Do you believe the DEATH PENALTY is Justified in some cases?


Do you believe the DEATH PENALTY is Justified in some cases?


1|1
13|31

Most Helpful Guy

  • I believe that in some cases death penalty is justified! For example, if someone took the innocent life of someone else intentionally, then they lose the right to have theirs.

    2|0
    0|0

Most Helpful Girl

  • I guess so. I wish they show it public see if people would think of rape ever again. After publiclly begin killer in front of millions!

    1|1
    0|0

What Guys Said 30

  • There are some people that are too dangerous to let live. Some people have to live in solitary confinement there whole lives because of how dangerous they are, but still occasionally have to see a doctor or something, and kill anyone that gets close to them. They are more like rabid animals than humans. Ex political leaders also can need to be silenced or else it can cause an uprising bringing an end to the peace in that country.

    I do not however believe in it as a way to gain vengeance. While sometimes taking a human life is necessary, it shouldn't be done out of anger. It should only be done to protect the peace.

    1|0
    0|0
  • 1. Death penalty is justified for those that are willfully and persistently into crimes that are harmful to people's lives
    2. The criminally insane however deserve show of humane nature and can be incarcerated in a maximum security penitentiary for life w/o parole and given adequate treatment if it works.
    3. Crimes like rape etc don't kill them, put them with the criminally insane as on point 2 above. They must live and w/o hope of anything ever

    1|0
    0|0
  • No,

    I take the pragmatic view here.
    I don't believe in the death penalty having either retributive value or value as a disincentive to commit crime.

    What the death penalty DOES do is:

    - make our society more barbaric

    - waste taxpayer dollars*

    *About that second point... Yes, executing a convicted criminal actually costs more than keeping him in prison for life. The supreme court has ruled that since a wrongful death penalty sentence can't be compensated for after an execution has taken place, defendants in capital cases are to be accorded super-due-process. This is the years long process of appeals whose purpose is to make the state rigorous in its pursuit of justice.
    Super-due-process is expensive in court time, in prosecutor time and in defense council time. (The state often picks up that last cost too.)
    By comparison, warehousing an inmate for life is much more cost effective. It's also reversible, unlike an execution. This is important when you consider that even with the doctrine of super-due-process in place, we still manage to convict and sometimes execute innocent people.

    This last sentence goes to the first point above. If we as a country institute a policy that will have the effect of putting innocent people to death, how are we not barbaric?

    No amount of attempts to improve the process will matter. No government program, not even the application of the death penalty, can be perfect.

    Still, it can be the case that a given criminal, duly convicted, does not deserve to live. I don't argue with that. I simply assert that his not deserving to live should not empower any individual or the state acting in our stead, to put the prisoner to death.

    1|0
    0|0
  • in some cases? well i guess.

    for like say.. repeated crimes, statistically will not recover, rehabilitate, then yeah.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Yep, I believe in the Golden Rule.

    Do "unto others and ye would want done to thyself."

    You kill? Prepare to BE killed.

    2|1
    0|0
  • So long as there's irrefutable: proof audio/video the suspect is guilty. Otherwise I say no. Mistakes have been made before. Then what? Once someone innocent has been put to death there's no way to correct that.

    1|0
    0|0
  • No, I do not. I think the death penalty is uncivilized and barbaric... which is probably why the United States is the only developed country in the world that still has it.

    2|1
    0|0
  • No. First of all, with the possibility of a wrongful conviction I could never justify the death penalty but that's not the only reason. The government represents the people and how can you have a law against killing people but then kill people yourself? Then people say I'd bet you feel differently if somebody you loved got killed. Maybe I would but It's not about me, the victim of the victims family are not the ones who should be making the decisions.

    You shouldn't be controlled by rage, grief etc. when you make a decision about someone's life. Justice should be calculated not ruled by emotion. If you let anger rule you could be killing the wrong person or maybe it i the right person but there were some factors that you didn't take into account. Mental illness etc. Most of the people killed in the U. S. are black, many are mentally ill or just have a IQ that is extremely low. The cops know all the tricks they manipulate people when they're interrogating them and of course it's especially effective on people who don't know what's going on.

    Also the death penalty does not reduce crime in any way statistics have shown it doesn't act as a deterrent. I just can't support the death penalty in any way. I think there are sick people and they need to be locked up forever and with all the other criminals rehabilitation should be attempted so they can become productive members of society.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yes I do - There has to be a deterrent element

    1|1
    0|0
    • The deterrent element is proven to not work. Criminals don't think about their punishment when they commit a crime. Nobody goes like "oh if I get that many years it'll be worth it but if I get the death penalty I guess I won't do it". Murders are not based on cost-benefit analyses. Also, if the deterrent element would actually work, the United States would have a very low rate for violent crimes. The reality is however that the United States has a higher crime rate than most other first world countries (and it has more people imprisoned than any other country in the world, even more than China).

    • @BlueCoyote

      it'll deter the one who was sentenced to death , because he won't be able to commit any crime ever again.

    • @BlueCoyote I get what you are saying but there is just part of me that thinks when I hear about an horrific crime - A serial killer of children then logic goes out the window and you want retribution - If someone murdered a member of my family, I would want them to die

  • In the United States we know that we have killed at least 11 people that were later found to be innocent. Hard to back something that is so irreversible, and known to be flawed. Yes there are crimes that are heinous, and a life in prison is certainly punishment for those crimes. Many people who are serving life, would rather have been executed anyway so why give them what they want? Lastly the expense of a death penalty is actually greater then the cost of incarceration, so it doesn't make sense fiscally either. Some interesting facts:
    <a target="_blank" class="media-link" href="http://www. deathwww.people.com/people/article/0,,20698656,00.htmlw">http://abcnews. go. com/US/story? id=90935lty" rel="nofollow">www. deathpenaltyinfo. org/costs-death-penaltyfollow">www. deathpenaltyinfo. org/executed-possibly-innocent
    http://www. deathpenaltyinfo. org/costs-death-penalty
    http://abcnews. go. com/US/story? id=90935
    http://www. people. com/people/article/0,,20698656,00. html

    0|0
    0|0
  • It can be but when you look at it from a tax payers view, most capital crime cases are in the millions vs say if just throw him in jail for life. It is actually cheaper to just put them in jail vs the death penalty. Make him / her sit in jail and make their brains rot on what they did. I've been in jail a few times for minor things. It isn't fun... let alone saying a life time, it would eat away at my mind and really make one think about what they should of not done.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes, I do believe in the death penalty and eff that whole "never giving up on people and always give another chance" stuff. I would refuse to pay taxes to shelter, feed and put clothes on the backs of society's scum had I had the choice.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Undecided. I can see the benefits of both sides. I believe that the individual states should maintain the ability to decide for themselves whether or not they want to utilize it. Furthermore, I would add that unless we are personally willing to fire up the electric chair or do whatever it is executioners do, we should not support the death penalty otherwise it makes us hypocrites. If you feel that it is immoral for you to do it and/or that it is too painful and psychologically traumatizing, then why would you support a practice that is built off of others having to endure the same thing?

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yessssss I do.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Only if it saves money.

    It's sort of strange but not having the death penalty will place a huge burden on the children. Why? Because they will be the one paying for the prison system that keeps growing in size. Prison nation is what people are starting to call USA.

    They might want to fix the system fast and probably up the executions and clear out the prisons. It's a waste of money that serve little.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yes.
    You up set me once you're going to the tower no questions asked.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes, it's justified. Arguments against the death penalty aren't primarily that it's unjustified. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. It's in the Bible, people.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes for some cases like taking the lives of innocent people

    1|0
    0|0
  • Sure, but I doubt the government's ability to enforce it correctly.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yeah I do.
    Child murders, serial rapists, and people like bernie madoff

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes if someone commits murder, they deserve capital punishment

    1|0
    0|0
  • I can see why we want to 'feel' the need to have a ruling such as the death penalty and in some cases it strongly feels like its the right move.

    But I personally think we do not have the right to take someone's life away. We are equals and that is not for us to judge.

    We can only try to control the situation for life did not start because of us and it should also not end because of us.

    0|0
    0|0
  • No way: death penalty lowers us to the same level as the criminal.

    0|0
    0|0
  • i think it´s never ok cause who ever decides and executes becomes a murder. you can´t eliminate a murder without creating another murderer.

    0|0
    0|0
  • no, because you can't say crime xy is worth a human life. also, rotting for the rest of your life in prison is a bigger penalty in my opinion

    0|0
    0|0
  • No. I don't favour death penalty in any case

    0|0
    0|0
    • Not even in cases for child killers?

    • Show All
    • We can give hundreds of reasons. People who murder are mentally sick. We should try to cure them. Not kill them.

    • You can't help some people though. For example Psychopaths can never be helped nor can paedophiles. In my personal opinion, people like that don't deserve any help. They deserve the death penalty.

  • No I prefer imprisoning, enslavement or an eye-for-an-eye

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yes it's justified in many cases but it's also a much slower and more expensive legal process than putting someone in jail and if falsely convicted there's no going back. So it should only be used for the most severe cases like mass shooters or child rapists

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes it is

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes, but not many, and in a developed nation, the legal headache of having it on books, combined with the cost of pushing through a death sentence case vs. life imprisonment, combined with how rarely i'd actually want to see it used, means its not worth maintaining as a practice.

    0|0
    0|0

What Girls Said 12

  • Yes. Repeat violent offenders and child rapists/killers.

    2|0
    0|0
  • Yes. I do.

    But I don't really think it's a deterrent to crime, which is what the alleged intent of capital punishment is.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Vigilante justice costs the taxpayers nothing. And it usually does a pretty good job of getting the point across.

    The death penalty would be effective if those convicted and sentenced had one year to file an appeal and present irrefutable proof of innocence, but were executed exactly one year later. As it stands, some of them rot in prison for 35 years or more, costing the taxpayers millions. The system needs reform.

    0|0
    0|0
  • i don't think it's right but i guess it's necessary to scare people into being decent because jail sometimes isn't enough. it's a necessary evil although i'd never want to be involved with it

    1|0
    0|0
  • I don't believe in the death penalty and it's not for some moral reason. I just think it's far to humane. They get killed with little to no pain. Sitting in a jail cell getting ass raped and beat up shanked. Then to be killed.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Yes in certain cases

    1|0
    0|0
  • yep!

    1|0
    0|0
  • i don't think it's justified, "an eye for an eye would make the whole world blind" no one can be in charge of taking someones life, no matter what they did, its a principal of morals, also statistics show that countries with the death penalty don't have a decrease in crime, in actual fact they have more, so its not stopping crime either. Longer sentences... YES but death penalty no

    0|0
    0|0
  • No it is never justified.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Nope. None.

    0|0
    0|0
  • No. Too much judicial errors.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yes i do

    1|0
    0|0
Loading...