Should death row inmates be allowed an unlimited amount of appeals?

Asked by: Sumocolt768
  • When their life is on the line, death row inmates should have every right to do everything in their power to save themselves.

    I am very much against the death penalty in the first place. I find it quite hypocritical that in a country that finds cruel and unusual punishment to be unjust, 32 states still allow the death penalty. Murder is murder, plain and simple. The death penalty is just as evil of an act as the acts of an inmate on death row. It is perhaps one of the most revolting things in our "modern" society. The government should not have the power to terminate one's life, the most precious thing we have. The death penalty is not justice. It is cruel, unusual, and above all, barbaric. Regardless of their actions, death row inmates should be able to fight for their lives. They are not animals or monsters, they are still human beings. What about a wrongfully accused inmate? At least he/she can protest and not be forced to die for something he/she did not do. Then, they can hold on to what little life they will have left in prison. Giving the government the power to govern over your existence is something no one should tolerate, but apparently, blood-thirst is okay as long as the other guy swung at you first.

  • When there are innocent people being executed, then everything needs to be looked at in every way possible.

    I see people doing less then a life sentence, with the same crimes as those on death row

    If you do some research, you will find serial killers, and rapists, and very sick and twisted criminals, in the State prison system. Some of these crimes are more heinous, or just as heinous as the crimes associated with the death row inmates. We see death row inmates being found innocent, after execution, and even innocent, and released, luckily, before being killed. Is it okay to have these kind of flaws, when it comes to a persons life, and death? Humans error, so, how can we put an flawed system in charge of the day a human dies? Alot of work should go into saving a life. Guilty individuals are freed all the time, and innocent people have done years, before, proven innocent. Death isn't something to take lightly, and doesn't have to be an option.

  • Death Row Inmates should not have unlimited appeals.

    When a jury or a court sentences a person to death they should be 99.9% sure that they are guilty of the crime.

    Why should we waste resources and money on appeal after appeal? They just might be innocent, they where framed the police did not have a correctly signed warrant. Give me a break. If they are up for a death sentence they are not nice people.

    Giving a Death Row Inmate Unlimited Appeals is really saying to the laws you can suck this sucker dry then the taxpayer. If the person has unlimited appeals and enough money at some point the probability is they will get out on appeal then sue the government.

    My believe is that society should intervene early and attempt reablitation. Prison should be avoided as it is the university of crime. The death penalty should only be used when society believes that this person has lost all rights to walk on the streets as a freeman. A this stage society has failed this person

  • 2 appeals, 2 appeals only

    Within a limited amount of time - say 5 years.

    After that, if no reasonable doubt has surface, the condemned must be condemned. Why we're allowing families to suffer as the criminal, who was already found guilty, is allowed to make a mockery of their pain by seeking technicalities and exceptions is unjust.

  • A Certain Limit

    These men and women have been convicted of their crimes. I believe they should have a few extra chances to prove themselves innocent, but unlimited? Having unlimited appeals makes it so that these death row inmates can stall until the day they die at a ripe old age, which is an abuse of the system. They need to face the music they wrote!

  • Death row murderers should not have no more than 1 appeal

    Forensics increasing to get better and better. If forensics have proven that this is 99% of the person who committed the crime than they're guilty. We are in a new generation. Unfortunately, in the past some prisoners have been executed and was found innocent after execution or even served a lot of time in prison and was found innocent. But there is no way in proving forensics wrong now a days. Also, when giving a chance to an appeal the death row patient should be told if they can prove that something was wrong with the evidence and can provide a testimony if they never did about the case then everything should be left alone. Judges have other cases to handle rather than over viewing the death row murderers appeal every 2 or 3 years. If you can't do the time then don't do the crime. And some of the murderers are not even remorseful, they're just made he/she was caught. Guilty!!

  • Just Take Death Penalty Off the Books

    If a death row inmate has an unlimited amount of appeals, they may as well have a sentence of life in prison without parole. Either have the death penalty with limited appeals or have the maximum sentence be life without parole. Killing an inmate doesn't solve anything--that person has no time to reflect upon what they've done. The real punishment is having a criminal live with the consequences of their actions while not having basic freedoms.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.