Death Penalty, is it right or wrong? Options

[EmeraldKnight]

everyone knows that killing someone is wrong and a crime

EVERYONE knows? thats a pretty big generalization.. you could say MOST everyone knows.. but realli, if a kid was never told or informed, how could they possibly know?

[Spirited Away]

But what if the child wasnt influenced by an adult, what if the child was say, influenced by the media or something?

Well, not only children, but also adults are influenced by the media every day. My little cousins learned the ABCs from Big Bird and I got rid of my accent from watching soap opras, I think. Hehe. My opinions are often formulated from watching and reading different news sources.

It shouldn't be an excuse.

However, I believe that a child does not have the capacity to know much of regret and sorrow. Regret is a powerful emotion. I think it's punishment enough for a child growing up knowing that he/she murdered someone.

I still do not think that child should walk free in society, but I don't think death is the answer either. Depending on the situation and the child, I might say let them live with that regret for the rest of their life. But then again, it really does depend on the child.

[EmeraldKnight]

However, I believe that a child does not have the capacity to know much of regret and sorrow. Regret is a powerful emotion. I think it's punishment enough for a child growing up knowing that he/she murdered someone.

That I agree with, but going on with the regret part, if an adult shows a lot of regret and remorse at his actions, do you think he should die?

[Spirited Away]

That I agree with, but going on with the regret part, if an adult shows a lot of regret and remorse at his actions, do you think he should die?

How do we know if his regrets are real?

That's what I mean when I said it depends on the child. I don't think a child would know much about play acting regret, if he/she does, then that child doesn't deserve pity.

An adult may be genuinely be remorseful or he may only act that way to get out of jam. You'd never know.

But that's why I agree with capital punishment, it prevents people who wants to do bad from actually doing the horrid deed, because there'll be a severe punishment for it. It's something to instill fear in people.

If they know that their crime will lead to the death penalty, and they still carry it out, then they deserve what's coming do they not? They must take responsibilty for their own actions.

[EmeraldKnight]

How do we know if his regrets are real?

That's what I mean when I said it depends on the child. I don't think a child would know much about play acting regret, if he/she does, then that child doesn't deserve pity.

An adult may be genuinely be remorseful or he may only act that way to get out of jam. You'd never know.

But that's why I agree with capital punishment, it prevents people who wants to do bad from actually doing the horrid deed, because there'll be a severe punishment for it. It's something to instill fear in people.

If they know that their crime will lead to the death penalty, and they still carry it out, then they deserve what's coming do they not? They must take responsibilty for their own actions.

I see what you mean, but many of the crimes carried out are done spontaneously out of passion/rage or something, in which they may have known the consequences but dont realize it in their frenzied state of anger, so the fear they feel normally is blocked out anyways

[Spirited Away]

I see what you mean, but many of the crimes carried out are done spontaneously out of passion/rage or something, in which they may have known the consequences but dont realize it in their frenzied state of anger, so the fear they feel normally is blocked out anyways

I've heard of 'saying things in anger', I've done it enough to last a life time, and I suppose 'doing things in anger' happens, too. But punching someone in the nose or breaking their jaw is completely harmless compared to shooting someone in the head or in the back going for the kill.

Spontaneity happens, I've no doubt of that. But that's why there are different sentences for murder. There's involuntary manslaugher vs voluntary manslaughter; killing in self-defense... etc.

If you mean spontaneity by involuntary manslaughter, than I suppose the death sentence would be too harsh. But if a murder was planned and there was an intention to kill, then the death sentence is justified.

Edit: don't forget first and second degree murders as well... and third degree.. capital murder... so many.

[ryfitaDF]

why not just draft everyone on death row? 2 birds with one stone.

[princess2113]

I've heard of 'saying things in anger', I've done it enough to last a life time, and I suppose 'doing things in anger' happens, too. But punching someone in the nose or breaking their jaw is completely harmless compared to shooting someone in the head or in the back going for the kill.

Spontaneity happens, I've no doubt of that. But that's why there are different sentences for murder. There's involuntary manslaugher vs voluntary manslaughter; killing in self-defense... etc.

If you mean spontaneity by involuntary manslaughter, than I suppose the death sentence would be too harsh. But if a murder was planned and there was an intention to kill, then the death sentence is justified.

Edit: don't forget first and second degree murders as well... and third degree.. capital murder... so many.

i think to get the death penelty u have to have planned murder...not sure but i heard it sumewhere...like u cant b mentally ill or have done it out of shock...gotta b planned....im still against it thou...i mean u r punishing them for killing by killing? when kids hear abt this doesnt it set an ex...ok the gov kills so violence is ok? i think they shuld b in prision all their life...not killed

[WildGriffin]

i think to get the death penelty u have to have planned murder...not sure but i heard it sumewhere...like u cant b mentally ill or have done it out of shock...gotta b planned....im still against it thou...i mean u r punishing them for killing by killing? when kids hear abt this doesnt it set an ex...ok the gov kills so violence is ok? i think they shuld b in prision all their life...not killed

It costs alot of money to keep someone alive. If they're gonna die in jail anyways, might as well suspend the wait and get it over with. What kind of life is jail life anyways?

[EmeraldKnight]

It costs alot of money to keep someone alive. If they're gonna die in jail anyways, might as well suspend the wait and get it over with. What kind of life is jail life anyways?

It gives them time to think about and regret what they've done

why not just draft everyone on death row? 2 birds with one stone.

That is extremely risky as if we hand them guns to fight with, they may start shooting our soldiers

[princess2113]

It costs alot of money to keep someone alive. If they're gonna die in jail anyways, might as well suspend the wait and get it over with. What kind of life is jail life anyways?

ok yes im bring religion in here...if they r in jail they may come to know God n ask for forgiveness........if u kill them they may never come to know God...so bye killing them they mite go to hell...let them die in God's timeing n the mite go to Heaven...its not for us to decide when sume1 dies...God brought u into this earth...He shuld b able to decide when to take u out

[EmeraldKnight]

ok yes im bring religion in here...

*sigh* joy well at least you're on my side

Since I despise debating religion.. i'll let someone else answer it

[princess2113]

*sigh* joy well at least you're on my side 

Since I despise debating religion.. i'll let someone else answer it

LOL yeah...for once i guess im on ur side?? n u spelled despise rite (i think) lol gud job babe!!!

[*Kathleen*]

ok yes im bring religion in here...if they r in jail they may come to know God n ask for forgiveness........if u kill them they may never come to know God...so bye killing them they mite go to hell...let them die in God's timeing n the mite go to Heaven...its not for us to decide when sume1 dies...God brought u into this earth...He shuld b able to decide when to take u out

What if they don't believe in God? Ack. Please don't bring in religion into this. Not everyone believes in God; thus, are they going to go to Hell?

It costs alot of money to keep someone alive. If they're gonna die in jail anyways, might as well suspend the wait and get it over with. What kind of life is jail life anyways?

Yes, but a lot of times, criminals find ways to get out of jail by pretending to be normal or whatnot...I think uninspiredfae brought this up in the first two pages...I mean...there are many good lawyers out there, and it doesn't take much to prove to others that you went from a psychopath to a seemingly normal person. Even psychos can act.

[EmeraldKnight]

What if they don't believe in God? Ack. Please don't bring in religion into this. Not everyone believes in God; thus, are they going to go to Hell?

*applauds Kathleen*

Yes, but a lot of times, criminals find ways to get out of jail by pretending to be normal or whatnot...I think uninspiredfae brought this up in the first two pages...I mean...there are many good lawyers out there, and it doesn't take much to prove to others that you went from a psychopath to a seemingly normal person. Even psychos can act.

Even psychos can act? Erm... perhaps for a while, but after spending several years in prison, do you believe that they'd still be able to carry on the charade?

There are many good lawyers out there, but what if they got a bad one? Must they die just because of their misfortune?

[*NatiMarie*]

Okay, let's see, for me: no death penalty. Why? Okay, there are many good lawyers but oftentimes are people tried for crimes they did not commit. It's like this Nicaraguense man that was in jail for so many years (more than 30), for a crime that he didn't even commit. They would have taken away his life, but then decided to have him stay him jail. He was let out, but thankfully didn't have his life taken away. Would the death penalty be justifiable in this case? I mean, they knew he wasn't guilty until after his term. So yeah...

[EmeraldKnight]

Okay, let's see, for me: no death penalty. Why? Okay, there are many good lawyers but oftentimes are people tried for crimes they did not commit. It's like this Nicaraguense man that was in jail for so many years (more than 30), for a crime that he didn't even commit. They would have taken away his life, but then decided to have him stay him jail. He was let out, but thankfully didn't have his life taken away. Would the death penalty be justifiable in this case? I mean, they knew he wasn't guilty until after his term. So yeah...

Thank you! Yes, there are good lawyers out there Kathleen, but there are also bad lawyers too, and yes someone may have brought up DNA testing as well (too lazy to check back and read), but some states DONT ALLOW it as evidence

[*Kathleen*]

Even psychos can act? Erm... perhaps for a while, but after spending several years in prison, do you believe that they'd still be able to carry on the charade?

Er you know what I mean! Besides, if they were truly determined, they'd hold it up. What if they were intending to kill someone once they got out? That would make them even more determined. Also, you can be partially psycho or something like that. I remember watching something about that.

There are many good lawyers out there, but what if they got a bad one? Must they die just because of their misfortune?

They still committed the crime...they should still pay.

[EmeraldKnight]

Er you know what I mean!  Besides, if they were truly determined, they'd hold it up. What if they were intending to kill someone once they got out? That would make them even more determined. Also, you can be partially psycho or something like that. I remember watching something about that.

The chances of that happening are extremely slim, far less than my next point below:

They still committed the crime...they should still pay.

So if an innocent person got a bad lawyer and was convicted, they should pay for a crime they didnt commit?

[*Kathleen*]

Okay, let's see, for me: no death penalty. Why? Okay, there are many good lawyers but oftentimes are people tried for crimes they did not commit. It's like this Nicaraguense man that was in jail for so many years (more than 30), for a crime that he didn't even commit. They would have taken away his life, but then decided to have him stay him jail. He was let out, but thankfully didn't have his life taken away. Would the death penalty be justifiable in this case? I mean, they knew he wasn't guilty until after his term. So yeah...

Sorry for the double post - I'm so slow with responses. This probably won't even be a double post. Okay, back to serious matters. Yes, but how many times do these things actually happen? I know I've said this before...I suppose I'll say it again. Because there are a few innocent people that get convicted for a crime they didn't commit and you take away the death penalty, what about all those criminals that should be killed? What about all those criminals that should be killed, but with the absence of a death penalty, get out in twenty years and kill again? There are most likely more actual criminals opposed to innocent people; thus, more innocent people will be killed on the anti-death penalty side. Moreover, *Realizes she lost her train of thought* without the death penalty, those that want to commit murders but are too afraid of the death penalty will do the crime anyways, assured that they won't get it. I know that wasn't my point. Ahh. *Thinks* Oh yeah! People that are truly innocent and feel they have a bad lawyer can always represent themselves in court, or get a new one, you know.

[EmeraldKnight]

Yes, but how many times do these things actually happen? I know I've said this before...I suppose I'll say it again. Because there are a few innocent people that get convicted for a crime they didn't commit and you take away the death penalty, what about all those criminals that should be killed? What about all those criminals that should be killed, but with the absence of a death penalty, get out in twenty years and kill again? There are most likely more actual criminals opposed to innocent people; thus, more innocent people will be killed on the anti-death penalty

Just because the press publicizes all the criminals and not many of the innocent, doesnt mean that there isnt a high amount [is there a topic on media influences or something here? there should be]

Ahh. *Thinks* Oh yeah! People that are truly innocent and feel they have a bad lawyer can always represent themselves in court, or get a new one, you know.

What if they can't afford one and a bad lawyer gets assigned? With the poor economy at the moment.. a poor person could easily get framed for a crime and be assigned a bad lawyer

[*Kathleen*]

Just because the press publicizes all the criminals and not many of the innocent, doesnt mean that there isnt a high amount [is there a topic on media influences or something here? there should be]

I answered this in the other topic.

What if they can't afford one and a bad lawyer gets assigned? With the poor economy at the moment.. a poor person could easily get framed for a crime and be assigned a bad lawyer

As I said...he/she can always represent him/herself in court if need be. Furthermore, there are plenty of associations out there that are free of charge...you can always ask the court to assign a new lawyer, or if you think the lawyer is doing bad, or you can suggest something else, just tell them. The point is: if you're truly innocent, there are ways to prove you are.

[*NatiMarie*]

I mean, how can the death penalty be justifiable. There are always those who get unfairly accused, and although those numbers are slim, those innocent lives were taken away unfairly. It's okay Kathleen, I lose my train of thought often. Like I was gonna just say something good too but I completely forgot *turns down music*. I have now seen that I cannot multi-task.

[EmeraldKnight]

As I said...he/she can always represent him/herself in court if need be

But without experience as a lawyer, how can they provide an adequate defense?

The point is: if you're truly innocent, there are ways to prove you are.

Then why do innocent ppl go to jail anyways?

[*Kathleen*]

But without experience as a lawyer, how can they provide an adequate defense?

What about hiring another one? Well, not hiring, but requesting? Searching for another free one? Also, this is why people should pay attention in civics class. Haha. Seriously, if they've seen the lawyer fail, if the person is truly determined and knows they're innocent, they'll find a way to prove it.

Then why do innocent ppl go to jail anyways?

I never said there weren't innocent people going to jail anyways. Your intent is to help out the most people, correct? Did you disreguard my whole comment about that up there from before?