Death Penalty, is it good or bad?

Question

So, me and my friends are debating on whether death penalty is a good or bad idea, and I need some opinions from some people.

So do you think death penalty is good or bad and why?

Answer 1

If it depends on conclusive DNA evidence or a number of credible witnesses who actually saw the crime, I think it's a good thing. The alternative is to leave them in jail for the rest of their lives, leaving society to care for them. That's a lot of money that could be put towards more productive things, starting with counseling the victims.

Answer 2

There are three (3) areas where the death penalty can be argued: effect on crime (deterrence), economics (cost), and morality.



1. Deterrence



If the trial was quick and execution followed the crime in a reasonably short period of time, there might be some deterrent effect, but repeated studies have shown there is little or no deterrent effect, especially in the current judicial environment. So, deterrence is not really a valid reason to have a death penalty.



2. Economics



Studies have shown that the death penalty is more expensive than life imprisonment, for a number of reasons, most having to do with court costs. From this standpoint, the death penalty is bad.



3. Morality



Here you can get into a lot of subtleties and arguments, depending on your ethics. For me, since point one and two are either neutral or against the death penalty, there are only two reasons left for having a death penalty: revenge, or merely preventing the person from ever committing such a crime again.



In the latter case (preventing further killing), life imprisonment with no parole works, leaving only punishment or revenge. As for punishment, given that the judicial system occasionally makes mistakes (look up the number of life imprisoned or death row inmates who have been exonerated by recent improvements in the analysis of DNA evidence), I am uncomfortable with a decision that cannot be reversed once executed. Death is final, and I do not wish to be responsible, even as a small part of a society, that executes someone wrongly. I can live with life imprisonment because if new evidence comes to light, the decision can be reversed.



This leaves revenge, which in my experience, has never solved anything and often leads to a never-ending cycle of violence. Not something I care to participate in, even as part of a larger society.



Given the answers to all three points, I find the death penalty useless at best, and morally repugnant at its worst.

Answer 3

Bad, for many reasons:



- Mistakes happen. Since 1973 in the U.S., 138 people have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence. These are ALL people who had been found guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." A life sentence is reversible. An execution is not.



- Cost - because of the legal apparatus designed to minimize wrongful executions (and the enormous expense of death row incarceration), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute someone than to imprison them for life.



- It is not a deterrent - violent crime rates are consistently HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions.



- It is inconsistently and arbitrarily applied.



- Because the U.S. is one of the last remaining nations with capital punishment, many other countries refuse to extradite known criminals who should be standing trial here.



- It fosters a culture of violence by asserting that killing is an acceptable solution to a problem.



- Jesus was against it (see Matthew 5:7 & 5:38-39, James 4:12, Romans 12:17-21, John 8:7, and James 1:20).



- Life without parole (LWOP) is on the books in most states now (all except Alaska), and it means what it says. People who get this sentence are taken off the streets. For good.



- As Voltaire once wrote, "let the punishments of criminals be useful. A hanged man is good for nothing; a man condemned to public works still serves the country, and is a living lesson."



- Whether you’re a hardened criminal or a government representing the people, killing an unarmed human being is wrong. Period. “He did it first” is not a valid excuse.

Answer 4

For the worst crimes, life without parole is better, for many reasons. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it isn’t effective in reducing crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people.



The worst thing about it. Errors:

The system can make tragic mistakes. In 2004, the state of Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham for starting the fire that killed his children. The Texas Forensic Science Commission found that the arson testimony that led to his conviction was based on flawed science. As of today, 138 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict.



Keeping killers off the streets for good:

Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages:

-an innocent person serving life can be released from prison

-life without parole costs less than the death penalty



Costs, a surprise to many people:

Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. Since the stakes are so high, the process is far more complex than for any other kind of criminal case. The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages. These apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death.



Crime reduction (deterrence):

The death penalty doesn't keep us safer. Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people without a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent.



Who gets it:

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed??



Victims:

People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported the death penalty in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.



It comes down to whether we should keep the death penalty for retribution or revenge in spite of its flaws and in spite of the huge toll it exacts on society.

Answer 5

The Death Penalty is, overall, a good thing. What's bad about it is the way it is implemented. After receiving a death penalty, an inmate can sit on Death Row for up to 20 years!! before sentence is carried out. Why? Because of the endless stream of appeals, lawsuits and posturing by lawyers.



I'd like to see a special court of ELECTED judges, in each state, convene for review of death penalty cases. They examine all the evidence, testimony, etc. IF they find all the criteria are met (DNA, credible eye-witnesses, evidence on the convict's person, etc) then sentence should be carried out immediately. This review should take place within one year of the conviction.



People amaze when they whine - the death penalty doesn't accomplish anything! Well not the way it's currently implemented! Duh! But I guarantee you, when it HAS been applied, the perpetrator has NEVER been set free to murder, rape or pillage again.

Answer 6

- blunders ensue. on the grounds that 1973 interior the U.S., 138 human beings have been released from loss of life row because of the fact they have been exonerated by DNA and different new info (DNA isn't available in maximum homicide circumstances). those are all people who have been got here upon accountable "previous a reasonable doubt." A life sentence is reversible. An execution isn't. - fee - because of the criminal equipment designed to cut back wrongful executions (and the super price of loss of life row incarceration), it costs taxpayers lots greater to execute somebody than to imprison them for all times. - it somewhat is no longer a deterrent - violent crime rates are continually larger in loss of life penalty jurisdictions. - it is erratically and arbitrarily utilized. - because of the fact the U.S. is between the final ultimate international locations with capital punishment, many different worldwide places refuse to extradite conventional criminals who could desire to be status trial right here. - It fosters a lifestyle of violence by affirming that killing is an appropriate answer to a issue. - Jesus became into against it (see Matthew 5:7 & 5:38-39, James 4:12, Romans 12:17-21, John 8:7, and James a million:20). - life with out parole (LWOP) is on the books in maximum states now (all different than Alaska), and it skill what it says. people who get this sentence are taken off the streets. For good. - As Voltaire as quickly as wrote, "enable the punishments of criminals be sensible. A hanged guy is sweet for no longer something; a guy condemned to public works nonetheless serves the country, and is a living lesson."

Answer 7

Anti death penalty arguments are either false or the pro death penalty arguments are stronger. Proof below.



The death penalty is a just and appropriate sanction and it saves additional innocent lives.



ETHICAL/RELIGIOUS SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY



"Death Penalty Support: Religious and Secular Scholars"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html



"The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx



Opponents in capital punishment have blood on their hands, Dennis Prager, 11/29/05, http://townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2005/11/29/opponents_in_capital_punishment_have_blood_on_their_hands





DETERRENCE



All prospects of a negative outcome deter some. It is a truism. The death penalty, the most severe of criminal sanctions, is the least likely of all criminal sanctions to violate that truism.



27 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation,

http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm



"Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence-and-the-death-penalty-a-reply-to-radelet-and-lacock.aspx



"Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalty-deterrence-murder-rates.html



INNOCENCE



"The Innocent Executed: Deception & Death Penalty Opponents"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/08/the-innocent-executed-deception--death-penalty-opponents--draft.aspx



"Cameron Todd Willingham: Another Media Meltdown", A Collection of Articles

http://homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Cameron%20Todd%20Willingham.aspx



The 130 (now 138) death row "innocents" scam

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/04/fact-checking-issues-on-innocence-and-the-death-penalty.aspx



COST



"Death Penalty Cost Studies: Saving Costs over LWOP"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2010/03/21/death-penalty-cost-studies-saving-costs-over-lwop.aspx





These are some of the common topics within the death penalty debate. Many more upon request. [e-mail]

Answer 8

It's good for certain crimes, such as murder. It's obviously not a deterrent, it's a punishment. For other crimes such as drug trafficking (Singapore, Malaysia, etc) it's absolutely ridiculous and inhumane. These countries that execute for drugs are hypocrites. They allow alcohol (some of these countries do not such as Saudi Arabia) to be sold and consumed, which is a drug itself, but they'll execute someone for drugs that "they don't like"....... just my opinion though

Answer 9

If the death penalty did what it is supposed to do, deter people, it would never be used.



Obviously it doesn't work.

Answer 10

Bad. For two reasons. One innocent life taken is one too many, and the guilty should suffer.

Answer 11

It is a good thing.



The electric chair oughta be our national form of punishment.

Answer 12

It's Bad. Because it Accomplishes -NOTHING. :(

Answer 13

it can be argued both ways