do you agree with the death penalty?
600447
Yes, for 2 reasons - they made their choice when they took a life & why should we as taxpayers pay to fed, clothe, educate & guard life sentence criminals.\nIn our state it is rarely given - must be cruel - like all murder is not cruel. Murderers forfeit their right to live.\nMy brother was murdered while buying a gallon of milk during robbery. They got the death penalty but it was overturned & they get out this year his 3 children are not even out of college yet. They grew up without him.
222060
I am against the death penalty as it does not make any solution. When we are giving a person death penalty, we are doing the same bad thing that we can't. Nobody has any right to murder other, the final judgement is in hand of God. That we can do maximum against a criminal is to give him/her an imprisonment for several years.
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.
598527
against . regardless of what someone has done it is not up to me to take there life.there is no circumstance where i would accept that killing one more person was right and justified .
493925
I'm prolife and I do not support the death penalty.  As you said, it's a form of murder.  No matter what someone has done, death should not be wished/forced upon them--it's very sad how meaningless LIFE (the greatest gift ever) has become.
894019
Absolutely. The death penalty should be administered to anyone denying the existence of God.\n\nOnce of course, his existence is proved.\n\nOver to you Heinz!!
747872
Yes i believe it is justified for i believe that if someone takes a life they deserve to have their life taken. To think of all the rapists, murders, and etc. people their are in the world, it is not right to have them remain alive if all they do in the world is take the people we love from the world.\n\nIt costs an average of $20,000 to imprison someone for 1 year,\nto think that a person guilty of first degree murder is sentenced to 25 years in prison... thats approx. 500k \n\nSo unless u think its okay to forgive someone for their sins they commited, for the lives they have taken and the lives they have ruined. then dont enforce the death penalty. \n\nBut i believe in the death penalty because i believe that is the only real justice that is even justified in this world... because all the murders and rapists out there are still alive and will be out in about a decade to commit the same crimes.
877023
Should there be a death penalty in a civilized society and if so, why hang criminals?\n\nThat's a question that's been asked many, many times. If we don't kill dangerous criminals they languish in prisons on our tax dollars. If they're put to death and they're innocent we've killed an innocent person. If we hang them; electrocute them or give them a fatal injection. Maybe we should stone them? \n\nI'm afraid this issue will go on until long after we've left this jolly old earth. Should we be too civilized or should we become more uncivilized? Perhaps dangerous offenders will refrain from killing if they know they will be put to death or do they just not care and will do it anyway?\n\nI'm afraid, given this diverse world we live in; our societies will dictate what is an isn't civilized and what forms of punishment these people will get.\n\nThere are worse places to live than the United States or Canada!
1014529
Absolutely.  There are only certain crimes that carry the death penalty and there are a number of reviews that take place before an execution takes place.  Once the person has been found guilty and the reviews have taken place, the punishment fits the crime.
395319
I think the death penalty is for cowards and sadists:  It's easy to support murder when someone else does it for you.\n\nOver 150 WRONGLY CONVICTED people have been released from death row in just the last 30+ years - and those are only the ones we *know* about.  \n\nThe death penalty doesn't make you safer - it makes you a killer.  Don't buy the con from politicians who scare you into believing this policy works.  It doesn't. \n\nIt's racist.\nIt's classist.\nIt's 2-6 times MORE expensive than life without parole.\nIt makes us cruel as a society.\nIt doesn't prevent new criminals from developing.\nIt takes the lives of innocent people.\n\nSomething tells me from the knee-jerk verbiage of the questioner that he/she doesn't care about these types of facts.  Regardless, check out the sites below before *you* make up your mind.\n\nThe way we treat the least of us is a clear reflection of who WE are... at least that's the way God sees it.
177564
I am all for the death penalty. I am not saying that everyone that has killed someone should be put to death, but I do believe that when there is absolute proof that someone murdered another human being out of cold blood that person does not deserve to live. The taxpayers spend entirely too much money housing these criminals. And what about the cost of medial treatment for these animals? We have honest, law abiding citizens in our country that can't afford medication or health care, why should the criminals be treated better. And I am tired of people using the excuse that they are mentally disturbed or were on drugs at the time of their crime. Most of these people are useless, wastes of life...sorry if that sounds cold, but that is the way I feel. Once someone has crossed that line of taking another human beings life I truly believe that they will do it again.
339067
I believe in capital punishment.  My problem with it is only that our contry does not practice it very much.
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.
810548
I am only for the death penalty IF there is positive proof, such as video tape...then I say fry 'em up. They say the death penalty is no deterent, but I say it is...we just need to do away with those appeals that last for 20-30 years. If you are caught on tape murdering a 7-11 clerk for the cash register. Then you don't even get a trial, you go straight to the chair, no questions.\nAs long as there is solid proof, I'm all for the death penalty in rape, murder, child abuse, child porn and pedophilism. These people have no place in society, behind bars or not.
471603
While if the death was in my family would make me mad, I completely am agaisnt the death penalty. I think it isn't right for the government to say "You killed a man and that's wrong, so we're going to kill you!" \nIt doesn't make sense and is unethical.
837329
The Death Penalty is a harsh sentence, the harshest that society can give, but I support it.\n\nIf a person killed 15 people then how can his one death pay back that crime?  Why don’t we kill him 15 times!  You can medically induce a heart attack and then bring them back with a defibrillator.  Of course this would be cruel and unusual punishment and it would be illegal according to the 5th amendment.  The Death Penalty has been challenged several times in the Supreme Court on the grounds of it being cruel and unusual punishment, it has been upheld each time.\n\nI have mixed feelings about the Death Penalty.  People claim that it isn’t a determent to crime; people still murder each other.  I also think that that it is used too often, my state is famous for it.\n\nHowever, the Death Penalty does have some advantages.  It is the ultimate determent for the murder.  John Wayne Gacy, a serial killer, will never kill anyone again.  Even if he was given a life term for each person that we know he killed, he would still be a threat to his guards and other prisoners.  What’s to stop him from committing murder in prison?  Are you going to give him another life term?  That wouldn’t be a determent.  And if he should escape then he will go back to murdering people again.  However, if the Death Penalty was a possibility then he might think twice about committing another murder.  We can’t ask him if this is so, because he is dead, and I think that is a good thing.\n\nCharles Manson is as crazy as ever.  He built a “family” and inspired them to go on a killing spree.  Charles Manson wants to do nothing more than to incite hate and violence.  To that end he has had a tattoo or brand of the Nazi symbol placed on his forehead.  If he escapes from prison there is no doubt what he will do.  He will start another “family” and send it too off on a killing spree.  Manson has even said he will do this.  If he were dead, killed by the Death Penalty, then that wouldn’t be a threat.  As it is we have to keep him locked up for the rest of his natural life.  He is a threat to his guards, other prisoners, and a continuing threat to society itself.  We can’t kill him though because he didn’t go on the killing spree himself, he only inspired it.  Meanwhile I have to spend my tax money to help support him for the rest of his natural life.\n\nThe Death Penalty has its advantages.  It is something to hold over prisoners.  If they murder another prisoner then they could have to face it.  It also prevents us from supporting a prisoner for the rest of his life.  That’s a cruel fact, but true.  It will also prevent a murderer from ever killing again.\n\nWhen the Death Penalty is applied it should be done so only as a last resort and under special circumstances.\n--  First a higher standard of guilt should be met.  The jury must be sure, beyond a SHADOW of doubt that the accused is actually guilty.  A murderer can be convicted if beyond a REASONABLE doubt the jury considers him guilty.  A higher standard should be held for the application of the death penalty.  Just how stringent that standard should be is up to the Judge’s instructions, and the jury.  Also our legal system is based on the idea that we would rather not convict 100 people, if that means convicting 1 innocent person.\n--  Second the person should be considered a continuing threat to society.  A man who finds out his wife is cheating on him and then kills her, may not be a continuing threat to society (unless he gets married again).  He may be unstable and should be sentenced to a long prison term, but I don’t think he should be subject to the Death Penalty.  The ultimate penalty should only be applied only to people who are likely to murder again; preferable only to people who have committed multiple murders and proved that they will kill again, if given the chance.\nIn some states there is another condition that can cause the Death Penalty to apply.  In New York it is call
849298
No.\n\nAs a matter of PUBLIC POLICY, I would cite the following reasons:\n\n(1) Death is an irreversible punishment, and overzealous juries/prosecutors get it wrong WAY too often.  (RECENT EXAMPLE:  Read "The Innocent Man", a nonfiction book by John Grisham.)\n\n(2) Taxpayer dollars spent on criminal sanctions should be designed to protect society, not dish out retribution. Yet, statistical data is clear that the death penalty and tougher criminal sentences does not deter murder or violent crime.  Why?  Most violent criminals are sociopathic/psychopathic and simply do not rationally weigh the consequences of their actions before committing violent crimes.\n\n(3) The numbers indicate that the death penalty is not imposed upon the worst of the murderers (i.e., the person who actually pulled the trigger and killed).  Why?  Truly disturbed seriel killers more often than not have mitigating circumstances that get them out of the death penalty (e.g., severe abuse as children).  Second, the death penalty is most often sought where the prosecution can get an easy sentence (i.e., the person who drove the person who pulled the trigger, because the person who actually pulled the trigger ran to the police and got a plea deal for life without parole).\n\n(4) Prosecuting the death penalty costs taxpayers more than simply giving them a sentence of life without parole.  Why?  Courts want to do everything they can to ensure that an innocent person is not put to death.  Unfortunately, innocent people are being released from death row routinely, despite the fact that they had numerous appeals.\n\n(5) The death penalty is not fairly applied.  For example, Harris County, Texas prosecutes more death penalty cases than the rest of the State of Texas combined.  Is that fair?  Is it fair that a black defendant who kills a white victim is 8 times more likely to get the death penalty than a white defendant who kills a black victim?  Is it fair that over 90% of the defendants on death row in states like Texas, which have no public defenders, had no money to hire an attorney and had to receive court-appointed counsel, most of which have no criminal law experience?\n\n(6) Once again, criminal sanctions should be designed to protect society, not dish out retribution.  Although victim's families will say, on the eve of execution, that the death penalty gives them closure; pyschologists who actually follow up with victim's families will tell you that is a fallacy.  (Read up on it for yourself.)  If the government wants to be in the business of making victim's families feel better (as opposed to making society safer, which is the primary purpose of criminal law), then it would better devote the financial resources to providing psychological services than seeking death penalty prosecutions.\n\n(7) The assertion that a person who commits murder poses a risk that he/she will murder again is ridiculous if the alternative sentence is life in prison without possibility of parole (as it is in most states for murder).  A rapist or other violent criminal is just as likely to murder or commit violent crimes on other inmates than murderers are.  We are not making other inmates (all of whom commited violent crimes if they are in high security prisons) statistically safer by killing murderers.\n\nNow, my Christian view:\n\n(1) One of the Ten Commandments given to Moses says "Thou shalt not kill."  That's a period at the end of that sentence.  It does not say, "Thou shalt not kill unless the person you are killing killed someone else."  There is no "unless", no "if", no qualifiers whatsoever.\n\n(2) In response to all of those "good Christians" who are often so quick to cite the Old Testament (Exodus 21:23-25) as grounds for supporting the death penalty, I would direct you to two passages from the NEW TESTAMENT:\n(i) "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a too