Are you for or against the death penalty?

Question

Naydyonov · Accepted Answer

I will say, I am pro-life. I also support the death penalty.

There are certain people, let's say serial killers as an example, who have denied others of life. Why should the life of the killed be valued less than that of the killer? — As in, the killer was allowed to kill his victims, but society cannot take retribution on him. If a man has killed multiple people, what's to say he won't again when released? Releasing him is a huge risk to the lives of other innocent people.
A killer has taken his own life and made it worthless. They've made themselves burdens on society: a mine waiting for a foot to step on it.

So my stance is the following:
All life is valuable, but however much you fuck with innocent people, so too should you be fucked.
In my view, the death penalty should be used sparingly and only in cases of overwhelming evidence, approved by a jury.
The alternative is to have a killer or rapist sit in prison 50 years until they die for crimes committed against individuals in society, leaching off society's taxpayers who pay for the killer/rapist's food, medical, housing, so on.
So now, not only has this person inflicted great harm on specific individuals in society, to a lesser, but still impactful level, harm on the victims' friends, families, acquaintances, but they now should economically harm society too?

The average cost per year of an inmate in US prison in 2015 was $33,274.
The cost of a prisoner serving a life sentence (25 years) is $831,850!! It's a cost with no benefit. Now, I'm a small-government type of guy, but I'd support redirecting $33,274 per year on healthcare, childcare, infrastructure, national defense, foreign aid, any day over spending this money to confine & support humans who have done unhuman acts.

People are all born innocent, even psychopaths. All their lives are valuable. It is their actions which determine how valuable they are as people.
People born with mental disabilities are burdens to society, but they had no choice in the matter. Criminals choose to take actions which make them burdens to society. This is the difference.
Helping a welfare-abuser become self-sufficient is to reach out one's hand to pick up a person who jumped on ice. Helping a person incapable of acting humanely is to reach out one's hand to help a person get up off the ground ignoring the knife directed at you in their second hand.

NYCQuestions1976 · Accepted Answer

I only support the death penalty (when applicable) if there is indisputable DNA evidence and/or media (picture, video) evidence. Otherwise it's life in prison. You can't risk executing an innocent person.

I'm perfectly fine with people being against the death penalty as long as they don't use the "You're not God." argument. I'm not claiming to be God if I support the death penalty in a certain circumstance. I'm just trying to get the person to God faster.

Brainsbeforebeauty · Accepted Answer

I'm for the death penalty... I believe part of the reason crime has gotten to the point it has is because too many times we mollycoddle criminals instead of punishing them for their crimes.
Criminals rights have become more important than victims rights.. But if you murder someone in cold blood or torture someone to death or brutally rape and murder someone, what rights should you have/deserve at that point🤷

Lori11 · Accepted Answer

I believe some people can recover and be part of the society again, that's for minor crimes. For heavier crimes, I think it would be better to put them to work so they are useful. Death penalty sounded good to me because victims can "let go" and try to move on, but, what since the system isn't perfect, imagine all the innocent people being killed for something they didn't do.

OlderAndWiser · Answer

I have witnessed an execution. I am not opposed to the death penalty but I do have some reservations.

BazookaTrouper · Answer

I completely agree with the spirit of the death penalty, though my support for it wavered when it comes to it's application. For example Oklahoma has the death penalty, but the district attorney gave someone who committed familicide (Robert Bever) a plea deal where the death penalty would be taken off the table in exchange for life in prison. He took the deal, and now is trying to commit suicide in prison after experiencing years of prison rape.

The problem there is if someone was falsely convicted of a crime, they can be blackmailed into accepting a bad plea deal with the alternative being execution. If that execution takes place, and it turns out later that the person was innocent, then an innocent person can't be brought back.

In the UK there was a government inquiry in 1953 where the Conservative government outright lied claiming that Timothy Evans wasn't wrongfully executed for killing Geraldine Evans. When that government was out of power, it was discovered they covered up the truth in order to prevent the death penalty from being phased out.

But I'm still in favor of the idea of the death penalty. By getting rid of people such as Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Anders Behring Breivik, and Dylann Roof we would be just getting rid of a problem. I'm not one of those bleeding heart libtards who say "that's barbaric! Dylann Roof MIGHT change his mind one day!". But the government's track record of executing innocent people out of corruption or greed makes the institution behind the death penalty unreliable.

Dennisjf12 · Answer

NO, our prisons are already overcrowded. Too many people are getting out doing the same thing they did before. These people don't care about killing a cop, a young woman, or a child. Or killing people in a robbery, they don't care about the life of another person & think nothing about killing him or her. And it's not just the people that kill during a crime. What about the people held hostage then killed because you had seen too much or did not get the money they wanted, or the people who sell drugs and the users are killed, the rape that goes too far. A person that kills often starts killing small animals. What about the parents who see this and think it's a phase and will grow out of it, or the parents who don't care, their child that killed at age 16 or younger? This is not the child's fault, it's the parent's fault, and they need to be put in jail too. We need to build more prisons, but where? Do you want a prison in your neighborhood? no one does. The companies that refuse to mix the shot to put that person to death, they never see what that person has done to all the people he killed. Why would anyone feel sorry for how a person who is put to death. When you look at all the people he killed and how he did it? If you do, you need to be shown what he did and how he did it.

VanillaSalt · Answer

I always say the only solution for Rapists murderers and child molesters is a bullet cheap quick effective and it’s a hell of a statement the more public you make it bigger the statement.

That being said I only believe in such things when there’s evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that this happened not for some stupid kid that hit a child because he was driving drunk or and accused rapist where there’s the consideration of consensual sex being turned around… A pedo bear is a pedo bear you touch a child you deserve to be castrated shot shot again and shot a third time children are the greatest gift we have there is absolutely no excuse for doing anything that may harm a child hell I’d almost argue that negligence is a good enough reason to shoot for is it hard to child

Shizunk · Answer

In general I disagree with the way prisons and punishment seem to work. But I certainly see no benefit in killing people. From what I heard it doesn't even save much money. And the additional discouragememt of crime is questionable.
Maybe I am influenced by how often the media talk about people who take their own life after commiting a crime as an easy way out.
Whether you want to punish or heal the criminal, or both, I don't see killing them as doing anyone a favor.
And I also even a slim possibility that someone may be killed despite being innocent is pretty scary.

Anonymous · Answer

If it's proven beyond reasonable doubt that the person is guilty then, yes, execution should be used. Everyone on here (mostly girls) keeps stating how there's so many people wrongfully convicted. The solution to that is to reserve capital punishment for the worst crimes and only when guilt can be proven. Plus, in terms of capital punishment, it doesn't happen as much as you'd think. Look at the list of those who have died by capital punishment so far, within the last few years. Most of those on the list were proven to be guilty of horrific crimes like mass murder, serial killing, violent rape etc.

People are so soft these days. Why wouldn't we execute those who are incredibly violent and irredeemable?

TheorionMage · Answer

If someone is convicted of some behavior SO heinous and antisocial as to WARRANT high security LIFETIME incarceration, WHY burden the law-abiding taxpayers typically $65.000 yr per felon, to lodge their 'no parole' worthless ass in a high security penitentiary? Perhaps even harvest their usable organs in partial reparations to the society they abused~

When an attractive pet becomes incurably dangerously ''rabid' we DON'T allocate resources to lodge it as a potential risk to others, for the remainder of its lifetime!
We humanely EUTHANIZE it!
THAT is the 'price' of ethical society.

Novacane · Answer

I am against it unless it's like mass murder, that is the only time that I will ever be for it. But besides that, I think that the death penalty should never be an option for crimes. There have been times when people have serves numerous years of jail time and were later found innocent, what happens if they would've gotten the death penalty? It's like they say there are 3 sides to every story your side their side and the truth so who knows whenever we get the truth unless a lot of investigation has occurred but even then so many people have been left as criminals when they didn't commit the crime. There are crimes people do that are just awful but that doesn't mean we should just result in killing them, it's inhumane, we would only be reducing ourselves to the likes of them.

Agape93 · Answer

All for it. Some people can't be rehabilitated and some shouldn't be given that chance. Plus who wants to be the one to tell a rape victim that they should be happy to pay for their rapist to live for the remainder of their sentence, which may or may not be for life. I mean how fucked up is that?

Outofthegrey · Answer

I'm of the opinion that if you stick your dick in a baby you should be executed.

There are no counterarguments about mistakes and second chances that deter me from my conviction that some people prove they are a greater danger to society and the innocent than their life is worth.

The_Shadow_Dweller · Answer

Death penalty just means a swift death.
If a person has got death penalty, he/she must have done crime of that magnitude.
For a death penalty, my take is to have such a death tool in which the guilty would be begging to just kill them. A swift death would be doing them a favor here.
I am for it.

Aerissa_Jade · Answer

I am for it, but only if DNA evidence is involved to prove it was really them. Many of the wrongly put to death people were before DNA was involved.

If that is not involved, life in prison. The problem with life in prison though is that many people with life, still get out. If anyone wants to get rid of the death penalty they need to fix the problem where life in prison doesn't actually mean that.

Diodoro · Answer

In very specific circumstances where we know someone murdered another. 100% without a shadow of a doubt that it was him and 100% without a shadow of a doubt that it was murder.

If you have to work to determine either of those two things then in my mind death penalty is off the table. We have enough technology now to be able to know and in cases we do I believe in death penalty

The_Maphio · Answer

There are rules for detention in case of any and all types of crimes. But when somebody does something REALLY fucked up, and is also proud of it, off with'em. Those can't be redeemed, and thinking otherwise would mean that sooner or later a psychopath with homicidal tendencies is going to roam the streets again.

CuriousJC · Answer

I hate my life so much that sometimes I prefer I that I want to die. It doesn't make sense to go to prison, and eventually one of the inmates tries to kill you when you're not looking especially when they treat you like a their own personal slave owner. I rather take the death penalty than spend 25 to life in prison.

spartan55 · Answer

I'm conflicted on it. There are definitely people who have no business walking this earth, and should face the death penalty. However, there have been quite a few inmates who were on death row, and were eventually found innocent. I know our justice system isn't perfect, but I don't know the solution.

Ms_Vanderquack · Answer

There are way too many fucking people on the planet. We should absolutely start offing the ones who aren’t worth sharing space with. Pedophiles, rapists, human traffickers, shit like that.

DizzyDesii · Answer

Im not for it. It is what it is but i personally dont want to be the one responsible for ordering someones death. I agree that people deserve jail time and physical punishment like a good ass whoopin but i dont want to be the one saying they deserve death

MCheetah · Answer

100% for it. The world is overpopulated as it is and we don't need taxpayer money going to pedos and rapists in a prison. That can be for the burglars and bank robbers and what not, but some people deserve to die.

SlightlyEccentric · Answer

I support it but fully acknowledge it is a dangerous sentence that needs to be given with 100% conviction. Meaning, if there is doubt about the guilt of the condemned, then it should be withheld. If the guilt is airtight on the condemned, then yes absolutely do it.

zagor · Answer

On the one hand, there have been a number of people wrongly convicted and even executed. And many prosecutors are assholes who think their job is to seek the maximum penalty regardless of circumstances.

On the other hand, no one misses Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, ...

CountessSarah · Answer

It is not the place of the state to decide who lives and who dies.
And if even one innocent person is executed, then the whole system is abhorrent. (Which has happened before.)
A jail sentence is fine. Murdering people is unnecessarily cruel.

Sonorous · Answer

I'm for it under many extreme circumstances. Because the world would undoubtedly be better off without certain people in it. But we must make sure the person is truly responsible for the malevolent acts.

Flower7 · Answer

I’m against it. No human being should have the right to take another person’s life. The only exception might be self-defense, when a person is in immediate danger. But not when it’s planned out and pre-meditated like in an execution.

TommyMountainFigure · Answer

I am for it only on certain circumstances. The problem is there are too many grey areas. I'd like t see convicted terrorists buried alive in unmarked ground. Again though, can't always be 100% certain guilt is correctly placed.

Celtero · Answer

Literally the only argument against it is "what if we got the wrong person." But often that isn't even a question.  Why should we spare people death when they inflict in on others in cold blood?

Kaneki05 · Answer

For it longs if the crime can be 100% proven without any doubt. Guy caught literally shooting someone on CTV for example. Without this proof it would just be killing innocent people no doubt.

Kingofkings1992 · Answer

I’m against it. While I don’t believe murderers should be given leniency, I can’t agree with killing them. Many people who are charged end up being exonerated later on. Once you kill someone, there’s no undoing it. Even if they are guilty, killing them gives them the easy way out. A lot of them wouldn’t even mind being put to death. Let their ass rot in prison, and think about what they’ve done.

Oigit · Answer

I am for it and I think there is one crime that should very much make a person eligible for it. Child molestation should very much make people eligible for the death penalty.

Dargil · Answer

It should be carefully applied. Aggravated first degree murder combined with forceable rape: The needle please.

HighValue · Answer

I am for it, but only if there was video and audio evidence of the crime so it is actually proven. I am totally against it for circumstantial "evidence" or just going by what a "witness" said.

dustybiker · Answer

I’m for it in cases with irrefutable proof.  I’d still want it in others, but want doesn’t justify mistaken identity.

Deathraider · Answer

Against. It causes nothing, but needless suffering. Should we not try to use every opportunity to rehabilitate them to make them useful members of society? Or if it were impossible, to try to keep the public safe whilst minimizing the necessary suffering by keeping them in jail with humane conditions? After all, what should the main priority of our prisons be? To cause the criminal harm or to keep public safe?

Everyone, even the accused have basic human rights that we should respect.

Heartache0405 · Answer

I’m against it because false accusations happen and innocent people would be put to death.

AndrewMG · Answer

No unlike real life where a person can make a mistake and learn from it if the justice system makes a mistake and the death penalty is in place there's no going back.

Trish25 · Answer

Death is better than living with the guilt, so I'm not a big fan, some people just dont deserve such easy way from horrors they have done to others...

Daniela1982 · Answer

I'm for as some scum sucking maggots deserve to exit this life because of the things they do to other people.

LiLaLydia · Answer

I'm against it. I don't believe that you can say crime xy is worth somebody's life. Also I think that being forever in jail can be a harder punishment than ready escape through death

NetSapien · Answer

I've always been against any 'group' deliberation which reaches a conclusion to end the life of another. This includes the death penalty.

Static_In_The_Attic · Answer

I’m for it if the person is 100% Guilty & I mean 100% Guilty & there has to be a lot of evidence to back it up & not just he said she said bullshit.

Likes2drive · Answer

Not exactly for it because what if they were innocent, the justice system isn’t all that good or correct

animesenpai · Answer

I am all for it some people can't be saved or rehabilitated but there needs to be a rock solid case and extensive mental health work to back it up.

But if the death penalty is legal so should medically assisted suicide

Hispanic-Cool-Guy · Answer

100% for it. Some people crimes are warranted of death quickly.

Lyndsielee666 · Answer

Against it. So many people have been wrongly convicted and the system keeps failing.

ChrisMaster69 · Answer

i wonder how many are happy with the fact someone carrying out taking of the convicted persons life would themselves be a murderer. just using something that pops up on questions about taking lives.

FTnWo · Answer

I think people get caught for molesting a child should be handed over to the parents in hand cuff and if they can't do it air that shit over tv

NewHopeGirl · Answer

Only if the crimes was so hinus that they can't be reformed.

douride2 · Answer

With what @brainsbeforebeauty said what else can I say but yes I'm for it.

TheUniqueOne96 · Answer

For it, especially for people rape, murder, things like that etc.

RebeccaBI2000 · Answer

I am for it. I just can’t believe how expensive it is to keep a person on death row and then the Execution costs just about the same if not more

Stoner710 · Answer

I’m for it in the case of rape child molestation and first degree murder

Anonymous · Answer

I would never trust the government or courts with that kind of power. They make mistakes too damn often.

Whatthefluff · Answer

No. Let's decrease prison populations by addressing the root of the issue.

Sketti2021 · Answer

I feel it's the easy way out but also less expensive to get rid of them.

najekim · Answer

For horrific crimes, absolutely! But what needs to change is reducing the carrying out the punishment to months afterwards, not years or decades.

007kingifrit · Answer

its the right thing to do. especially for repeat offenders or truly horrific crimes.

its also good for us emotionally. it toughens us up to condemn someone to death. otherwise we become frail and emotionally weak.

G5TWA1 · Answer

no, I don't trust anyone with that kind of power they will definitely fuck up, but even if didn't I don't think the court system should decide who lives and who dies

TeacherUser · Answer

I'm against it. Many people have lost their lives because of false accusations and people who sentenced people just because they could.

Seangreen · Answer

It needs to be reserved for tve most heinous crimes and without a reasonable doubt that they did it

Snakeyes7 · Answer

Against. If you killed a convict, then there will be nothing to save him if evidence eventually came out proving his innocence.

Are you for or against the death penalty?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said