is it ever jusifiable to execute criminals?
964283
It is justifiable to execute criminals because it is a fair punishment when:\n\n1.  The crime leaves permanent damage on the victim.\na.  Pedophiles (Permanent scarring for life)\nb.  Murders (the dead stay dead)\nc. Rapes (permanent scarring)\n\n2.  The crime is likely to be committed again:\na.  Rehabilitation is not possible for pedophiles.\n\n3.  Restitution is impossible\na.  You can never repay for the damage caused by molestation, murder or rape.\n\n4.  Remorse is typically not present.\na.  THese peopel know what they are doing to their victims, and do it anyway.\n\n5.  Lack of serious deterrent is an encouragement to crime.
942264
Sure, why not.  You don't have to be on the side of right or justice to be competent.\nRommel was implicated in the plot to assassinate Hitler, and was forced (allowed) to commit suicide.
90134
Yes. It happens frequently in murder cases. It's more of a memorial though.
495320
This always the case, the murderers demanding mercy and rights, but did they show mercy when they were doing their heinous acts?\n\nPrison is good place afterall, some people can only live in prison.
1084067
Yes but there would have to be very strict osntrols surrounding it and it would have to be done in a controlled environment such as a hospital. Imagine if someone killed a person and stood up in court and said "it was a mercy killing, they wanted to die" and there was no way of convicting them or murder.
910170
No. Capital punishment is revenge not justice.\n\nIf a con doing an armed robbery is shot dead at the scene by coips then that is justice. Murdering them months or years later is not!
812830
yes, the same applies is doing the commission of a crime one of the criminal get killed the other can also be charge with his death.\nThe innocent bystanders wasn't doing anything so they will have a case
42465
Yes.  However, we need to be certain of the condemned man's guilt.  The "reasonable doubt" bit is ok to send him to jail, but not to kill him.  \nLife without parole?  OK fair enough, but to put a 30 year old man in a cage and tell him we'll never let him out is just cruel....I think it's actually merciful to put him to death.
107515
no b/c they just may be INNOCENT--the court system isnt always right.
749489
Maybe it wouldn't... but juries have been known to convict innocent people and to free the guilty. They don't always get it right.
80318
I have met executioners and they tend to be people who strongly believe they are carrying out one of their many job responsibilities.  They take no joy from it, but neither do they shy away from being part of the system's mechanism for the ultimate punishment.  I did not get the impression that the people with whom I met were psychopathic or sociopathic (as most other thrill-killers would be).\n\nTo put this answer in context, by the way, I am not generally in favor of the death penalty because I think our system of justice is far too imperfect for it to ever be fairly and equally meted out.
370896
No\nAnd Convicted Felons Cannot Either
317629
I think the question is not "can" they be but "will" they be.  Seems to be a very poignant distinction in cases where elected officials commit crimes...
150571
The United States Penal Code has well defined penalties for those who break various laws.  The Penal Code does not include execution as a penalty for breaking immigration laws.  The penalty for that is deportation.\n\nIf you believe that they should be executed, you should lobby your congressperson, although I must warn you that you will not get very far with that idea and may end up receiving a visit from the FBI.
686272
No. \nYou can also kill someone in the name of God without getting payed.\nIf you wanna kill your wife's killer, will you getting payed for it?\nNo.
902360
It is pretty much impossible to say someone who was executed was actually innocent, because there is never another trial. However, the cases at the site below are very questionable.
1113
Yes.  He murdered four people in cold blood.  Volumes of evidence were presented proving his guilt.  Even the 9th Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, proven to be the most liberal, anti-death-penalty court in the nation, could not find sufficient cause to nullify the verdict.  He received his fair trial, his fair appeals process.  He continuously professed his innocence to delay (for nearly 30 years) his sentence, nothing more.  He capitalized on the fact that American society, with it's EXTREMELY short attention span, would forget the horrific crimes he committed.  He gambled on the possibility that we would forget what he did, become desensitized to it, and dismiss the jury's decision overly harsh.  Some arguing in his defense tried to portray the jury as a bunch of racist white rich folks intent on "murdering another innocent black man" (it wasn't all-white, check the record).  Fortunately, all of the right people saw through his charade, and ended his shennanigans, permanently.