Contrary to my supporting headline I do believe that there are certain circumstances in which ignorance could excuse a death penalty... But, on the obverse, there are situations in which it may be appropriate. Consider a scenario with a repeat drunk driving offender, imprisoned for manslaughter once already. License banned for life, drunk behind the wheel again he hits another car with a family of 5 on their way home. The father dies on impact, mother in a persistent vegetative state, 1 child dead, 1 cripple, and so it's sad... 1 child with only minor injuries.
I don't personally support the death penalty, but I do believe that the man in the scenario I spelled out should be held as responsible as another man who premeditated murder.
Ok so the death penalty think of it as one of your family members if that happened to them you would be torn apart. Honestly you would want justice. An apology cant fix anything, and sure can not bring a dead human being back to life. Just some thing to think about.
I do not believe that the death penalty, in any case, is fair if someone committed involuntary manslaughter, even in a case that the convict is a previous offender. In the case that the offender has time and time again committed the same or similar crime, it would be more beneficial to address the reasons why the offender continually repeats the crime. There must be some sort of social, economic, socio-economic, or psychological reason behind the continual offence.
For example, using the case mentioned by kyudisease, this person ,depending on how his situation is diagnosed, could be committed to a rehabilitation centre, given psychotherapy or at most given the life sentence. Who knows? Maybe this said man will one day become an advocate against alcoholism, drinking and driving, etc..
Will all said, I am not a supporter of the death penalty in the case of involuntary manslaughter because none of us are perfect.
Death row separates men from monsters. While I do believe a decent percentage of those on death row are 💯 % innocent. You can’t take someone’s life who didn’t take someone’s life out of cold blood. It’s the worst accident someone can do. But it’s no where near worthy of the death penalty. Of course punishment should be in line but not capital punishment. Details in every case matters though. If you’re just trying to play-scare someone with a weapon such as a 9mm pistol. . . . Accident happens. . . . Do you then deserve the death penalty? I think this penalty should be put in behind glass. . . . BROKEN ONLY IN THE EVENT OF TERROISTS AND COLD CALCULATED AGGRAVATED MURDER.
It isn't fair. For someone who accidentally murdered someone else. It really isn't fair. No....... It isn't fair at all. Realy, really unfair........ It was only an accident. See, it wasn't on purpose.... I really think it isn't fair... It's not fair. Everyone will die anyways. And it was an accident......... It's not fair.
Manslaughter, when somebody is killed by accident, should not be punished by death. Some manslaughter cases could have been easily prevented (drunk driving) but if somebody broke into your house and you hit them too hard and they died, it wouldn't be fair for you to have to die because of a misjudged force. You should not punish by death for accidents because why cause another family the loss of a loved one? "Do not kill" is a law, and everybody should obey it!
Death penalty's are cruel for people who didn't mean to do it. An accident is an accident. Nobody should be killed because of an accident. Jail time is the only appropriate punishment for accidents. The fact that he has to live and remember what he has done to the person is bad enough.
No, the death penalty is not fair for accidental manslaughter. In fact, in most states and countries that have the death penalty, it is reserved only for outright murder, not for accidental death. Even so, in these cases, I would argue that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment.
If a court finds somewhere guilty of accidental manslaughter the death penalty should never be considered. Accidental deaths are in no way a warranted use of the death penalty. Now if a criminal claims accidental manslaughter but is found guilty of more serious murder it should be considered to be used.
The death penalty is not just thrown around in cases. It is decided upon after looking at all evidence. If someone is found to have committed accidental manslaughter they are not going to get the death penalty and they shouldn't. The death penalty is reserved for more severe crimes that are committed.
The death penalty is not fair for someone who had an accident and committed manslaughter.The death penalty should be reserved for someone who has committed the worst kind of murder,This crime contains an element of intent which is never included in the crime of unintentional manslaughter or other similar crimes.
A person that has commited accidental manslaughter shouldn't be convicted and put to the death penalty. They deserve to spend many years in jail, but the death penalty isn't designed to end a person's life after they've commited what a reasonable person would call an accident. Accidents shouldn't lead to the death penalty.