Death penalty - Pro or against?
What´s your opinion? I am very against it, regardless of what, the reason is because two wrongs simply doesn´t make one right. Besides, for example, if someone has commited a really horrible crime, like raping a kid, wouldn´t it be better to let that person just be imprisoned?
Because if you think about it, if you kill someone, then that person gets away with the crime, while in jail many ones get the chance to improve and become a better person, or just sit there and regret what he or she have done. Death penalty also tends to apply to people who are innocent, therefore, I say no to death penalty!
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
...
In what cases? Human trafficking? Arson?
Fun fact; in high school, we had a speech class and one of our assignments was to pair up and work on debates. Some students and I decided to debate on the Death Penalty. I was against it. To this day, I still am.
...
I'm pretty against the death penalty, if what they did was so bad might as well let them just rot in jail instead of giving an easy way out. Also false info false accusations and being set up and to be "legally killed" for something you didn't do isn't right.
I personally believe that we shouldn't have the power choosing who lives and who dies, but there are exceptions. Your example isn’t good. Criminals have a different type of mind set, you and I could never rape a child, thus saying that a criminal will repent for his past sins isn’t suffice. And rotting in prison, using all of our tax money, is also a waste. If we go back in time, we see the criminals were treated harshly because, in doing so, people wouldn’t commit crimes. If you stole, your hand was cut off. If you murdered, you were executed. The death penalty is needed. I mean, if someone killed someone you loved, would you want that person to live?
It's for this reason that we have a justice system with laws, so that people don't enforce their own idea of who deserves to live and who doesn't.
Well, that's questionable. Most of people commit crimes again after getting out of jail. Plus, you mustn't forget that prisons take away money from the budget. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want my taxes to be spent on some disgusting son of a bitch.
I vote for death penalty in some really bad cases, such as raping children and serial mudrers (especially of it's done with some outstanding cruelty) but ONLY if the judiciary is good and there are low chances of accusing an innocent person. For example, while the police was searching for Andrei Chikatilo, 9 innocent people became the victims of the death penalty. These kind of things should not happen.
If somebody does something as horrible as cannibalism or mass slaughter then they should get the death penalty.
I am firmly against the death penalty. Firstly, I don't believe it works in deterring criminal or reducing the amount of crime (Australia's benefited from lower crime rates, and we scrapped the death penalty in the 70's). Secondly, I do not believe that killing someone is ever justified unless that person is a threat to someone's life (so in an instance where rehabilitation fails, then I might be able to tolerate the death penalty). I simply think that killing a person who isn't a threat to you is wrong, regardless of what wrong they have done.
It depends on what they did and why they did it.
If someone does something like manslaughter or cannibalism or murder with no good reason, they deserve to die.
I am against the death penalty and you can never be 100% sure of guilt. Just look at the hundreds of people that were found to be innocent of crimes decades later.
Kill em all
I'm against it simply because I believe taking a life is wrong. Like you said, two wrongs don't make a right. Not because I want them to suffer or anything like that.
No, I don't support the death penalty. I don't believe the state should ever have the power to enforce death upon anyone, no matter how despicable the criminal is. Especially when you remind yourself of how corrupt governments from across the globe can and continue to be, yet it will be them, acting god, choosing who lives and who dies, and demonstrating their ultimate control, despite many of them not being much better than who's actually standing trial. They have no right, nor place to decide the living status of anyone.
It's also viciously unfair for people of poverty, giving the indication that wealthy people's lives are more valued. An unemployed psycho won't have the money to afford the finest legal defence the country has to offer and more likely than not, could find themselves on death row. Yet, of course, some rich psycho with a shit ton of cash could pay for a hotshot lawyer and have a far greater chance of avoiding the penalty, even though both could be standing trial for the same crimes.
You know cannibalism is actually legal?
Well, it shouldn't be.
You can eat people if they let you. You can't kill people for food though. (I'm not a cannibal, just pointing out the truth)
I'm against the death penalty, not because of "right/wrong" or the "easy way out" (failed suicides laugh in the face of this), but because it's not worth risking innocents who get framed for what other people do.
I support death penalty for people who deserve to die. Namely people who murder children (Not talking about abortions), people who commit extreme acts of violence in name of a deity or someone who kills for the thrill of it.
Nothing's black and white.
I think you can find this kind of thoughts from Justinian (Roman Emperor, in his codex), to today with some philosophy of such as "défense sociale nouvelle". It's kinda universal.
So you gonna ask, "what's the fucking link with death penalty, Euron?" Well, death penalty will never let the innocent have a chance to prove his innocence if he's ever condamned. While with prison, there are still ways to the State and police to see where they failed, and to the defendant to prove his innocence.
If the only thing you seek in the sentence as member of the society is to punish the culprit then fine: you've got prison. Guy will rot in it, cool. But leave death penalty away.
Funny thing: prison is kinda a new "sentence"; before 1790 -at least in my country- it wasn't used that way. I'm pretty sure in europa it wasn't thought that way too.
We can see as a problem that prison's staff is outmaneuvered pretty much everywhere in the world.
Prison got also its problems: funding (the main one since its beginning) and insanity. For example here in france one counts 80% of insanes in our prison (insane being quite large as a definition though). If I remember well america is around 1/2.
Anyway, seeing how politicized justice is in America, there are sometimes the needs to put someone in jail with big cases near the election.
This kind of case are problematic when death penalty can be delivered.
Prison has got its errors and defaults, but yet still better than the death penalty. It's a progress that this sentence is erased more and more in every country; saddly seeing that these days we make some steps away, it won't surprise me if it comes back (such people as Erdogan are already fighting for it)
Wow. The little faith I had in humanity is gone.
I lost faith in humanity waaaayyy before you did, Lee. So...welcome to the club.
I don't really know what to say about it, one part of me says that it is necessary for the criminally insane and the loonies that think it's okay to go to a public place and start shooting in the name of their religion. But another part of me says that it is inhumane and wrong, so im gonna settle for the fact that it is a morally grey spot that will be debated to the end of time
Oppose
The American justice system is a politicized mess.
Poor suspects often have their constitutional right to an attorney and speedy trial subverted.
The process is expensive, moreso than life imprisonment.
I largely believe in restorative justice, except for the absolute worst of the worst.
Do some people deserve to die? Probably. But I don't think the extortion racket in charge of wherever you live has the moral authority to sanction murder.
You wouldn't care about humanity if you were starving for days and then found a perfectly prepared and grilled human meat. You need to survive. Your brain and body would make you eat it immediately. That's how humanity works.
I don't get the "more expensive" part. How is shooting someone in the head more expensive then providing life functions for someone for another 50 years?
It depends on the crime and if the person was sane, if the crime was pre meditated. So many factors but I do believe murdering or raping children should earn someone the death penalty
Shooting someone immediately after a conviction is unjust and unconstitutional.
Appeals are expensive and take forever due to judicial gridlock (in America, at least). It can talke anywhere between 5-20 years or more.
Meanwhile, the condemned is in a special lockdown unit and doesn't perform labor for the prison (which is a whole other issue) and doesn't contribute to the cost of providing his/her needs.
I understand this. People will do anything to survive in near death situations, but eating a human on the regular because you're just a vile human being shouldn't be legal.
I'm for. In particular, rapists, peadophiles and murderers do not deserve to live as far as I'm concerned, and our taxes go into keeping them in prison systems. They are worthless, put them on the chopping block.
Get rid of it. Does nothing to deter criminals. Plus with the chance of executing innocent people...it just is not worth it.
Murderers, Rapists, Pedophiles, Human Traffickers, Terrorists, and drug dealers, deserve the death penalty.
Thieves, instead of sitting in jail, need to be put to the chain gang. Instead of sitting in jail getting three meals a day, they should working their assess off serving the public, paying their debt to society.
I think it should depend on the severity of their crime and the evidence to back up what they did - thing about the death penalty is that sometimes, and it has happened, innocent people are killed.
It's more that there was never any law invented against it. I doubt if Trump confessed to consuming human meat he'd remain in office.
considering how im all for fairness, if a person is killed unjustly I would have the people who cared about the person who was killed decide the fate of the one who's guilty this is pretty much fair in my eyes. so yeah in a sense im for the death penalty mainly because of all the taxes that go into trying to maintain prisons and such.
So if later new evidence is found that clears the one executed...does his loved ones have the right to determine if those who chose for him to die will in turn die?
yes
Yes.