Death Penalty, is it right or wrong? Options

[Ze world is a Ma...]

YES you kill you die pay life for taking life

but if the the person that killed was wrong in the head adn didnt knwo what he was doin and there was proof then he should get treatment not die

[krazyxp]

WRONG. who are we to judge when its right to take a life or not? that's God's choice and His alone.

[Spirited Away]

WRONG. who are we to judge when its right to take a life or not? that's God's choice and His alone.

Well, if God would protect those who are just trying to live their life from those killers then there wouldn't be a need for capital punishment.

[sporadic]

Once we perfect the justice system (or at least get it 99% accurate.. at least) then we can decide on the death penalty.
I, personally, think rotting away in a prison is worse than death.

[Devastation]

its right. killing another = yourself being killed.

[Spirited Away]

What is wrong with the justice system? And if it is bad/corrupted, then what alternative do we have? Life in prison doesn't do much to a serial killer who's psychotic... or at least, I don't think so.

[sweetdreamsx3]

Yes for death penalty! I mean you can always go through your head to decide what to do and what not to do, but once you've already done it and it's something bad, then it's wrong. Like killing someone for no reason or something like that...

Does THAT make sense? Eh..I'm starting to confuse myself.

[sikdragon]

kerry is for the death penalty, but only if they are terrorists. but wait isnt someone who deserves the death penalty a terrorist? causing terror to their victims and their victims communities? i guess ur not a terrorist unless ur arab in kerry's book.

I support the death penalty, as long as the person being executed knew at the time or now knows that what they did was wrong by legal standards.

[is2diexd]

YES and i think they should use that penalty EVERYTIME someone is 100% guilty to purposly murdering someone. because they deserve to die when they has taken away someone else's life. or for like a serial rapist that raped like 50 people -_-.....

[bebekins]

as long as it fits the crime, but some of those murders actually WANT to die, so naturally, i think the best way to punish them is to let them live the hellish life in prison being someones "bubba"

[*Kathleen*]

as long as it fits the crime, but some of those murders actually WANT to die, so naturally, i think the best way to punish them is to let them live the hellish life in prison being someones "bubba"

But how would you determine that?

[xnastyninjagrlx]

I am sometimes for this and sometimes against this. Some death penatly can sometimes punish the wrong people, but we have to blame the judge on that for not getting his facts straight. But if we're talking about punishing someone for murder then I am FOR it cuz you dont' want anyone to mess with the people that you love and the only reasonable way to punish them is for them to pay for it with their own lives.

[F1R3B4T]

yup im for death penalties.

[xnastyninjagrlx]

Well, if God would protect those who are just trying to live their life from those killers then there wouldn't be a need for capital punishment.

God does have the power to protect. But when things happen, it is by the evil nature of men, shouldn't blame God for what men cause. But that's in the god forum so sorriee

[Angelos]

im for it sometimes i guess ohh damn another debate where god shows up this is really annoying

[mouse_3k]

my opinion, if they killed someone, then they deserved to be killed too.

[sporadic]

In debate, god will always be mentioned. Rawr.

[bebekins]

But how would you determine that?

beats me; i was just saying that if someone steals half a million dollars dont kill him

[Spirited Away]

God does have the power to protect. But when things happen, it is by the evil nature of men, shouldn't blame God for what men cause. But that's in the god forum so sorriee

Well, the person that I was quoting said that it's God's choice to take life, not ours, so then I said that if God would provide protection from the evils of men, then there wouldn't be a problem of evil men killing good men.

[nyctophiliac]

i'm for the death penalty becuase i mean if you kill someone or do something really bad you should be killed too

[*the_village_idiot*]

wow there's so many replies...but i am against the death penalty--life imprisonment without the possibility of parole should be the chosen punishment over the death penalty.

for one..

the death penalty actually serves as no deterrent. there are studies gathered from the fbi uniform crime reports that showing that during the last 20 years, the homicide rates in us states w/ the death penalty have been 48%-101% higher than in states w/o the death penalty. so putting someone to death really doesn't steer others in the right direction--it doesn't necessarily scare someone to not commit a serious crime like...premediated murder... http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?sc...TATES%20WITHOUT
i'd be more scared to spend years in a 6' x 10' cell w/ other weirdos than die...i wouldn't care--i'd be dead...and once i died, it wouldn't bother me knowing i hurt other people...because i'd be dead...sry lol...i'd be fearing for my life if i spent every day in a tiny cell, knowing there would be no escape--no possibility of parole. no misery and no suffering if i died.

death penalty is oftened used when someone is acused of first degree murder...and most people will probably say that life imprisonment is a worse punishment than death penalty--whoever commits first degree murder should suffer. and i don't think that's being inhuman--i think it's being reasonable...

avoiding the death penalty by making someone spend the rest of his or her life in prison also costs society less monetarily. (even if it does take a considerable amount of tax funds like strice mentioned) studies from the legal department of kansas reveal that the estimated median cost of a case in which the death penalty sentence was given was $1.2million compared to the same estimated cost for a non-death penalty case of %740,000. deathpenaltyinfo.org we shouldn't have to pay for other peoples crimes.

haha i actually took a speech class over the summer--one of our assignments was to give a persuasive speech and mine was why life imprisonment should be instititued instead of the death penalty--i don't have very strong arguments--haha for content of my speech i didn't score too high xP

..but i'm against the death penalty

[*the_village_idiot*]

argh...that always happens...okay the link was screwed up--not that anyone would want to see it... >>

http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=167

haha if you scroll down there's a chart under STATES WITH THE DEATH PENALTY V. STATES WITHOUT i thought it was interesting ^^

[ComradeRed]

Interesting stats. I will say that the higher US murder rate compared to Europe is due to our more aggressive approach to the War on Drugs, and not the death penalty. The fact that North Dakota (w/o the penalty) has a SLIGHTLY lower murder rate than South Dakota (which has it) is small enough as to be statistically insignificant. This is also the only valid comparison. There are so many differences between Vermont and Louisiana that comparing the murder rate between the two is really meaningless. The site did, however, bring up four neighboring states:

Wisconsin/Illinois: Illinois has something called the City of Chicago -- that would increase the overall crime rate tremendously in the state. Illinois also has tougher gun control laws than Wisconsin does.

Iowa/Missouri: Missouri has two large cities, each with its own ghettos -- Iowa has none. Missouri also has tougher gun control and drug laws than Iowa does.

Massachusetts/Connecticut: This one's harder to explain ... All I can think of is that Connecticut has some major issues... I would like to see what part of Connecticut the murders are happening in (the New York side or the Rhode Island side) -- I bet that most of the murders are happening in the New York side. Crime in a city often carries over, and Fairfax County, Connecticut is right next to New York City. I think that might be enough to drag the overall average up.

West Virginia/Virginia: The difference is small here, and I think it can be attributed more to the fact that Virginia has tougher gun laws, and also cities, whereas in West Virginia you just have hicks with guns who aren't worth robbing.

A correlation does not prove casuation -- Three of those four examples I could attribute to the state without the death penalty having fewer gun laws. There is actually a stronger correlation between more guns, less crime than there is between no death peantly, less crime. I'm not saying either is true, just that a correlation doesn't prove that there is a causation.

That said, I still believe that the death penalty has a VERY SLIGHT increase on crime that comes with it, but it is TINY in comparison to the crime increases we see when we try gun control and what is infinitely worse, drug control.

Ah, and one more thing: I will agree to the statistics that the death penalty leads to a higher number of police officers killed (offest by the slightly lowre number of people OVERALL, thus creating the very slight increase). However, most states with the death penalty are also states where drug laws are very strictly enforced ... in those cases, the police may be executing unjust laws, and their killings percieved as justified (This is in the law actually -- in most states, if a policeman tries to arrest you on a false or unjust warrant, killing said policeman only invokes a charge of Involuntary Manslaughter, not First Degree Murder).

[picaso_smile]

So this is basicly what the title says. Do you believe in the death penalty? Do you think that if you kill somebody you should be killed? If you were president would you support it?

[*Statistik*]

Yes, you deserve the same cause u did to others