I understand and respect what you're saying. Most people who support the death penalty are not concerned about being morally superior, however. They see predators and those who commit violent crimes, especially against the innocent, as human vermin needing to be exterminated. They don't care if the person has remorse, or if he/she can be rehabilitated. They worry more about such a person being released and harming someone else.<br />
My concern about the death penalty in my country (U.S.) is that it's applied arbitrarily, and rarely to those with the money or standing to command the best legal defense. People have been exonerated at the eleventh hour because of outside groups, who found evidence that their own legal counsel didn't even bother to consider. This lets us know that we've executed innocent people. There ARE those, imo, who've committed crimes horrible enough to really have forfeited their place in this world. But if even one innocent person is executed, that's too many to risk it.
Bijoux is right. Most of the time you can expect the police and court system to find someone guilty enough to persecute. The government lies and invents evidence all the time, especially in this state (TX).
As opposed to a criminal getting parolled, or released due to a bleeding heart group, or a sheister lawer with no morals; I have never known a criminal, to claw his way out of a grave, and repeat his crimes. If the trail evedence meets predetermined criteria, I support it. It should be carried out in public view, as well.
I don't agree. The guilty person should be allowed to live so that he or she can realize more fully the gravity of the crime that they have done. How are we any better by killing them?
The guilty don't have to realize anything. The punishment is ment to deter others, from following his path in life.
If they are alive in prison with no bail that's a punishment longer than killing them.
Killing them is like shortening their punishment for them.
It should be used more often. It should be public. And the method of execution should be the same the offender used on his/her victim(s).
As long as the person being killed is the guilty party, I have no problem with it, and don't forget, the death penalty is a punishment, a severe and final one, why should tax payers have to keep a prisoner fed , watered, and subject to priviledges for the rest of their lives?
It is not about who is better, it is not about setting an example. Some people are just sociopaths or worse yet psychopaths, there is no cure. They are truly sick. Why should we pay tax dollars to house feed medicate these individuals. I think it falls under the same stint as government spending must be maintained to keep the current budget approved.<br />
By the way a sociopath and a psychopath have NO remorse and are not capeable of it, regardless of what they have done.
If it gets one idiot off the street who could care lss whether he lives, dies, or takes someone else's life with his/hers, then good riddance.
Am against it and always will be. Murder is murder. Period.
Yes its right. Its making things better by making sure they cant ever kill anyone else ever again. The only problem is we dont use is soon enough, or often enough. Rape and child molestation should be added to the list of offences that justify the death penality.
DNA... without absolute proof we should not become murderers.
I am for the death penalty.
it's twisted.<br />
people complain about having to finance prisons, pay for inmate upkeep. rarely does anyone question the law and the circumstances that lead to prison overcrowding. rarely do we hear about the people (or industries, though industries are people [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission]) profiting from and often (politically or otherwise) contributing to such laws and circumstances, such as the prison industry, the police, and "tough-on-crime' politicians. rarely do people talk of treatment, rehabilitation and resocialisation, law reform. rarely does anyone mention prison privatization and the prison industrial-complex, the carceral society.<br />
or that roughly two percent of Americans are in prison. but I'm rambling, this is about killing people...<br />
now, on the moral-sentimental issues of the death penalty... suppose I abstain. I've never lost anyone to a murder, or had a friend raped, or anything like that and I have no idea how I'd react. my mind says it is better and more honorable to forgive, to let the spirit judge as it judges us all, but I suppose that's an empty sophism without having been asked to forgive something like that.
It's not about being better. It's about getting rid of scum that should not have any chance to get out an do more harm. And why do tax payers' money has to be spent on someone like that when it can do good elsewhere. <br />
Yes, I'm pro death penalty.
i feel the same way you do, like they need to sit in jail for a long time and think about what they did, killing them is too easy for them
So the ACLU can get them back on the street within 5 years?
justice, I'm afraid, sometimes demands this penalty; it's a tough question though
I am against it I think they should have to think about what they did , and it won't bring back the person or people who were killed either .
It makes no sense but a death for a death brings balance and peace of mind for the affect
mixed feelings. some folks need killing, but deciding exactly who is a dangerous game I'd rather not leave to the legal system.