how can a civilised person support capital punishment?
340500
you don't. Why should you support the free killing of someone, eventhough they killed someone. Two wrongs don't make a right.
606214
http://www.mcadp.org/LancetEditorial4_05.htm\n\nPersuading people to be against the death penalty
208658
The premise that capital punishment offers is all good, however the realities are far removed.  As part of my BA in Law and Criminology we covered a module on the death penalty in the U.S. Several facts about the death penalty and it's application are worrying.\n\nFirstly state representation in death penalty cases are usually substandard (Bright 1994).  As a result the mainly poor, black defendents are required to fight a case put together with the full resources of the state with as little as $3000 to fund their case (Paduano and Smith 1991).  The amount of funding required to fund a full defence is, at the most conservative $100,000, rising to £1,700,000 if you take less conservative estimations (Paduano and Smith 1991).\n\nThere is discrimination in the way that the death penalty is applied to ethnic minorities, with the most likely person to be facing the death penalty a indigent black person who has killed a white victim.\n\nThe cost of inflicting death on a person, when considering the costs of appeals, habeous corpus review and other elements of the case means that it is often cheaper to sentence an offender to life without the possibility of parole.\n\nThere is even research to suggest that rather than deter possible offenders the influence of an execution is the opposite, this is termed 'brutalization'.  Basically when the state executes somebody, the state devalues human life which can lead to other people following the example of the state in so much that for wrongs done against them they see the use of deadly violence as legitimate.\n\nOther objections are to do with the use of a paraletic agent in lethal injection so that the condemned is not able to show any pain and therefore any violation of his constitutional right to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment cannot be seen.\n\nI also take issue with the irreversability of the death penalty, there have been many incidents of innocent people being put to death, so many infact the Illinois Governor George Ryan has put a moratorium on any exectutions in his state.\n\nPublic opinion is a tricky one.  Some poles show that people are in favour of the death penalty and some not.  This depends on the framing of the question, support for the death penalty greatly reduces when the option of life without parole is included.  In order to abolish the death penalty the federal state needs to lead from the front, once the abolition is in place then public opinion will fall into place as has happened in the UK and western europe.\n\nAs you can probably tell I am against the death penalty, mainly for the above reasons but also because no civilized society should have the need to put people to death, especially people under 18 (although the supreme court did ban this a couple of years ago, at last) and mentally under developed people who cannot understand what they are about to recieve (this is also unconstitutional, but still occcurs).\n\nThe sources below are only a brief list, however the Sarat book just below this is quite excellent and will open your eyes, a must read!\n\nFor more information see the excellent book by Austin Sarat,\n(2001) "When The State Kills: Capital Punishment and the American Condition" Princeton: Princeton University Press, and to find out the experiences of a lawyer working in capital cases see Scott Turow (2003) Ultimate Punishment: A Lawyers Reflections on Dealing with the Death Penalty New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux\n\nIm just going to leave you with this to think about, as Ghandi said An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind, enough said really
377317
Technically it still does for treason!\n\nThis is so easy a subject to generalise about and so difficult to be case-by-case specific.\n\nIt does seem illogical to keep someone in prison until they die but it also seems illogical to do it as a deterrent for other people (isn't that killing someone for someone else's crime they have yet to commit).\n\nI have to be honest and say that I have heard of cases where I would have no problem if the person was executed but the line is very difficult to specify.\n\nMaybe not having it is an honour we should hold up rather than a burden to bear.\n\nPeace out.
447758
The only people who can legally kill people are the state. That is how conservatives see it. A medical doctor cannot make a decision on life and death. \n\nI do consider myself a consevative however I believe it to be hypocrytical of christians who are against abortion and euthanasia but for the death penalty. Makes no sense at all.
1152773
No, I do not.\n\nIf we had capitol punishment here in Britain we might already have executed a few people who were acquitted several years later.\nAlso, why is it assumed that capitol punishment is worse than life imprisonment (and I mean life). Some prisoners commit suicide in prison.\n\nAnother problem with capitol punishment is that the condemmed person's family probably suffer as much as they do.\n\nLeaving aside the religious arguament that "though shalt not kill)\nI do this, not because I do not believe in it, but because you could go on writing for ever about the morality of it.\n\nYou have to remember also, that the state is carrying out executions in cold blood. The murderer may have had some reason for doing what he did, no matter how twisted. Also, on a personal level, what does it say about the person/persons who are prepared to kill other people as part of their job, and no, it is not the same as the military doing it.\nPlease don't give me the response, "It's my duty" or, "somebody has to do it. You are operating on a personal level when you are doing a job.\n\nI find it particularly distasteful, when executions are turned into circuses, as in th US. If you have to execute people, I am sure that the state can be trusted to do the job without about two hundred and fifty Madam la Farges' looking on. At least the person should be allowed to die with some sort of dignity. Whist I am on this subject, let me also say that I am disgusted and appalled that some women seem have been directly involved in carrying out executions. Particularly because women tend to personalise things more than men. I have to wonder what their real motivation is, because it is nearly always men that are executed. Please don't give me "it's only a job" or equal opportunities stuff.\n\nFinally, I would like to set a little test for those who, from afar, think that they believe in capitol punishment.\nWould you be personally prepared to carry it out? Would you still believe in it if it was a member of your own family. Would you be prepared to carry it out yourself in those circumstances.It's easy letting someone else carry it out, particularly when you don't know the condemmed.\n\nThere aren't any good reasons for capitol punishment, except that it saves the cost of keeping the prisoner in jail.\n\nFinally, I am not a soppy liberal, I think that life should mean life.
48640
The real answer is very simple; it's because supporting the death penalty wins votes.\n\nMost active voters support the death penalty.  A politician that also supports the death penalty has an easier time getting those votes than one who doesn't.  More importantly, the US has a block of voters who consider themselves "conservatives" and who overwhelmingly support the death penalty.  A politician who opposes the death penalty will have a great deal of trouble winning his or her primary election.  Since the conservative voters are the majority of active voters in so many states, you almost always end up with at least one candidate in each final election that supports the death penalty.  And if the "liberal" candidate wants any chance of winning the final election, that candidate must take at least some conservitive positions.  \n\nBeing in favor of the death penalty is a reasonable choice for liberal politicians in conservative states, because it wins badly needed support from some conservative voters and mostly alienates those liberal voters who would never vote for the conservative opponent anyway.  This is a bit of an oversimplification, and liberal politicians at this level are skilled enough to roll death penalty support into a "tough on crime" stance so even if they alienate some of there liberal base with the death penalty support, they salvage that somewhat because even liberal voters generally like to hear that a candidate is tough on crime.\n\nThe dynamics change in the states where the liberals make up the majority.  In these states, liberal politicans have less need to support conservative causes, and the best chance a conservative candidate has to win the final election is to appear as moderate as possible.  \n\nThat's why of the 12 states without the death penalty, only 4 are "Red" states (voting for Bush in 2004) while 8 are "Blue" states (voting for Kerry).
816986
not quite the same thing really....although i am in favour of eutahnasia which should be strictly controlled and not  used as an excuse to get rid of people that we feel as a society are no longer able to contribute to our society..i,,m not in favour of the death penalty..you only have to look at the tragic case of Timothy Evans who hanged after being wrongly convicted of murdering his wife and baby daughter..in the end it turned out to be Christie,,what would you do then? you cannot bring back an innocent man from the dead and if this doesn,t convince you then just look at al the miscarriages of justice there have been
694729
How do you not support it?  He committed genocide and killed thousands of people in his own country and then just dumped them in mass graves like animals.  He was attempting to "cleanse" his country to his liking, much like Hitler.  He isn't the only one - how about that upstanding leader in Darfur?  There's a real dilly for you...  I'm not much for capital punishment since DNA testing has set free more than a couple people on death row who were proved innocent.  But in a case like Saddam?  Who needs DNA, the whole world knows who was running that show.  I say hang him on public TV.
662966
I don't believe in the death penalty.\nToo many Innocent people have been executed for something they did not do.There are two infamous cases here in Australia where the murderers/rapist were caught red handed within days and admitted they did it,both these individuals have tried to commit suicide while in prison,their crimes against another human being were horrendous and had a great impact on our country not just the state in which it took place,in a case like this I think the judge should be able to in-force the death penalty.\nSome people still think the last man hanged here was innocent and it was done for political reasons.
715184
that is one way off lookin at it but the arguement against it could be.\n1. if the person was found innocent later on...they could be freed\n2. suffering for a life time much better than a quick death\n\ni have a solution...\n\nturn prisons into factories... like get them to make pillows....or bag up paper clips or something... that way they can "give back to society" and still suffer!... cos that wat it all about!
436225
Personally i believe in capital punishment. I also believe that it is used to liberally in USA. Often times people go to death sentence on circumstantial evidence, or when they are retarded. \nOn the other hand SOME criminals truly deserve to DIE. If you are a BOUND TORTURE KILL serial murderer who has suffocated 10 people for sexual gratification -- you deserve to die. If you are a mastermind of genocide -- you deserve to die. If you are Oklahoma city bomber who has murdered 167 people with a bomb -- you deserve to die. No amount of jail time will atone for crimes like that.\n\nSo Back to your question. If we limit execution to Egregious cases that truly shock the conscience then i believe some form of speedy and public execution might be appropriate. Crucifixion of course is going to far as it is clearly cruel and unusual. On the other hand televising the normal mode of execution like lethal injection might be entirely appropriate.
978301
Death penalty laws are social engineering. I cannot subscribe to the ethics of social engineering. As a nurse who has worked in the system with pedophiles, I know also that episodic imprisonment is ineffective. They are relentless. I support the only known ethical solution which is chemical castration.  But, then again, I believe in that for Conservatives, too.
13803
No, it does not make us a better nation ,but, if properly utilized it may create a safer nation! In reality we do not utilize capital punishment as very few convicted criminals are ever sentenced to death, and even, when sentenced to death, automatic appeals prevent the timely execution of criminals.  Therefore, capital punishment is not a deterrent.  How strange that people rally to prevent the execution of murderers but demand the right to continue killing more unborn babies. Here in the US we have "legally" sacrificed more babies, numerically, than the individuals exterminated by the Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler. Yet we dare to call ourselves a moral, civilized nation. If we decide to give capital crime offenders life imprisonment without the possibility of parole maybe we should at least require that life be given to inutero individuals, unless the life of the mother is at risk.
666671
I certainly think that some people that are in favor of the death penalty are people that would murder as they have no value of life. Yes it is barbaric and wrong to lower your morals to that of the alleged perpetrator.
732314
I don't agree with capital punishment in principle. But even if you do, it's not a solution to prison overcrowding. In the US, people spend years on death row and it costs much more money than regular prison because of all the appeals etc.\n\nAnd there is no evidence that death sentences would deter paedophiles for the most serious offenders for whom it is a compulsion. Paodophilia is dangerous, disgusting and evil - I understand the anger that makes us want to kill in revenge - but it would not put off other paedophiles from doing the same sadly. All the emphasis on 'stranger danger' makes us forget that most child abuse is within the family & home.\n\n\nBritain's prisons are overcrowded because more and more people are being locked up for relatively petty crime. Paedophiles have always been imprisoned and rightly so. But we also lock up people for not paying their TV licenses....\n\nOnly people who are dangerous or who are serious or repeat offenders should be locked up. People who are addicts or mentally ill should be treated. People who are petty criminals or anti-social should be put to work cleaning up the mess they and others have made, not locked up for year at public expense.\n\nWe could save a fortune by ensuring that people get a decent education - reading, writing, IT and social skills and learning a trade - rather than making everyone sit lots of exams and then excluding the kids who can't keep up. And we need to do more to tackle drugs and family breakdown. A bit more money on counselling could save the whole of society a lot of grief in future.
34205
becasue there are people out there the deserve it. I believe in the death penalty very much. If they are found guilty of what they did and its a bad thing then they deserve to die for it. They have no mercy on what they did so why should we show mercy.