What are some reason why Death penalty must to be avoid?
156712
Mistake in the verdict leading to executing of an innocent person is the main argument of the oppostion to capital punishment.
606214
http://www.mcadp.org/LancetEditorial4_05.htm\n\nPersuading people to be against the death penalty
490858
It amazes me in America, a country built on the foundation of Christianity, that we condone state sanctioned murder.  No matter a person's belief, the only person who has the right to take a life is God, Allah or whatever you may call him or her.  \n\nIf we are talking about punishment, life in prison is no cakewalk it's severe punishment.  If we are talking about costs, it costs LESS to house an inmate in prison for life than to put him or her on death row.  The appeals process is so costly and the person remains on death row for so long, that it costs the tax payers more to kill someone than to send them to prison for life.  Often times, when an inmate is murdered via state sanction, they are not even the same person they were when the committed the crime.  You have folks being "put to death" 20 years after they committed the crime. So the state is then murdering someone who is no longer the person who committed the crime...umm the point of that is WHAT?  \n\nAnd finally, the death penalty does not deter crime.  Low life murders don't stop murdering because they know they can get the DP.  Crime rates don't decrease because of the DP.  And if you are going to get a low life off other streets and they are sitting in prison for 20 years before getting iced, then just let em rot in prison. I am just glad that I ain't the one who has to pull the switch. I would never be able to sleep at night.
147898
Abolish it entirely.  Our justice system is not infalible.  There have been multiple people sentanced to death and exhonorated post-mortem.  That's enough reason for me.  Besides which the death penalty is motivated by revenge, not justice.  An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
1181605
Actually if you do some research you'll find that an average more money is spent on a prisoner on death row.  Appeals, lengthy stay on death row, etc adds up also.  The death penalty is not only wrong its wasting taxpayers money!  But what is the Gov. doing thats right these days anyways?
956193
Many states have the death penalty. The problem is the sentences aren't carried out enough.
555669
The basic laws of the country are breaking down and that is the problem..  The police can't get tough because they get sued.  It is just too much.  People on death row for 10 years.  They can't decide in 10 years if they are guilty or not.  The whole system is just in a state of non functioning.
240856
Yes, there is so much lobbying for human rights in this country that people who need to be locked up are set free, or given very light sentences.  Longer/more severe sentences would not only keep them off the streets longer, but they would make people more afraid of commiting the crime.  This is why the death penalty works, it scares people.
605331
state some facts like the amount of innocent people put to death. the biases that the courts have in handing out death sentences(race, etc...)Playing god. morality of it\nI feel its done to save money. ...easier to kill someone than to pay to keep them in jail the rest of their lives.
191239
The Criminal Justice System is designed to prevent such crimes by providing stiff penalties for those who commit them. The penalties, among other things act as a deterant for those people who would otherwise commit the crime. Other than that, no steps are taken to prevent the specific crime you are asking about.
998689
An offence is punishable for two reasons. First to render justice to the victim and secondly, to prevent the criminal  and other potential criminals from such offences against society in future Some offences like murder can not be controlled unless the killer faces the fear of capital punishment. Capital punishment does give justice when the utmost care has been taken by the jJdge and is awarded in the rarest of the rare cases.\nConfusion Master
742733
Well, the only thing I can say about it is that it keeps the murderer from committing another murder.\nThe bad thing is that innocent people get convicted.  Not very good when an innocent person is executed.
41734
I have gone both ways on different occasions, but I think I am ultimately against it.  I don't think it is a deterrent, like if a person has the mindset necessary for committing murder, they aren't thinking of the consequences and will commit murder anyway.  Also, many people get wrongly convicted and I shudder to think how many of them were sentenced to death.
126107
In the state of Texas, we execute more people than any other state of the union but even in Texas, the death penalty is hotly debated.  Not all states in the US have the death penalty but those that do have the same issues with it as here in Texas.\n\nLet’s start with a few of them… Firstly, the original reason for the death penalty was it was suppose to be a deterrent for crime.  It’s still touted as such in the states that do have the death penalty.  But, if you look at the statistics in the states that do have it you will see that it is not a deterrent at all.  Crime rates have not drastically dropped since its implementation.  If it were the state of Texas would be the state in the union that has the lowest violent crime rate, it doesn’t.  The only deterrent effect it has is that the person that is put to death will never again break the law.  That doesn’t drop the crime rate or make us any safer.  The realism is most criminals think they will never get caught, that they are too smart.  When criminals are doing whatever they are doing that is going to send them to death row they are not even considering the death penalty while they are performing the crime.  So that throws out the argument of being a deterrent and lowering crime rates.   \n\nSecondly, it was also suppose to lower costs of prisons.  If you execute the criminals they aren’t going to cost as much to feed, house or be taken care of.  Like the crime rate argument, this one is false as well.  In all actuality it takes more money to execute someone then to house them for life.  That has to do with the legal system and the appeals process.  Most of those on death row have court appointed lawyers because they can’t afford to hire one.  So the tax payers of the state end up footing the bill for not only the prosecution and housing the prisoner they end up paying for his legal defense as well.  In Texas, it costs almost three times more to execute someone then it does to house them in the highest security level for life (stats come from www.deathpenaltyinfo.org).  So how is that fulfilling the promise of lower costs?\n\nThirdly, it is considered retribution.  Unlike life imprisonment, where someone can lead a fairly normal life and have some luxuries, the death penalty does not allow that.  For some that are pro-death penalty that is acceptable because it is a true punishment for a crime, not a chance to rehabilitate the criminal.  With varying degrees people do agree with this, citing the ‘eye for an eye’ quote as back up for it.  But others feel that the states don’t have to right to impose retribution on an individual, that as ‘man’ we don’t have that right to take another life.  A lot of the belief systems that argue both for and against this have to do with religious principles.  But should states have that ability and be able to enforce death when they bluntly always say the state is not there to give retribution?  Isn’t death the utmost in retribution rather than punishment?\n\nFourthly, there is recidivism.  That is that some criminals repeat, repeat and repeat crimes no matter how many time they are sent to jail.  This is true.  There is a certain class of criminals that do repeat their crimes over and over, each time getting worse.  There seems to be nothing that can be done with these people that will work to rehabilitate and reform them.  Repeat offenders do seem to dominate the criminal justice system and are a big chunk of those that are incarcerated.  From the people that oppose the death penalty they say that drugs are a large part of this population, that is true, and sometimes it takes many rehabs to work but in the end it will, eventually.  They also say that the three strikes laws (generally this means after 3 felonies the offender is usually put in prison for life or a very extended stay and are unlikely to get out, although each state has it’s own version of this).  Also, for some criminals, life in prison with no p
477708
Because the harm from an attempted crime is less than for an actual crime. Also, it is not usually the case that someone tries to shoot someone and misses, but that they shoot someone and the person does not die. If that person meant to kill the other person, they should get a harsher punishment than they would for simply shooting someone.
43087
According to the figures on the source site, death penalty states have higher murder rates. So it doesn't seem to be much of a deterrent.
831669
i've done this before too. alright. the death penalty is bad for many reasons.\n\none. the death penalty is cruel and unusual. the death penalty lowers us down to murderer status. we are murdering a person that could very well be kept alive, and that very person could be kept in life imprisonment. sure, they couuld break out, but the chances are so slim, we have to say that it's worth it. we as america keep ourselves to be a very humane country, and when we kill people, we really aren't keeping that title. when people die on the chair, they sometimes have to be electrocuted multiple times before they die. i'm sure the criminals deserve it, but by doing this, we're doing the same. especiall cause the viable alternative, the life sentence, is a lot better and a lot more humane, yet still causes punishment.\n\nsecond, you could say that the death penalty serves as a deterrent, or it serves to make sure that other criminals WONT kill. HOWEVER, studies show that the death penalty actually RAISES the rate of violent crime in states. that's true-- the death penalty DOES increase the rate of murder-- it's a proven fact. \n\nthird, people say that the death penalty is good for the victim's family. however, why make the family suffer time and time again through endless trials? we are only fueling anger by killing people, because they have to be reminded of the murder trial again and again, throughout 20 years of trials.\n\nfourth, the death penalty from a religious standpoint. if you're religious. jesus said not to kill. the "eye for an eye" thing in the old testament was overrules by jesus's teachings. and he said to turn the other cheek, not to kill again. sure, we should say "hey murderer, kill another!" but we should certainly not kill them back.\n\nthanks, and i hope i was helpful.