Uerio gwer ghwearui ghearui gheraiuo gher uhgerui gerhgerhgerh geuiosa ghwerauigeraio ie gheroigheruisehuighesiruo e gu u u u u u uu u u u u u u u uu u u uu uu u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u uu u u
Gunmen like these are often times racialists, and should be taken seriously, as a threat to our national security. By giving the death penalty to this terrorist, which has performed acts of terrorism, we grant vengeance to those families affected, and make them feel better. In addition to that, it sets a example, and dramatically lowers future occurrences for potential offenders.
I believe he should get the Death Penalty in the sense that he decided to murder all innocent bystanders in cold blood. Because of this, he deserves the Death Penalty.
I don't get why people defend this man from receiving the Death Penalty, when he committed a mass murder. Because of this, I vote for him to be executed under the Death Penalty.
No matter what his true motive, he killed people. He not only killed civilians, but also a brave police officer who was doing his job trying to protect the people he was sworn to serve. Although the gunman sounds a little off-kilter by friends' and neighbors' accounts, he committed murder, which is not acceptable, crazy or not.
Capital punishment for murder is not unconstitutional and the crime is proportional especially in worse case such as mass murder.Locking them up in prison would be at high risk at the time that they release from prison would re-offend at second conviction again and this can be dangerous to society as whole.Also mass murderer are very cold blood and remorseless.So these brutal types as same as treason,aggravated rapist (especially if the victim is an elderly,a child,or physically handicap),and drug dealers should be killed.All others non-violent or less violent criminal such as shoplifter,burglary,or kidnappers should be in prison but not death penalty.
Killing someone as a punishment for the crime of murder does not solve the underlying roots of the problem. We should look instead at what caused the killer to act, and how he or she had access to weapons that could harm people. We should prevent the circumstances that caused the event.
No, the death penalty is morally unacceptable and is not an accurate response to a crime. The issue behind the shooting is the United State's problem with gun violence and lack of gun control laws. Life imprisonment should be the suitable punishment for this type of crime. It would not be such a burden on taxpayers if police would stop putting people in jail merely to fill the prison system up in order to appease the big companies that own the prisons. Marijuana use and similar petty crimes should not result in prison time, freeing up the system for life imprisonment for those who commit real crimes like murder.
The death penalty is simply not economically productive. It is ultimately more expensive than life in prison. However if he did pose a threat to people even while in prison, then the death penalty should be considered. I also think that the death penalty would be appropriate based on the current justice model.
The issue of planned parenthood is controversial to begin with. Many people disapprove of planned pregnancy and abortion on ethical, religious or moral grounds. However, people do not kill each other for their beliefs. They protest and lobby for regulation. There are ways for people to make their opinion known without resorting to violence.The laws for the state of Colorado must be applied as they would be for any person committing gun violence resulting in death and injury. Is the death penalty unconstitutional or not in Colorado? The accused is entitled to a trial. If this involves the death penalty then the gunman should be punished to the full extent of the law. The gunman is facing years in jail.