The Death Penalty?

[Nitrus]

What are peoples views on the death penalty?

Should it be allowed?

Should it be the punishment for more crimes?

What do you think?

EDIT: I have made a poll for this topic, please vote accordingly. :)

[Deacon]

I believed only lethal injection should be allowed only if they did a serious crime like kill 25 people or burned an orphanage down

[FucangLong]

I think the Death Penalty is a good penalty. It is a quick and easy way of justice. However, our current procedures for the death penalty is very timely and expensive. I think it costs $5,000,000 total of the tax payers money for a complete injection death. There are easier ways to painlessly kill people. I recommend the Soviet death penalty. Drag the person out, and shoot them 10 times in the back of the head with an AK-47. Haha, not really, but it is much cheaper.

[Nitrus]

I see your point. I think that in my country (UK) sex offenders should be executed, especially paedophiles, it sounds extreme, but it is something I really hate about society. People like that.

[Deacon]

I agree

[FucangLong]

Yah, but the death penalty is just too (REMOVED) expensive.

[MODERATOR MESSAGE: DON'T SWEAR]

[Nitrus]

LANGUAGE!!! Lol.

I think we should bring back shot to the head executions, not so expensive. :)

[FucangLong]

Yah, the price of one bullet is much cheaper than the 3 injections it takes.

[tbl]

Yeh, Im for but only extream cases. Serial or multiple murder/rape, torture, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Not for killing one person because they commited another crime with the murder

[Jim]

Well, I continue to switch sides on this.

On one hand, the death penalty is good because it helps lessen our overcrowed prison system. But, then again, I think we could easily let many of those who are there for non-violent crimes out of there.

On the other hand, you're still killing someone, which I don't find to be a suitable solution. I find it would be a much more suitable punishment to have them spend the rest of thier lives locked up.

[tbl]

Some people have don't deserve the right to live. Hittler, Bundy, Son of Sam, Manson... They have no chance of reform, sociapaths and evil.

[Jon]

the death penalty should be used in every state. if someone kills another, then they should die.

[Jim]

the death penalty should be used in every state. if someone kills another, then they should die.

So, if you kill two people, should you die twice? :rolleyes:

[smub]

i am definately for the death penalty.

look at the history and you'll see many criminals like who is about 65 killed 3 people and got away because he is old!

I dont like that way. I mean if you commited the crime you should be punished as harsh as your crime was. That way others can learn lessons from it.

[veryboredme]

Death penalty is not the right panishment in some cases in my opinion.
I personaly think that death is too light panishment for peaple who made many other people suffering,I think they should suffer themself too first.

[digital_freeway]

Death penalty is kind of good IMHO. There are so many violators around. With this law, I think it will be lessened. Crime rates will go down. However, like Jim said, we are still killing someone with this law. In the eyes of God, this is still a sin. We might as well try other alternatives. :)

[radu_dragonul]

No death penalty is my opinion. Life is a natural right for every person, even for criminals. I think living all your life in the prison is a harder penalty than dying in a few moments. The criminal must be forced to live in hard conditions so he will regret his facts.

[Defender]

I think hanging is my favorite death penalty. Rope is cheap and reusable...plus we can do it in the public square for everyone to watch. I miss the good ole days. :-)

[Nitrus]

Lol, what usually happens with a "massarce" is that the defendant will plead isanity, go to therapy for a year then walk free.

[Gritgrat]

While the death penaly may give closure to relatives and save on tax payers money in the long run it also puts the Evil person to rest. Let them live there lives out on a normal prison wing where they will feel the pain caused on a daily basis never mind giving them the easy option out.

On another note it costs a Tax payer around £15,000 - £20,000 a week in certain parts of the uk.

[FucangLong]

I think hanging is my favorite death penalty.Â*Â*Rope is cheap and reusable...plus we can do it in the public square for everyone to watch.Â*Â*I miss the good ole days.Â*Â*:-)


I prefer the Communist way of dragging them to a dark alley in the middle of the night and shooting a few rounds of an AK-47 to the back of their head.

[bobbylien]

I think the Death Penalty is a good penalty. It is a quick and easy way of justice. However, our current procedures for the death penalty is very timely and expensive. I think it costs $5,000,000 total of the tax payers money for a complete injection death. There are easier ways to painlessly kill people. I recommend the Soviet death penalty. Drag the person out, and shoot them 10 times in the back of the head with an AK-47. Haha, not really, but it is much cheaper.

The cost has nothing to do with the actual execution but the nearly limitless appeals leading up to the actual execution, which can take 20+years.

If you take a look at the statistics, in 1976, we dropped the death penalty. Murders skyrocketed until we reinstated it.

[mis_chiff]

I am for the death penalty!
But only if they are sure...because look how many people that DNA tests are getting off. They shouldn't have the right for the death penalty until the DNA is completed...because that would make us all murderers if we did it without POSITIVE proof.

[demo_news]

What are peoples views on the death penalty?

Should it be allowed?

Should it be the punishment for more crimes?

What do you think?

EDIT: I have made a poll for this topic, please vote accordingly. :)


I'm not sure, it depends what they did, and how bad it was. Nearly maybe a massacre

[trefer]

You shoudl forbide it soon. It's a bad way to promote racism (more blacks than withes executed) and also it can't be corrected if there's an innocent.

[eggs]

I'd like to raise the point of the death penelty and its often occurrence
i see people getting the sentance but not getting the deed untill 12 years later, sometimes more sometimes less.
even when Timothy McVeigh a man who fessed up to his crimes
waved all his rights and wanted to go to the chair or needel
it still too how many years? at least 2 i think i could be wrong on this point
there was a guy here in our state who was sitting on it for a murder he had committed back in 1990 and they were JUST NOW getting to doing the deed.
i can understand a certain level of appeal, we want to make sure we got the right guy but isnt that what the conviction process was there for?
how can we prolong one's eventual doom more than say 5 years?
is it the court systems and its structured to be slow or is it the lawyers who drag it out longer looking for loop holes.
i say if convicted of your crime whatever it may be (muder, serial whatever, bombing) how long do we drag the process
and im sure it wouldnt cost as much if we gave the process incentive to speed up. but since it takes so long to finally do the deed. then let the deed be done instead of using tax paying dollers for these people who have wrongd another.

maybe im wrong but thats my 2 cents

[rodeojones903]

I am 100% for the death penalty. I have no sympathy for criminals. We need to stream line the process, and just have an automated gun fire a single round into the criminals head. Then send a bill to the family for the cost of the bullet and electricty used to operate the machine.

[FucangLong]

But think about the cost to the taxpayers. We need a cheaper but still humane way of pulling it off.

[Alonzo]

But think about the cost to the taxpayers. We need a cheaper but still humane way of pulling it off.


That's not really possible. Most death penalty cases are eventually overturned due to serious issues in the trial, evidence etc. or new evidence emerges that exonerates them. All the money we put into it still doesn't save every innocent person from the death penalty, and we even refuse DNA tests to many requesting them. There's no reason to think we could improve the situation without increasing tax payers money.

[KrAzY3]

I support the death penalty. I believe it is something we should use with utmost care, but in the end I think it can be both just and pragmatic.

[Cephus]

Yah, but the death penalty is just too (REMOVED) expensive.

The death penalty isn't expensive at all, it's all the legal wrangling that goes on for decades before it's ever carried out that's expensive. We really need to limit how many meaningless appeals we allow for all crimes, not just capital cases. As far as I'm concerned, before you're tried, you're innocent until proven guilty. After you're convicted, you're guilty until proven innocent. Outside of the single manditory appeal, every single appeal should only be allowed on the basis of factual innocence. That means you need to PROVE that you didn't do it. Two independent juries of your peers already found you guilty, if you want to get out of dying, you need to prove yourself innocent.

If you do that, end all of the "sure, I did it, but I don't want to die" appeals, you'd make the death penalty downright cheap.

[Cephus]

I think hanging is my favorite death penalty. Rope is cheap and reusable...plus we can do it in the public square for everyone to watch. I miss the good ole days. :-)

Come on, mass crucifiction! Wait until you get a couple dozen of them, then line them up along the freeways!

Or take them out to a national park, line them up and sell tickets to the public for shooting practice. Hit the convict, win a prize! ;)

And yes, I'm kidding... mostly... for those with no sense of humor.

[George W Bush]

Hi all, i'm new. ok, got that out of the way.

my opinion:

Death Penalty has done nothing except help victim families resolve their grief.

That being said, it's enforced wrongly as a deterrent. DP doesnt deter killers when the murder rate stays the same.

I could also see that, in probably most cases, death penalty is not a factor - and therefore many who would kill would feel a life in prison is worth their deed.

Death Penalty just 'doesnt work' in its capacity as a deterrent.

[Cephus]

Death Penalty just 'doesnt work' in its capacity as a deterrent.

Whoever said the Death Penalty was a deterrent? It isn't. If it was, it would be called the Death Deterrent. It is a punishment for the worst of criminals who have, through their crimes, lost the right to breathe the same air as decent people. That's it. That's all. End of story. Trying to claim that it "doesn't work" because of something it's not supposed to do in the first place is nothing but a strawman.

[Alonzo]

Death Penalty just 'doesnt work' in its capacity as a deterrent.

Whoever said the Death Penalty was a deterrent?Â*Â*It isn't.Â*Â*If it was, it would be called the Death Deterrent.Â*Â*It is a punishment for the worst of criminals who have, through their crimes, lost the right to breathe the same air as decent people.Â*Â*That's it.Â*Â*That's all.Â*Â*End of story.Â*Â*Trying to claim that it "doesn't work" because of something it's not supposed to do in the first place is nothingÂ*Â*but a strawman.


The death penalty has always been used as a deterrent. That was never the entire function of it, but has always been part of the purpose.

[Cephus]

The death penalty has always been used as a deterrent. That was never the entire function of it, but has always been part of the purpose.


No form of punishment is very effective as a deterrent. If you're going to end anything that doesn't stop crime, then stop all forms of punishment because they all fail. Let everyone out of prison, apparently putting people in jail doesn't work, right?

Any deterrent effects that the DP has are purely secondary and a bonus. That is not it's goal, nor it's purpose. But of course, the anti-DP crowd have to keep beating that strawman, otherwise they have nothing to talk about.

[Alonzo]

The death penalty has always been used as a deterrent. That was never the entire function of it, but has always been part of the purpose.


No form of punishment is very effective as a deterrent.Â*Â*If you're going to end anything that doesn't stop crime, then stop all forms of punishment because they all fail.Â*Â*Let everyone out of prison, apparently putting people in jail doesn't work, right?

This is laughable. You're suggesting that prison has no effect on crime rates? You also made too statements, one concerning deterrence and the other with cessation.

Any deterrent effects that the DP has are purely secondary and a bonus.Â*Â*That is not it's goal, nor it's purpose.Â*Â*But of course, the anti-DP crowd have to keep beating that strawman, otherwise they have nothing to talk about.


I'm sorry, when an argument is used in court cases and public life for well over a thousand years, you start to assume that that is one of the reasons. What was I thinking?

[Cephus]

This is laughable. You're suggesting that prison has no effect on crime rates? You also made too statements, one concerning deterrence and the other with cessation.

The fact that we can't build prisons fast enough to put all the people being sent to prison is a pretty good indication that prison isn't stopping anyone from committing crimes. We're having to let them go early and the overwhelming majority of released convicts re-offend and get sent back to prison. Heck, there are people who specifically commit crimes because they WANT to go to prison, it's a country club!

I'm sorry, when an argument is used in court cases and public life for well over a thousand years, you start to assume that that is one of the reasons. What was I thinking?


I'm not sure, what were you thinking? The only people who are assuming that the DP is all about deterrence are the anti-DPers who are beating a strawman.

The DP is to put down rabid dogs, that's it, and it does it with 100% effectiveness. Not one person ever put to death through capital punishment has ever re-offended. Try saying that about the prison system.

[Alonzo]

The fact that we can't build prisons fast enough to put all the people being sent to prison is a pretty good indication that prison isn't stopping anyone from committing crimes.Â*Â*We're having to let them go early and the overwhelming majority of released convicts re-offend and get sent back to prison.Â*Â*

No one is arguing the system is perfect, no one is arguing prison is a cure all. What you are arguing is that since there's crime then prison doesn't work at all. No one in their right mind assumes someone needs to be 100% succesful in order to be better than their alternative.

Heck, there are people who specifically commit crimes because they WANT to go to prison, it's a country club!

Those tend to be the ones who've spent large amount of time in prison already.


I'm not sure, what were you thinking?Â*Â*The only people who are assuming that the DP is all about deterrence are the anti-DPers who are beating a strawman.

The DP is to put down rabid dogs, that's it, and it does it with 100% effectiveness.Â*Â*Not one person ever put to death through capital punishment has ever re-offended.Â*Â*Try saying that about the prison system.


Stop being so black and white, no one ever said it was "all about deterrence". You're arguing that deterrence isn't even a factor, that no one in favor of the death penalty argues it.

[Cephus]

No one is arguing the system is perfect, no one is arguing prison is a cure all. What you are arguing is that since there's crime then prison doesn't work at all. No one in their right mind assumes someone needs to be 100% succesful in order to be better than their alternative.

I'm arguing that you cannot say we should get rid of the DP because it's not a strong deterrent because you can say exactly the same thing about prison and no one is going to seriously suggest we stop putting people in jail. The DP is 100% effective at what it is intended to do. Any other effect it might have is purely secondary.

Those tend to be the ones who've spent large amount of time in prison already.

Or the ones who live in terrible poverty and would rather be behind bars and eating three meals a day than free and starving.

Stop being so black and white, no one ever said it was "all about deterrence". You're arguing that deterrence isn't even a factor, that no one in favor of the death penalty argues it.

I'm saying that if there is any deterrent effect, it's secondary to what the DP is intended to do. There may be some slight deterent, I don't know. It is utterly irrelevant to the question at hand however.

[bobbylien]

Or the ones who live in terrible poverty and would rather be behind bars and eating three meals a day than free and starving.

Yeah, because they aren't smart enough to get a job and would rather steal. Most of the poor in America are poor because they aren't as motivated. There are many ways to get out of poverty.

[Cephus]

Or the ones who live in terrible poverty and would rather be behind bars and eating three meals a day than free and starving.

Yeah, because they aren't smart enough to get a job and would rather steal. Most of the poor in America are poor because they aren't as motivated. There are many ways to get out of poverty.


That may be true, it doesn't change what I said. I really think we need comprehensive welfare reform that requires, as a consequence of getting money, that you must get an education, take job-training classes, etc. and the length of time you can spend on welfare is limited to no more than 2 years, after which you must work for at least a year to qualify again.

No more free rides.