Is capital punishment ever justified?

As with criminals and such, is it ever right to perform it? Especially on those convicted of heinous crimes (terrorism, treason, etc.)?

0|2
327

Most Helpful Girl

  • I believe capital punishment is justified when it's absolutely certain someone has
    -murdered another living being that isn't culturally eaten (let it be a dog, a cat, or a human)
    -raped another human being (let it be a child or an adult)

    Those are the only two reasons I can think of right now.

    0|2
    0|0

Most Helpful Guy

  • Why I'm against death penalty.
    - It's very serious consequences with capital punishment. If a person who's innocent gets the wrong judgement and everybody believing they're guilty, then they may get executed and you can't resurrect a death person.

    - Learning a person that killing is wrong and then killing them are very ironically and ridiculous. If you're going to prove people something is wrong, doing the same mistake as the wrongdoer won't work. Then it's double communication.

    - Another thing is that some inmates prefer to die instead of being locked in their cells and feel the boredom. Giving them help to die if they doesn't manage suicide would just let them get away from the boredom. If you're death, you don't need to worry about getting bored later.

    0|1
    0|0

Recommended Questions

Loading...

Have an opinion?

What Girls Said 2

  • Yes for people that have been proven guilty for a evil crime instead of accused guilty. Some people had this done to them and they weren't actually guilty that's why they should be proven

    0|2
    0|0
    • But wrong conviction would still happen. The evidences aren't always error free. Complication do occur sometimes.

  • Not in my opinion.

    0|3
    0|3
    • So no pedophiles

    • Show All
    • The Bible hates gays but okay

    • @ItsAMeWeirdo Actually, it real doesn't. Pretty much all the clobber passages people quote are taken out of context and don't mean what anti-gay people thinks they mean. And lesbianism is nowhere mentioned by ANY stretch. Be that as it may, Christ certainly didn't advocate any abusive behavior, or killing, ever, for any reason.

What Guys Said 26

  • In (summarized) words of my professor who is also a criminal prosecutor.

    "I can never accept a case with a pedophile, because I would be biased. From my knowledge and years of experience, these people are sick in the head. I don't ever believe a single word that comes out of their mouth."

    I'd say capital punishment is justified in this case.

    0|2
    0|1
  • Yes. The purpose of justice is to restore the victim and punish the crime. If the victim is dead the only thing left is to punish the criminal (and maybe attempt to restore the family). Punishments must also fit the crime so if the damage is un-repairable their must be a just, irretrievable punishment.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Molesting children is the worst crime of all in my eyes, no contest. Molesters should be executed in public and in a particularly gruesome manner, prolonged and agonising.
    Murder isn't always black and white and doesn't always warrant death as punishment in my opinion

    0|1
    0|0
  • I think capital punishment should be reserved for those who took another persons life without having any remorse. I think other crimes them prisoners should be
    rehabilitated and than given a trial basis to make a new life , they should have
    job training programs where former prisoners actually get paid.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Duh. . . what if some sick pervert killed all your kids just to prove how sick he is? Locking people up in a cage and drowning them, just because they are the wrong sect? I'm all for that instant karma if the situation screams for it. It really is a GREAT deterant. . . at least for the offender who gets executed! It's a fake news fact that 99% of them don't repeat the offence.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Yes, in the case of murder, kidnapping, rape or conspiracy to commit any of the above or perjury in all of the above (e. g. lying at a murder trial or false rape accusation).

    0|1
    0|0
  • Yes, capital punishment is justified because if you don't make an example out of the one's who do wrong crimes will increase day by day.
    Bottom line fear is also required for order.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Never, even in murder. No crime can be proven 100% so an innocent man could be killed. Just watch Prison Break.

    0|1
    0|0
  • For serial killers, child molesters and terrorists? Absolutely.

    0|3
    0|1
  • yes, why should the people who commit the most heinous crimes imaginable be allowed to live out their lives in relative comfort while we pay the bill

    0|2
    0|0
  • I used to be in favor of it.

    But now, I realize that the System and its minions don't care about the truth, or actual justice. They care about getting an arrest, or getting another conviction in their "WINS" column. They'll gladly put the wrong person away, just as long as they can show the ignorant, stupid public that they're 'tough on crime'. And juries are just as bad. They're the most ignorant and stupid of the lot. As stupid as the public is, juries make the average person look intelligent. There's a reason for that bit about "a jury is composed to twelve people that aren't smart enough to be able to figure out how to get out of jury duty".

    Far too many innocent men have gone to prison for me to be in favor of capital punishment any longer.

    0|1
    0|0
  • I believe that humans shouldn't be in the business of judgement when it comes to the law, because you can't see into someone's heart and know their intent, our goal should be to protect society and prevent future crime. So if someone can be safely prevented from hurting society without killing them I think morally we are obligated to take that option. I think if we were to have the death penalty, lethal injection is probably the most inhumane way to kill someone, and I honestly would be more comfortable with a guillotine or firing squad or even hanging as an alternative.

    That said, you could argue that killing/torturing people is a lot more effective (and possibly humane) method of preventing future crime than putting them in prison.

    0|1
    0|0
  • I would say that it is though they must be proven guilty

    0|1
    0|0
  • lifetime imprisonment is much more painful as you see the person slowly begging to be killed rather than waste his life

    0|1
    0|0
  • First, we need to recognize that war and crime are different. War is the absence of law or a conflict between legal systems. Therefore, criminal justice does not operate in the context of war. The obligation of a government in a war is to do whatever is necessary to win the war as fast as possible and with the least injury on its side, in order to fulfil its underlying purpose to protect the rights of its citizens. Islamic terrorists are not lone operators. The fact is that several Islamic states, chiefly Iran and Saudi Arabia, are at war against the rest of us. We need to crush them and the terrorists whom they sponsor. This will inevitably involve a lot of killing.

    As for criminal justice, a murderer has forfeited his right to life. But, that doesn't necessarily mean that the judicial system should be granted the power to kill. One concern is people who are falsely convicted. Another concern is whether other punishments would be just as good as deterrents.

    0|1
    0|0
  • punishment works till a point

    when the mother slaps her daughter because she broke a window on purpose you reached this point.

    when she reduces her pocket money for a while because her daughter broke a window on purpose it works.

    sadly most people and countries in the world, especially the usa, works with number 1.

    when you stolen something you have to give it back + maybe some money for the time you wasted to others.
    when you raped someone there is no point in taking 50000€/$ from you just as punishment. this is a slap in your face and doesn't help.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Only if the person has ended another person's life.

    0|1
    0|0
  • No, it is not.

    0|2
    0|1
  • I'd say yes.

    0|1
    0|0
    • while my methods for measuring it's appropriateness May differ from others.
      there are some times where a person or organization has performed or planned an act so heinous that it is better for the world to not have the possibility of having them repeat it again... now, for the fun part. the only way to learn from a thing is for it to have been experienced and regretted. you don't have to have been the one to perform it, but the fact that it was either done, or considered allows a logical human to consider the action and its outcome logically and decide to not do or repeat the action. as they say, rules are written in blood.

    • if the perpetrator did actually learn from the actions and regrets and will not repeat those actions, then it is better to have them around to preach the error of performing those actions. if there is no immediate regret whatsoever and they are willing to perform a similar act in the future, then they should be removed from society and the gene pool. the reasoning is important too. not all murderers and so forth should just be put to death. if there is a logical reasoning for it, or if by performing those actions they prevented an even greater, more insidious outcome, then they should be considered in a different light, up to being lauded for their actions.

  • No, it's not.

    0|1
    0|0
  • bible rules
    brings closure

    0|1
    0|1
  • Yes.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Yeah

    0|1
    0|0
  • Yes.

    0|1
    0|0
  • Obama supports it so maybe

    0|1
    0|0
  • No. Its just the govt playing death squad.

    0|1
    0|0

Recommended myTakes

Loading...