• The height of Hippocracy.

    Most obviously in this question is the hippocracy which is involved in
    the idea's very premise. A man kills a man, so you kill him? In turn, should the executioner not be killed, and so on? There is a clear contradiction that some people get the right to kill and some don't. It's illogical and there is another problem.

    Imagine for a minute: A man walks into a shop, shoots several people, steals money, whatever he wants, and leaves but gets caught. You are the relative, spouse of one of the victims. Which would you prefer? Him to live a full life, suffering in prison in a confined space, or for him to just die and get a "Get-out-of-jail-free" card on the suffering. I don't know one person with would not choose for him to suffer. It doesn't matter how much it cost to keep him in prison or anything, he deserves to waste away for what he has done.

  • I agree to the statement

    Capital punishment should be banned because if someone have done crime like muder then they should get very big punishment if you think that taking life of criminal is very big punishment for criminal then you are absolutely wrong because they should realise that what they have done then that punishment should successful the best punishment for criminal is that they should get such a punishment that they realize what they have done and from this punishment other criminal should fear that they will not try to think to do crime in their life like i should suggust a punishment for criminal that is life prison in that punishment they will realize and after the died when they will born on earth then they will not try to think to do crime next time so,it should be banned.

  • Yes it should

    Two wrongs don't make a right. If you kill someone because they killed someone else, you're literally punishing that person by committing the same crime he or she just committed, which is inhumane. Why not sentence that person for life and make it so that there is no chance of getting out of prison? That would be a much harsher and fairer sentence, that would be sure to teach the criminal a valuable lesson.

    Posted by: ABG
  • People need to think this through

    I agree with Paul. Although I am not full on the living a life of suffering, I strongly think that the Capital Punishment should be banned. Imagine if the suspect was not really the suspect, an he was just a setup. If he got killed and then the real culprit was found, then the family of the first 'suspect' would go crazy and sue and blah blah blah. Killing because someone did something wrong is never ok.

  • No it is horrible

    How is this just? An eye for an eye just doesn't work. The death penalty is unjust, killing a killer makes us just as bad. Rehabilitation is better than punishment, yes sometimes punishment is needed for rehabilitation but the ones who do it due to insanity should be in a mental hospital and those who don't probably should be in jail but they will most likely feel remorse and they should all at least get a chance to be rehabilitated.

    Posted by: mc9
  • Capital punishment is buffer to people banning life in prison.

    Capital punishment happens rarely now. It serves little function other than the most important. Without it you would have a run away system of banning punishments. Some places that this is a problem with have serial killer being release after they get a fairly weak sentence for the crimes. Example, Colombian killer, confessed to over 300 murders, was in jail 18 years, then got released, then he murder another person.

    Personally I much rather have the rarely used death penalty, than the possibility of serial killer go free. Plus I feel if we didn't have the death penalty and life in prison, somebody would have murdered me already.

  • Capital punishment shouldn't be banned but regulated

    I agree with the above argument. There are crimes so atrociously bad that it warrants capital punishment because first, there are cases where there is absolutely no hope for reform on the part of the criminal (the criminally insane/psychopaths) and second, if the criminal has a chance of even getting out of prison he/she would be likely to do the same thing again. There are just cold blooded people wired that way in this world.

    Why does it have to be regulated? Because cap. Punishment is not something we should enforce lightly. It consists of taking away another indivs life which I think we would all concur is very serious, even for the non religious people. There are possibilities of charging someone for the wrong crime, so it would lead to an irreversible damage if someone innocent were to be sentenced to death.

    There are also crimes where the guilty sincerely do want to turn over a new leaf. It is unfair to take away a person's life because of one albeit, major mistake, if he or she is willing to change.

  • There are levels to reaching the capital punishment

    If you are from America, each states usually handle their own capital punishment unless the crime they committed involve the feds. The states are very careful with the steps to the punishment of the capital crime. You could literally count the executions, it's not that much. In other countries, they have the capital punishment everyday, even as little as a 10 minute trial will get you a capital punishment. So it depends on everyone's opinion, but personally if a person have killed more than one, like the psychopathic killer of ten people, that person deserves more than capital punishment.

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