Should people on death row (for murder, etc.) have a painful death (yes) or painless death (no)?

Asked by: Elette
  • Painful death definitely

    They deserve to suffer for what they did. Justice should be served. Turning the other cheek makes the other side bloody as well. An eye for an eye. Need I continue? These people are monsters not humans and we have to show the public that actions have consequences to deter criminals from repeating their actions.

  • Pay for their crimes.

    If people commit murder (etc) Think of the victim, dying agony. The murderer should suffer in pain for his/her crimes as well , shouldn't they? I don't have an opinion for arsonists, or robbers. Anything that results in death whether my robbery gone wrong or an arsonists fire killing someone.
    Whoever commited the crime , deserves to feel the pain of their innocent victim.

  • I think it

    Depends in the crime. In most cases yes, a murderer on death row deserves a painful death. At least the chemical that removes the pain in the injection, should be removed. These people are animals and have been put through the due-process and deemed criminally responsible. The pain and suffering that they put through their victims and their families.... And they get to just lay on a bed and go to sleep peacefully - painlessly. They have no value for life as-is, so u are doing most of them a favour. Let alone by giving them such humaine deaths they aren't afraid of commiting the crimes in the first place, because the consequence isn't big enough to keep them from doing it.

    Also I think it should be up to the victims' families to decide what happens to the convicted - An eye for an eye. They deserve vindication.

  • Punishment depending on the crime

    I think the criminal should suffer the same fate they gave to another person/people IF it is 100% proven. For example, an arsonist should be burned or die via smoke inhalation. A rapist should be raped. It sounds extreme, but it would surely make murders think twice on what they are doing. Twisted people do not deserve to be treated humainly..

  • It depends on the crime

    I think the death penalty should only be used for certain crimes. For example extreme terrorism. Some people are on death row for being wrongly accused of a crime and their lawyers aren't able to build a strong enough case to defend them. Yes it should be painful but only for extreme crimes.

  • Most definitely absolutely positively sure

    Here's why that person made someone suffer in some unfair or psycho way. So now the family should decide which way they die then ask how long would they want it to last only then we would move on from this scum calling themselves human even though they are dirt to society (they worse than that) not a weak little needle to make problems go away and them scot free laughing how an easy death they got. People sometimes laugh at the survivors saying how they enjoyed their suffering and junk. Now my opinion in that should be no more painless death (keep in mind only if they are absolutely guilty and family wants it to happen)

  • It should depend

    Certain crimes deserve the criminal to feel pain. We are talking about those who tortured their victim before killing them, although there are more those types of crimes than those where a swift painless death could be accepted. Death is a relief, but dying itself shouldn't be painless for the wicked. Someone who shows no regard for human life should feel dread all the way to the point of the actual death.

  • They should suffer

    If someone murdered your friend you're going to want them to suffer. Suffering by sitting in a jail cell for the rest of their lives is going to do way more emotional damage than an execution will do. They should definitely suffer than being executed. There's a reason why most murderers kill themselves.

  • That's why they're on death row, not in prison for life.

    I'm going to put this very bluntly. Life in prison is, at least in my mind, more painful than dying. However, you're also dead once you die. Seems obvious, but there you go. If you want a person to suffer, you keep them alive. If you want them dead, then you either do it yourself (and go to prison) or let the state do what it does, which legally mandates that it not be cruel or unusual; I hate to have to point this out, but an intentionally painful death, where a more efficient, less painful alternative exists, is 'cruel', and seems pretty unusual (waste of taxpayer money just to hurt someone for 40 seconds before they're dead, for one) to me.

  • No it should be painless

    The law prevents cruel and unusual punishments and a painful death penalty is a cruel punishment.

    If we were to use painful death penalties it would be stooping to the same level as the criminal, which would make us just as guilty as the criminal.

    Two wrongs do not make a right.

  • Kind of an awkward yes or no question but...

    No, they should not die a painful death, but rather a painless death. It' bad enough to be deprived of your life, but even worse when you realize the last moments of it shall be spent in excruciating pain. We don't allow torcher anyways, so it would be very ridiculous.

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