Americans in general know the bedevils of capital punishment, but how will it be ever abolished?
402395
In Michigan we do not have capitol punishment. We have not had it since 1842. Life in prison with out possibility of parole means just that and we do not have any more crime then Texas. In fact probably less.
648688
Well, the person punished won't do it again.\n\nSeriously, capital punishment doesn't work as a deterrent for the simple reason of politics.  When a person is sentenced for capital punishment, there are endless appeals, retrials and whatnot to delay the punishment. On average, a person on death row will more likely have their sentence converted to "life imprisonment" then be executed. Added is that the prisoner is kept warm, dry, fed and clothed at taxpayer expense.  So, if someone was contemplating a capital crime, they're looking at two options...\n\n1) They get away with it.\n2) They get caught, and spend the rest of their life no longer in the rat race of daily society for food, clothing and shelter.\n\nWhat's the deterrent? \n\nIf the government wants capital punishment to work as a deterrent, they need to be decisive and carry out the sentence as soon as it is proven beyond reasonable doubt of innocence.  If you know the person is guilty, why let them linger on for years?  If they're guilty (either admitted it or similar), get it over with.  Then capital punishment will have teeth again.
578063
I think it is a necessary evil. I only wish the appeals process didn't take so long. There are times when I think we should have public executions again. Then, capital punishment would be the effective deterrent it is supposed to be.
891888
CHeck out the Death PEnalty INformation Center.  They are the national aurhority on the Death Penalty.  Just google them.  They're the best.
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.
564596
Each State has its own guidelines for capital punishment.\n\nBut for the Federal guidelines- there are many- some of which are not murder - although most of them are circumstances that require a death result (such as kidnapping where a death results; attack on an airline where a death results) but there are some like treason, or related to drug kingpins, etc.\n\nHere is a link- it's pretty dense- but it's all there:\n\nhttp://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RL30962.pdf
1090030
In a perfect world where justice was perfectly administered every single time, the death penalty might be the appropriate punishment for the most heinous crimes. However, this isn't a perfect world. And, justice is rarely administered appropriately or fairly.  Race and class impact the judicial system. Those who are minorities and/or poor rarely receive the level of legal representation that the dominant race and/or the wealthy receive. Nor are they like to receive the same caliber of due process. Statistically, law enforcement treats minority and/or poor suspects quite differently than the wealthy. \n\nSo, at every step of the legal process from arrest to trial to judgement and finally, to the imposition of that judgement, the race and class of the person impacts the outcome. Because this is so endemic to the judicial system at both the federal and a state level, the death penalty  as the ultimate penalty should no longer be imposed at least not until the issues of class and race have been better resolved in the US than they are at present.
1184845
Capital punishment permanently removes the  worst of society so that they can no longer violate the human rights of others.
338059
If use of the death penalty kills even one innocent person, it is a great evil, and the state has committed cold-blooded murder.  There are groups doing research who claim we kill at least one innocent every year.  There is also the point that the United States was created as a Christian nation.  Read your history.  If you are a Christian, you follow the teachings of Christ.  He demonstrated His feelings about the death penalty when He saved Mary from the charge of adultery.  Just some thoughts.
865609
In my State these are the reasons for being given a sentence of death; multiple murders (killing more than one person), murdering a police officer, murder during the execution of a felony. Examples of murder during the act of a felony would be if you kill a bank clerk during a robbery or a kill a woman during a rape. \n\nThere are also some Federal laws which call for capital punishment like murder and treason. The Federal government seldom executes anyone. In fact, I can not remember, nor can I find any reference to anyone being executed by the Federal government in recent years.
949305
It's called the right to fair trial and it's enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. \n\nAnd your argument doesn't wash. There is no death penalty in Western European countries, yet they all have much lower crime rates - both violent and non-violent.
939722
It will never be reversed. People have become addicted to the sadistic killing of the innocent for the sake of convenience... much like the Romans became addicted to watching innocent people get ripped apart in the coliseums... much like hitler became addicted to torturing innocent people to death. Its a mental sickness and it will not go away. Its not a normal human attribute to want to kill your offspring. However, for some reason I will never understand, America has embraced killing the most innocent and defenseless  people that could ever exist. Don't touch the whales though!!! You will go to prison for that.....
684383
No.\n\nParliament voted to abolish the death penalty for murder for a five-year experiment in 1965. The abolition of the death penalty for murder was made permanent through another parliamentary vote in 1969. \n\nAlthough capital punishment was abolished for murder, the death sentence remained in force for treason and piracy of the high seas with violence. This was abolished in 1998 under the Crime and Disorder Act.\n\nOn 27 January 1999, Home Secretary, Jack Straw, signed the 6th protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights in Strasbourg. This formally abolished the death penalty in the UK.
687780
I must say that it has bad press, particularly in association with the French Revolution. But in the cold light of day, if you are going to have capital punishment (which I disagree with), then it really is the best means of doing it.\n\n1. It is instantaneous, unlike other forms of killing, hanging being the worst\n\n2. It is cost-effective, requiring little infra-structure and personnel to make it happen\n\n3. It has an almost 0 failure rate\n\nYes, if capital punishment it must be then let the guillotine come back
901668
I find it interesting that most of the answers so far refer to "general deterrence" -- the idea that by having capital punishment, it will deter people from committing crime.  Of course, over and over, it has been proven that capital punishment provides NO general deterrence value.  First, most of the murders in society are committed by family members against family members, either calculated or in some sort of altered emotional state.  Second, the truly "sick" murderers are sociopaths and/or psychopaths -- those who can tell the difference between right and wrong but have no conscience, no morality, and no desire to be subjected to society's norms.  Thus, no deterrent system will work.  Third, the states with capital punishment have murder rates the same as, or higher than, states without capital punishment.  One would think that if the death penalty was a deterrent, then the capital punishment states would have at least a marginally lower murder rate.\nThus, general deterrence is not a genuine argument for capital punishment.\n\n(WM Critter's argument about deterrence is interesting.  Sure, that might deter some people, but not many, because so many murders are not truly rationally contemplated.  Further, killings in the heat of passion, or in "imperfect self defense" or when under the influence of substance, or under the influence of other people (i.e. gang shootings), and killings by sociopaths or psychopaths  would not stop.  That's JUST about the entirety of all murders committed.)\n\nThere are only two supportable arguments: Incapicatation and retribution.  Retribution has a bad connotation, but in criminology / legal theory, it means simply giving the criminal his "just desserts."  To some extent, we punish because people have taken actions we have deemed to be wrong in society, and society has a right (and obligation) to express its collective displeasure for that antisocial behavior.  The capital punishment argument goes like this:  By murdering with aggravating factors, the person has done something so abhorrent to society that the only effective way to show our displeasure is by taking the persons life.  By murdering, he has forfeitted his life, and it is society's obligation to put him to death.  Or, more straightforward "The guy's a sicko and deserves to fry."\n\nThis also tails into the argument for "incapacitation" -- the idea that society needs to protect itself from the offender reoffending.  By killing him, he certainly can't reoffend.  But of course, the counter to this point is that he can be locked up with no possibility of parole to be just as effective. \n\nTreatises have been written on these purposes of punishment, and I can't sum them up here.  But that should get you started.
1087557
I'd address three topics:\n\n1.Is it justified (eg. eye for an eye, revenge Vs rehabilitation, rights of the victim and their family, risk of miscarriage etc)\n2.Is it effective (eg. is it a deterent, does it make better societies, is it cheaper than permanent incarceration etc)\n3.Is it legal (eg. is it a cruel and unusual punishment, the position of international law, etc)\n\nYou've probably been asked the US/UK part because we are fairly similar societies with a largely common ancestry\nand tradition, but the UK abolished the death penalty whilst much of the US still uses it.  You can go two ways on this - \n1. the US is a much younger society still in a vigourous development phase facing the challenges of it's huge size and diversity so frontier justice is still appropriate (similar claims for China by the way, the other big executor).  when the UK was trying to hold a huge empire together it executed loads of people too.\n2. the existence in the US of a more fundemental christianity gives people a different perspective on life (and death) from the broadly humanist (post christian) views in Europe (including the UK) where morality is more personal and less something learned from religion.  Religious Europe was a very bloody place indeed for hundreds of years.\n\nHope this helps, BTW my opinion is that it is as morally justifiable as war.  I really don't want to have to do it, but sometimes I might have to protect my family and society.  Right now I think both our societies could live without capital punishment, and therefore should - but that could change.
873846
Might be helpful to include the country next time , this is all US information..... Here is some research with links " Get to work and stop reading questions" LOL\n\n\n1) Check out their "History of the Death Penalty "section\n2) United States Courts on the death penalty\n3)Victims and the death penalty\n4)Capital Punishment, legal infliction of death as a penalty for violating criminal law. Throughout history people have been put to death for various forms of wrongdoing. Methods of execution have included such practices as crucifixion, stoning, drowning, burning at the stake, impaling, and beheading. Today capital punishment is typically accomplished by lethal gas or injection, electrocution, hanging, or shooting.\n5)History of the death penalty ---Plus a chart chronicles the United State's use of the death penalty over the past four centuries.