severe crimes deserve to die, just because one goes to prison does not necessarily mean that he/she will learn from this minor punishment. It is a sad thing that society has degraded to such a degree that we can no longer have the willpower to install proper judicial punishments.
Posted by: TitusJustified
If by adopting the death penalty, america goes against its “christian values”, then it must be asked, what are those values? The ones about justice? Depending on how the death penalty is implemented, it may or may not be as cost effective as life-imprisonment. What must be considered is the offender’s life-expectancy. How exactly should the offender be executed? Bullets do not cost much. In contrast, the amount of money spent on health-care, food, internet connection. etc. provided in prisons would certainly beat the amount to buy a bullet. Justice and revenge. That’s interesting. The same logic can be used to advocate against prisons. Or even laws.
Posted by: MutedIf we know for sure X actually killed Y and we can prove it, the death penalty must be done to maintain social order.
What incentive is there to respect basic rights, for example the right to live of the person next to you, if there is no punishment for acting against that right? Any right can only have substance if there is a punishment for breaking that right, otherwise it's cheap talk in the wind.
Posted by: AnonymousSaves lives
Studies show if the DP is used for all murders, 821 lives A YEAR are saved from recidivism. Plus, they all are guilty (usually) so no reason not to. I'm writing on a phone, so really: depends. Usually (for murder) yes
Posted by: 16kadamsVery bad people should die.
I think that serial killers deserve the death penalty. Those who take other's lives should forfeit their lives to justify what they did. For example, the man from Sandy Hook took all those children's lives, but he was a coward, and unjustly took his own life, instead of facing the consequences of his actions. I think that someone like him deserves Capital Punishment, because they used extreme actions, and took others's lives, and so they should give their lives as well.
Posted by: Anonymous
Criminals should all be set free
How can a side that argues that criminals don't deserve to die because they would suffer, not recognize that imprisonment, and rehabilitation are just as cruel?
When you send criminal to prison or put him on probation as a society, temporary or not, you deprive him of freedom of association, limit his access to the world, and cause him suffering by forcing our revenge upon the criminal. Did Jesus not say turn the other cheek?
The only moral way to deal with criminals is to appeal to there better side, run, defend our selves (only as needed to stop the crime.)
How does being secure by incarcerating and causing suffering to others, not make us any worse? It's not that they are innocent, it is just that we have no right to harm them in return, its the same reason we don't cheer any more for the kid who strikes back at the bully who assaults him, he is just as evil as his oppressor when he lowers himself, and so are we. The death penalty is only this tenfold.Posted by: Anonymousnot justified
Killing a person to show that killing another person is wrong does not even make sense?? It is really hypocritical. The death penalty financial cost is also very high we pay more to kill a person than to keep them in jail. Who knew death was more expensive than life?
Posted by: AnonymousIf killing is crime, then it doesn't make a difference if it is committed by an individual or the court of law.
A wise man said, if you cannot give life as a reward, you cannot give death as a punishment. If we cannot give life to people, what right do we have to take their life. If killing is a crime, how can we remove that crime from the society by committing the same crime again. And it is such a simple thing to understand that a man who has murdered someone is basically psychologically sick. He should be sent to a nursing home, not the gallows. Death sentence is nothing more or less than revenge. The man went against the society, the society is prepared to take him down. Death sentence is barbaric. It cannot be part of a civilized world.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, the death penalty is unfair, because it allows to government to control the lives of citizens.
Our corrupt judicial system should not be responsible for doling out life and death for the citizens. On principle, the death penalty is wrong, because it is subject to human error, and all crimes are subjective. The death penalty is an outdated form of punishment, which factors in the human need for revenge, rather than true justice or possible rehabilitation. So-called evil criminals should be studied, rather than murdered in order to please the populace.
Posted by: R4yCherThe state should not have right to take life.
While death is a fair punishment for certain crimes, I do not believe that the power to decide when to apply that punishment should belong to the state. For example, I do not think it should be considered a crime to kill someone who brutally murdered your family member. However, the state may enforce laws that an individual has the right to choose not to follow if they can do so without harming anyone else, or the state may make a mistake in prosecution.
Posted by: Wynn354Death row inmates have family too!
Yes, victims may have been hurt, but the suspects family are hurting too. The government should not be allowed to kill anyone, just give them life in prison. Killing death row inmates will actually make matters was, it can cause the children of the death row inmates to retaliate by being a criminal or mentally ill. Death row is wrong!
Posted by: AnonymousIt's Too Late?
Killing someone for killing other people is both hypocritical and unjust. Maybe seeing the person who killed someone you know and love would give you peace, but it won't bring them back. Not to mention, maybe the prosecuted has a family as well. Does anyone think about them? Offer comfort and condolences? No. They throw them from society, saying they were close to a murderer and are just as bad. Plus, crimes are acts of revenge. Revenge isn't without reason. And no one ever asks what that reason is before it's too late.
Posted by: AnonymousRevenge not Justice
What's the difference between putting a gun to a murderer's head and exectuing them? Using the death penalty is no form of justice but an act of vengance. Killing somebody cant bring back a victim. Moreover, in the last 32 years at least 10 people have been wrongfully executed, which is 10 people too many in my book. Who is a human being to decide whether someone lives or dies? By supporting the death penalty we are being no more humane than a murderer.
Posted by: brockscrappyI oppose the death penalty, and I also oppose life sentences without any kind of rehabilitation or psychological treatments.
I oppose the death penalty because I believe that the intentional killing of another human as a form of punishment is wrong. This is the laziest solution possible on the part of society and the government. Killing a human because we don't believe they can change is lazy. Life-long prison sentences are incredibly expensive and have an extremely low success rate of positive reform. More treatment and rehabilitation programs need to be available to death row inmates. Just because we can't currently rehabilitate them does not mean they are a hopeless case.
Posted by: RoachDogDeath sentence is hypocritical.
"Why do we kill people, who kill people, to show that killing people is wrong?" I think that pretty much sums it up. Killing is wrong period. Why would we go about killing someone while at the same time we are shunning someone who has killed. This does not make sense, nor does it make us any better. A killer is a killer.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, the death penalty is not justified, it is merely a legal form of murder.
If a person is on trial for murder, then they are on trial for taking a life that is not theirs to take. Sending a person to death row is the same thing. A persons life does not belong to the government, therefore it should not be the courts decision whether a person lives or not. Also, taking a murderer's life does not bring back the death of the victim, nor does it justify it. Instead of the death penalty (for any crime committed), the criminal should be given the appropriate number of years sentence, which would depend on the intensity of the crime, along with the appropriate amount of counseling throughout the sentence.
Posted by: AnonymousNO I DO NOT THINK CRIMINAL FOR NO MATTER WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
EXECUTING A CRIMINAL IS JUST LIKE A CRIMINAL GOING OUT AND TORTURING SOMEONELSE.I BELIEVE ITS WRONG TO KILL ANYONE.I DON'T THINK THE DEATH PENALTY IS A GOOD WAY TO PUNISH A MURDERER.I MEAN KILLING SOMEONE OF A CRIME THEY'VE COMMITED IS GOING TO HELP STOP CRIME.PEOPLE GET EXECUTED AND THEY DID NOTHING WRONG.I MEAN KEEP SAYING THIS BUT KILLING A MURDERER ISN'T GOING TO HELP REDUCE THE RATE OF CRIME ITS JUST GOING TO MAKE IT WORSE JUST LIKE lacerated900 said THE CRIME RATES HAVE GONE UP I THINK THE DEATH PENALTY SHOULD BE DESTROYED FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: AnonymousThe death penalty is not justified, because it is the forcible ending of a human life and that is never acceptable.
The death penalty is nothing more or less than state-sponsored murder. The forcible ending of a human life is never acceptable, and attempts to rationalize it as "cost-effective" or "just punishment" are self-delusional at best. Furthermore, the criminal justice system is imperfect; there is always the possibility that a person sentenced to death may be innocent.
Posted by: JohnnyGarrettIt's an easy way out.
For many criminals who have committed a heinous act the death penalty would be an easy way out of the actions they have done, rather than spending the rest of their life in prison where they would be forced to live with other people like themselves and think about their actions.
Posted by: AnonymousNevertheless...
In the case of Korea, there are about 60 death-row criminals waiting to die. But there has been no capital punishment that has been enforced in past 14 years. Nevertheless, being sentenced death and yet still living can actually be more painful than a death. Everyday, death-row criminals wake up in fear if the day has came. Every time they are called out of their cells for whatever reason, they suffer fear of death since it can be their call for the injection. Maybe making their life so miserable this way is in fact a better "eye for an eye".
Posted by: Ike-Jin-ParkCan't undead someone later found innocent
Our justice system is not 100% perfect and innocent people are convicted and have been put to death. We should control our sense of revenge against evil people and just lock them up for ever, so when the occasional innocent person is later found innocent they can be released. Like I said, you can't undead someone who is dead.
Even if you justify it for the most heinous crimes, you will never be 100% perfect with guilty verdicts.Posted by: slo1No, the death penalty is not justified.
I do not think it is ever justified to give someone the death penalty. Killing is wrong, it is immoral, but still the death penalty causes killing. There are other ways to punish criminals and killing does not have to be one of them.
Posted by: FemaleTyron73We are only human.
We are not gods and are equal to each other. We have no right or logical reason to decide someone else's future. Honestly, you wouldn't believe in it if you were the one about to be killed.
Posted by: AnonymousUnder NO circumstances is the death penalty justified.
Human life is one thing no human deserves to be deprived of. It seems that, whenever it's CONVENIENT, America is a "Christian nation"...But as soon as we bring the death penalty into it, we drop all the "Christian values" that are (wrongly) upheld in other areas.
It doesn't matter what a human does; we have no right to take their life away. It's not like it's effective, anyway...Many criminals would rather die than suffer a life sentence, and killing someone doesn't give them a chance to change anyway. It's not fixing the problem at all, and it's unethical.Posted by: JessalynNot a right thing to do
The cost to pay for executions is too high, for example from the Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice (2008):
“The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California’s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.” That is too high of an amount of money. Not to mention that this goes against almost every religion. However, there are some cases where life in prison is not acceptable for the crime the inmate has committed. In those few cases the death penitently should be allowed, but not as much as it has been going on.Posted by: AnonymousThe death penalty is never justified unless the US wants to be Like China or Iraq.
The death penalty is a disaster for a modern forward looking country. The first world countries of the world (especially Europe with it's War background) have long released that "an eye for an eye" leaves everyone blind. Only barbaric countries like China and Iraq still use the death penalty and it would be a mistake for the US to put itself in league with these states.
Posted by: KIemeP3nguinIt can't satisfy anybody's conscience.
It is quite simple to say that a person(perpetrator) who is supposed to be hang is justified but will it satisfy anybody's conscience? Will it put an end to that type of crime? The answer to that is a big NO. Take, for example, a terrorist being hanged for killing people. He might be deserving that simply considering the severity of the crime, but it will not bring the crime to an end, which should be our main agenda.
Posted by: AnonymousDeterminism plays to big of a role on the human will.
Even if determinism is not completely true, it has a lot of truth in it. When contemplating the concept of free-will you cannot but come to the conclusion that we are not as free as we think. We are born with a personality. That personality is made up of a blend of thousands of different character traits. Our character changes over the years largely due to environmental and social factors. Genetic, environmental and social factors are all external to the will and it is undeniable that they play a HUGE role on the way we act. This entails a diminished sense of responsibility for actions. It is then unjustified for the government to put to death its citizens because external factors were largely responsible for the way they acted. Erickson's 8 stages of psychosicial development further confirms this. We must focus on rehabilitation and segregation much more than punishment.
Posted by: phantomNo, I believe that the death penalty is considered a cruel and unusual punishment.
Death is one thing. To sit and know for years and years the exact date you are going to die is completely different. To know you'll be dying in years, months, weeks, days, and down to hours is cruel. Strapped to a gurney, staring at the ceiling, and knowing your life is about to be taken away from you in just a few minutes is torture. Only in extreme cases could you ever justify something like that.
Posted by: 54ndDaviThe death penalty is not justified, on many grounds.
I do not support the death penalty for several reasons. It places the execution team in the role of state-sanctioned murderers, there are too many cases where convicted murderers were not actually guilty of their capital crimes and it destroys any potential contributions on the part of the people on Death Row. Once a person is dead, they can no longer affect another person's life, positive or negative, in the same way as they could when they were alive. It's a waste of time, manpower and resources to grant the state the ability to end human lives in this manner.
Posted by: ElwBoardinI don't agree for different reasons.
I believe that people don't deserve the death penalty because that is an easy way out for them. They go through pain for a few seconds after they have taken another human beings life? No thank you. Make them suffer in jail, get raped & beat up for what they have done.
Posted by: AnonymousKilling is always unjustified...
With the exception of self-defense. No one deserves to have their life taken from them, because no one can "lose" sovereignty over their body. Further more, when you kill someone, you take away the chance that they may eventually realize the ill of their crime, and repent, and seek to make amends and improve their livelihood by whatever means thy can. Killing another individual is only ever justified when you are defending yourself from attack. If you have someone in captivity, there is absolutely no reason to kill them. You have them captured and neutralized. To kill them is entirely unjustified, and makes the state just as bad as a murderer. It's childish vengeance, and nothing more.
Posted by: The_Chaos_HeartDurp
It costs too much and is not an effective deterent. There are numerous studies and statistics that show how the DP doesn't effectively deter criminals.
In addition, a study by Amnesty International showed that a maximum penalty of life sentance would be cheaper than the DP.Posted by: Dr.StrangeloveThe death penalty is unjustified.
The problem with the death penalty is that the punishment of death can never be reversed, that is to say death is final. To deal a punishment of this severity, two unattainable conditions must be met: 1. A person must be impartially adjudicated to be worthy of such a punishment; 2 A person must be proved to have committed this crime beyond any doubt.
1.A person cannot be impartially adjudicated to be worthy of the death penalty because morality changes based on a society's culture. A deed worthy of the death penalty at one point in time could not be worthy of it at another, due to changes in a society's morality. Therefore, since morality changes, and justice is based on morality e.g. the belief it is wrong to kill is a moral decision, it is unjustifiable to punish someone in a way that cannot be changed or reversed to reflect the changes in societies' morals.
2. The death penalty is unjustifiable because it is impossible to prove a person to have committed this crime beyond any doubt. Since death is irreversible, the need to prove beyond any doubt is an inherent condition of the death penalty. To prove beyond any doubt is impossible( think all the moon landing conspiracy theories),because, evidence is based on a society's culture, and evidence is never irrefutable. This condition protects those who are convicted on flawed evidence from an irreversible punishment and those that are convicted on correct evidence that proves their guilt, but only to a reasonable doubt. Therefore, an inherent condition of the death penalty is the need to prove beyond any doubt, due to its irreversible nature, and this is impossible to be met because all evidence proves guilt only to an extent.Posted by: zse3012I oppose the death penalty because it's absurd; who will kill the executioner?
If there is to be a death penalty, we have to either deal with the fact that people who kill people or a living are part of our society, or kill them also. I suppose that we could have murderers kill one and then be killed, but it's obviously not a workable penalty. Never mind the fact that no one learns anything if being killed is the punishment for transgressing.
Posted by: groovyboxNo, because it is clearly stated in the Bible that it is a sin to take a life.
I believe the death penalty was imposed as a way to help sway people from committing murder, for fear of being put to death themselves at a later point. But nowhere has it been proven that this drastic measure has had any effect on diminishing crime. In fact, the murder rate has gone up. So, capital punishment serves no useful purpose.
Posted by: lacerated900We are Humans.
We are humans and we make mistakes. We can always compensate someone who has been wrongfully imprisoned, but we can never give someone back the life they lost if later evidence shows that they did not commit the crime they were punished for. I mean, really, the death penalty in and of itself can be justified, but humans doing so and using it is not.
Posted by: LeonTheBravenon-aggression principle
A criminal gives up all rights when they violate the rights of another.
The issue, is they do not give up the right to the state. If the state is the only institution that can deal in death, then we as citizens of a state, are in a whole deal of trouble.
Force should only be initiated in self defense, and the force used should avoid death if possible.
The legal system issuing death is not an act of defense, therefore not justifiable.Posted by: xenofreedomxBC
Killing the person that killed someone makes no sense
Posted by: WubwubwubIt’s time to outlaw this barabaric practice worldwide.
Our primitive ancestors dealt with members of the tribe who disobeyed the rules with barbaric punishments including torture and even death, but as civilisations developed, and we adopted sophisticated codes of law, we put learned to put our base human instincts to one side and no longer reduce ourselves to the level of the offender. The death penalty is now only associated with despotic regimes, rogue nations and the United States of America – the practice has long been banned everywhere else.
Posted by: brian_egglestonAre we going to contribute to death?
Capital punishment brings about a culture of death, violence and revenge. The only thing an execution truly offers is the illusion of government-approved "closure." Thousands of people desperately seek this, but may they not ever find it here. If they refuse to forgive what has happened in their hearts, families will never feel true, lasting peace and justice.
Posted by: AnonymousNot as currently implemented
In the weeks preceding an announced execution there is a spike in the violent crime rate. This essentially means that there are innocent victims of violent crime for no other apparent reason than the implementation of the death penalty. Does that offender deserve to die? Maybe. Should be execute them if doing so causes the victimization of someone who otherwise would not be victimized? Absolutely not.
Posted by: doggy237circle
If some one kills some one they die what about the person that killed them they would died too and then it would never stop until everyone is dead. So I oppose this. It should not be justified.If a person is on trial for murder, then they are on trial for taking a life that is not theirs to take. Sending a person to death row is the same thing. A persons life does not belong to the government, therefore it should not be the courts decision whether a person lives or not. Also, taking a murderer's life does not bring back the death of the victim, nor does it justify it. Instead of the death penalty (for any crime committed), the criminal should be given the appropriate number of years sentence, which would depend on the intensity of the crime, along with the appropriate amount of counseling throughout the sentence.
Posted by: AnonymousIt undermines principles of criminal rehabilitation.
One of the primary aims of the criminal justice system is to attempt to rehabilitate the criminal in order to both prevent the repetition of the crime by that individual, and to improve the life of that criminal. It is unjustified to take a life for a mistake they made.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, they say death is the easy way out of suffering.
They say that death is an easy way out of your punishment and I agree. Once a killer kills rather they like to remember or not that memory stays with them for ever and ever driving them crazy because either: a) they want to kill again but can't; or b) they regret what they've done. Either way keeping them alive to deal with that suffering is the best choice of revenge and justice. Make them do hard labor and make them regret and work for their mistake. I don't know that's how I see it, so with the death penalty I say no, you should let the killer rot in a jail sail and wish he had never been driven to kill.
Posted by: AnonymousI am opposed to the death penalty, because taking one life is not a substitution for other that was lost.
When taking one person's life for another, it does not correct the original situation. It is giving the jurors too much power to decide that one person's life is terminated to avenge a wrongful death. What would happen if, after the fact, it is discovered that the person was wrongfully prosecuted?
Posted by: ThickBryan60At every level, the death penalty is unjustified.
On a philosophical level, we are to some extent determined on our actions. On a political level, the death penalty ignores all liberal values our countries are founded on. On an economic level, the DP has such an extreme opportunity cost that thousands more lives can be saved from life in prison instead. On a judicial level it ignores the purposes of the judiciary system to adequately deter and adequately rehabilitate and adequately punish. The Death Penalty is itself a flawed archaic system.
Posted by: Stephen_HawkinsPunishment
Since the government has decided that the person being sentenced to death cannot experience cruel or unusual punishment, there is no punishment to dieing instantly with no pain. Rotting in prison for the rest of their life is much more punishment than being taken out of this world in an instant.
Posted by: Anonymous