Buffalo

I think I don't think we should do it. When I hear of some of the heinous crimes that complete monsters commit, I think, "I'll do it, please. Can I peel his skin off with a dull razor for a few days, before I slowly slit his throat ?". If I knew, without a doubt., In other words, If I saw someone murder someone else, and I knew, I'd say, "Yeah, hang him". The problem comes with the legal system, mistakes happen every day. Innocent people are convicted, and guilty ones go free. I would kill myself if I were on a jury that wrongfully convicted an innocent man, only to find out after his execution, we had made a mistake, someone else did it. Can you imagine ? I don't think the State should be in the business of killing people anyway, it sets a bad example. Besides, life without parole is far worse punishment, if that's what you are looking for. I know if I was in that situation, I'd say, "Just kill me, I don't wanna spend the next 50 years in this hellhole !". I guess I don't believe.If you just stick someone in prison, and you find out they are innocent later, at least you can let them out. You can't do that if they are dead. It won't make up for it, but at least they are alive.And I don't believe it's a deterrent. It is vengance, pure and simple, sometimes well deserved. If you think the punk who is robbing you at gunpoint is thinking about the death penalty, I believe you are mistaken.It has been shown that it is cheaper to keep someone in prison than to execute them, if you are worried about financial matters. With all the mandatory appeals and stuff, executing someone is far more expensive than feeding him balogna sandwiches for the next 50 years.

Duvel

It is very effective! It has been proven to work! It is the best crime prevention tool. You kill, rape, molest children, spy on your country, you get caught, you will never do it again.

susieqj

yes sometimes they get the wrong person but most of the time they get the right person..And yes we should keep the death pently when they are in prison guess who feeds them?? That's right we do

ItsThatGuy

I feel about like you. I think capital punishment is barbaric and we should have grown past it by now. But when I hear about the things the criminals did I don't feel sorry for them. I would support the death penalty even though I feel it's barbaric if I believed it worked, but it doesn't.There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. It doesn't bring the victim back. It costs MUCH more than keeping someone in prison forever.And you're right, in the last 20 years or so literally dozens of people have been freed from jail after DNA examination of the evidence in their trial. Some of these people were in prison for decades! We don't know if anyone has been executed wrongly because when a criminal is executed all the evidence from his trial is destroyed. The sad thing is that people who support the death penalty DON'T CARE! Crime and punishment has become a political football. Any politician who doesn't believe in the death penalty is immediately jumped on as being 'soft on crime'. So to protect themselves they try to outdo each other in strengthening laws and lengthening sentences. Nobody dares speak out against the death penalty. Bill Clinton took time out from his campaign in 1992 to go to the State Capital in Little Rock and sit there while a guy was executed and NOT make that last-minute call. The man who was executed was so mentally retarded that when he couldn't finish his last meal he asked the guards to save a piece of pecan pie for him to eat later. And GW Bush made a name for himself by executing more people than any governor in history--which obviously qualified him to be a good president. 8^)

sallybowles

I'm in a bit of a moral quandry on this one myself.Ethically speaking I don't agree with the Death Penalty. I don't believe that a state should have the power of life and death over citizens and I don't believe that anything is really made better for the victim or the victim's family.That said, I have to argue that, economically speaking, it simply isn't worthwhile or really viable to pay the millions of pounds it would cost to keep that murderer or rapist alive. That money could be much better spent on education and rehabilitation in order to try to prevent these crimes from happening.I think, on balance, I am leaning towards the latter; but only just.

LITTLE_JOHN

there is a time for all things.....time to be born,time to laugh,time to weep,time to build,time to tear down,time to plant,time to harvest,time to work,time to sleep,and yes, there are a time to die.i also believe that one can speed their time to die up.for those that harm a child or commit cold-hearted murder, yes they should be put to death. the death penalty is needed.if some evil person just rape your helpless child or killed your 83yr old mother, would you ask the judge to just be easy on him? i would say hang the bastard in the middle of down town, or let me shoot him in between his eyes with my 44 magnum. let that be an example to all others that commit such acts. crime would drop 95% on the same day with out an election.....most of all people that is against capital puinshipment is for killing unborn children..

torit

A penalty that is not carried out until years after the crime makes no sense to then conclude the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on maintenance of the criminal with a death walk. If there is a death penalty, then there should be a defined length of time for it to be carried out -- perhaps 12 months -- period.I'm for it; but not for taking years to get the job done.

RichardP

I'm for it. But I am also willing to pay some extra taxes to make it mandatory that any and all DNA evidence be tested. It is only used if there is a lack of witness testimony. Relying on witnesses only to gain a capital conviction is severely flawed. Too many times a wrongful identification is made. Some people in times of stress can alter facts unknowingly to ID a suspect. Many times two different people have entirely different descriptions of the suspect. Every way imaginable should be used to prove guilt. Some say that the death penalty is not a deterrent. It may not deter some from committing a capital offense but it DOES deter that one person who is convicted from ever doing it again. Too many killers have gained their freedom, even after serving very long sentences, only to kill again. The ones who have had their death sentence carried out ARE deterred from ever killing again. My cousin was one of those who suffered at the hands of a "rehabilitated" murderer. This person had killed his girlfriend in 1975, served 24 years, was deemed no longer a threat to society, let go and killed my cousin 2 months later after raping her. He should never have had the chance.

SusanS

Against. When you look at the way the death penalty system actually functions, you have to conclude that the only purpose it serves is retribution or revenge. I agree with all your points. I see that a couple of answerers are mistaken about costs and deterrence and have not thought about the consequences of streamlining the process. Sound bites are no substitute for facts with credible sources.This week, the 129th person on death row was released with proof of being wrongfully convictioned. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don’t.Life without parole, on the books in 48 states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending 23 of 24 hours a day locked in a tiny cell is not a picnic. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.The death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison, mostly because of the upfront costs of legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people. (upfront=before and during the initial trial)The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. Murder victim family members have testified that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. Speed up the process and we will execute innocent people.Sourceseath Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org, for stats on executions, reports on costs, deterrence studies, links to FBI crime stats and links to testimony (at state legislatures) of victims' family members.FBI http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_04.html The Innocence Project, www.innocenceproject.orghttp://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/COcosttestimony.pdf page 3 and 4 on why the death penalty is so expensivehttp://www.njadp.org/forms/signon-survivor.html for statements of victims’ families

BanjoandSullivan

I'm for the death penalty. Always have been. It is too costly to lock someone up for life. The process of execution needs to be expedited. Only in America do we provide food clothing and shelter for our criminals, but we kill the dog that bites just to protect its master.