With as many people who are strictly opposed to the death penalty, there is a chance that one or more such people are on a jury. This would prevent a jury from giving a guilty verdict, causing a deadlock or possibly giving an innocent one. This means that either the whole case starts over with a new jury or someone who is known to be guilty by the jury to go free. Neither is acceptable in my opinion. It waists too much time an money when it should be obvious the person is guilty. I have another idea.
Because some may oppose it because they would be causing someones death, I say, let give them a life sentence without parole. I am not saying just put them with the other inmates. Their punishment should be worse. I am not saying beating them or anything but just put them in a smaller cell, alone and secluded, for the rest of their lives. For the most part, the closest thing to contact with another person would be the trays of food they get. Instead of being let our for a shower, they have a hose that shoots water into the cell. So they don't have to have wet clothing, don't give them any. Who's going to see anyway? The only things in their cell would be a toilet molded into the wall, maybe a bench to sit or sleep on, and a red button. What's the button for? You may ask. It is to tell the prison system that they changed their mind and want to volunteer for the death sentence. If they push the button, a red light come on and ten minutes later, a deadly gas fills the chamber. If they chicken out before the ten minutes, they just have to push the button again before the ten minutes are up. This way, the juries hands are clean so they can convict without personal guilt.
1 in 25 people on death row are innocent. I agree that people who actually murdered someone should experience the pain they made their victim feel. At the same time if there is 1 per cent of a chance that someone is innocent of a crime than they should not be executed.
The point of jails and prisons is to show that the crimes convicts are convicted of are bad, and I believe it is a double standard to say those who kill are bad, but when we do it, it is okay. Ultimately, the death penalty is just an act of revenge conducted by the State.
I know that one of the Boston bombers killed and injured a lot of people but the government should not be able to kill people they have lives and family but at least put them in jail for the rest of their lives until they die because even though will die eventually. Let them live because they kill them you are actually a murderer so then why not give it to them say people rob a bank then for some reason you give them the death penalty then the people who gave it to them or decided for them to kill them then you killed more people they did so should you death penalty.
Killing someone because they killed someone else is not going to make things better because, the person that died is already dead, if you kill another person, there is no punishment for that person, because all you are doing is hurting the family of the killer and you're not making a point to that person by killing them. If you just put them in jail then you are making them suffer and pay for what they did, yeah killing them would be a punishment, but not for the killer its just a punishment for the family who did not do anything, they didn't control the killer he did what he did for a reason and for himself.If you have proof the family helped then maybe the death penalty is good but 99.9% of the time the family had nothing to do with is so therefore it wasn't the families fault so they shouldn't be punished only the murder should be punished for what he did,by throwing him in jail for the est of his life or for a long time
Keeping someone in prison for life is the same as sentencing them to death, pretty much. And if you let a serial killer back into the public, what's stopping him from killing again? Also, some crimes cannot be forgiven. You can't kill 50 people and then just go to jail for 25 years.
Although some may be inoccent, I think fall down crimes should be in jail but more than one murder is death, those people lost there lives and didn't get to do things they want. I feel that certain crimes should still be punished by death, for things like murders, on more than one account. I'm not saying Phisical torture, I'm saying mental, how it feels to be away from the world, away from your family, away from everybody, simple jail can be the answer to smaller crimes, but huge attacks like terrorism needs to be severely punished, I hate to say it, but by death
Now I don't think that anyone should be put to death. It should be a process that is done for the lowest of the low. Criminals who've done unthinkable things and cannot be rehabilitated. The death penalty is needed for these special cases and don't tell me the BS about how leaving them in prison is a better alternative. There are plenty of cases of people who have been arrested for violent crimes and they end up finding a way to escape custody and disappear. Luckily most times it ends with the person getting caught but sometimes it doesn't. For this reason, we have to put them to death as keeping them alive gives them opportunity to do it again.
Some people don't deserve to live. Prison is too nice a place for a lot of criminals.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .