» Home » Society
Death Penalty Is Necessary.
We Need Death Penalty To Punish Those Most Heinous And Ruthless Murders And Give Fear To Those Who Attempt To Act Those Merciless Crimes.For More Information About Death Penalty, Please Read here
 hitomi  28 Nov 2007 15:51
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
I have been saying for a long time that we should bring the death penalty back. One of the only things I have against it is that I have heard of previous cases where they have somehow found out after the accused is dead that they were innocent. Therefore, the only thing I will say against it is that they need to be certifiably sure that the accused is definitely the criminal before doing so. However, in this day and age with the good DNA processes etc. I see no reason why they can't be sure. Therefore, I totally agree with this! Why should we be spending our taxes on housing monsters in cushy prisons? They should be dead! That will be a deterrent to other potential criminals....I am of course talking about serious criminals like murderers and not petty criminals.
 
 Emilie  09 Apr 2013 11:59
 Add a Comment
 
 
Nobody has a right to say who lives and who dies. And those who take that decision into their own hands, deserve to lose whatever they took from another.
 
 2sh3p  20 Feb 2013 20:27
 Add a Comment
 
 
Not to mention saving resources you would otherwise expend to keep so many people locked up for their whole life.
 
 Dadmad6  17 Feb 2013 17:44
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes. The death penalty is needed to keep prisoners in hand.
 
 n00b  08 Feb 2013 21:32
 1 Comment
 
 Despite evidence that indicates it has no effect on reducing violent crime?
by  ohon
 01 Apr 2013 05:02
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
If you murder someone, you shoudl pay with your life. We can make that choice because we rule this land and we must maintain order within in it. Order equals balance and it isn't balanced when there is no life to pay when one is wrongfully taken. The SandyHook killer should die. Not that his life alone would be close to paying for what he did
 
 df0512  26 Dec 2012 13:10
 Add a Comment
 
 
While a serial murder is in jail watching tv, playing the playstation 3 , talking to others. Out in the streets are the nicest people you could meet looking for somewhere to sleep tonight.
 
 poyatevale  25 Sep 2012 12:00
 Add a Comment
 
 
Of course!
Why the hell do we have to pay for the murder's everyday expenditures in jail? Why do we have to look after them?
 
 melody95  31 Jul 2012 04:05
 Add a Comment
 
 
100% agree with you here, for those who take a life, should have their's taken away from them! Thats justice rather than sitting in a jail playing xboxs and PS3s, they have better care in a prison than in a care home! An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. It is also great at deterrence.
 
 jdawg92  10 Jul 2012 09:57
 Add a Comment
 
 
Death penalty is essential. For heinous and disgustingly unacceptlable crime a brutal, slow and painful death is needed to teach the criminal a lesson and make him regret what he did. He will get the quick way out but will regret and feel guilt for his crimes through the pain and it will save millions in tax money rather than having the person live through it. Life is the ultimate gift and when somebody abuses the privellage in a horrible way then they should be stripped of that gift. Death penalty would also serve as a detterant to criminals.
 
 tohin  07 May 2012 09:21
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes it is
 
 bobetta105  12 Feb 2012 21:58
 Add a Comment
 
 
We need to execute everyone who murders someone.

All governments, the good ones and even the bad ones, are ordained by God and have the right and obligation to bear the sword against those who practice evil.

Romans 13:3
3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same.
4. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
 
 AR454  09 Oct 2011 06:30
 2 Comments
 
 Whenever we don't execute murderers, we build up unrequited blood against ourselves. Every murder that goes unanswered causes judgment to build up against ourselves and against our nation. The Lord demands a reckoning from animals who kill men and from men who kill men.

Genesis 9:5
5. Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.
6. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God He made man.

In the Old Testament, killing was not only allowed by God but was instituted and required by God. So, the issue is not: is it wrong to kill but what are the conditions in which it is wrong? In the 1611 King James Version of the Bible, the translation that most people are familiar with, the sixth commandment reads:

Exodus 20:13
13. Thou shalt not kill.

The word “kill” was an incorrect translation of the Hebrew word “ratsach" which is correctly translated “murder.” In all modern translations of the Bible, this error has been corrected. The New King James Version was finished in 1982 and the sixth commandment now reads:

Exodus 20:13
13. "You shall not murder.

There is no place for premeditated murder but Scripture is very clear that there is a just retribution … a just self-defense.

Exodus 22:2
2. "If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.

A Christian has the right to take a life. A Christian is instructed to turn the other cheek to avoid a fight but when a Christian’s life is threatened or he sees innocent people about to be murdered, he has the right to protect himself and an obligation to protect innocent life. That's the difference between a Christian and a criminal … a Christian protects innocent life but a criminal takes innocent life.
by  AR454
 09 Oct 2011 06:32
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
An eye for an eye
 
 ilovemw2  08 Oct 2011 22:17
 Add a Comment
 
 
I support the death penalty if either a person attempts to murder at least 20 people or if they enter the US illegally. For details, please read what I wrote in " illegal immigrants should be executed on the spot when discovered by authorities.
 
 IWillTrump  24 Sep 2011 01:23
 Add a Comment
 
 
Somebody kills someone, they deserve to die. That's my logic.
 
 Falkon97  31 Mar 2011 19:48
 1 Comment
 
 and is the correct logic.
by  jdawg92
 12 Jul 2012 08:46
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I agree only if the evidence is highly conclusive and if the crime is suitable for the punishment but i do believe for crimes like murder that this would be a suitable punishment.
 
 Eeyore  09 Sep 2010 20:24
 Add a Comment
 
 
I believe in the death penalty. I agree it could be a deterrent to crime...if it was carried out...death penalty cases automatic State Supreme Court Review within 30 days, sentence carried out within 45 days.... Why society should pay for murderers, who die easier than their victims is beyond me....oh, lets be clear...there is a big difference between a murderer and a killer...what is it you may ask? The killer is the one that carries out the death sentence on the murderer...
 
 wtfya64  02 Aug 2009 05:28
 Add a Comment
 
 
I am for it. I also believe that the following crimes means the death penalty. Child molestation, raping a kid producing kiddy porn. Another case for the death penalty is taxing people too much. Lol
 
 offcgibby  24 Jul 2009 23:38
 Add a Comment
 
 
The reason that the death penalty isn't as effective as it should be is that it isn't used enough! What gives me the right you say, well the FACT is that I have the RIGHT to walk down the street without being scared, beaten, robbed or killed. We are willing to put them away and throw away the key but not to have the strength to do what is necessary because of our concience.Thats pretty hypocritical to me.. Execution is different than murder, after you cross that line with murder you have given the rights to your life away, they have a choice. The victim doesn't . There should be no mercy for someone who has shown no mercy in his or her own life. People need to be held responsible for there actions and a message needs to be sent to people eye for an eye. . These people arent sorry they're cold, they dont care what you have to say. If it would have been you they killed they wouldn't have any more remorse then they do already. Yes people can change but a person who was murdered doesn't get the chance to have any life changes or see their kids grow up. I think some of us have forgotten that the only reason that you have the ability to cry about death row inmates and there feelings is because brave young men and women have taken many many lives in war so suck it up and have the backbone to stand up for yourself and for your rights as an american . One in every 31 adults, or 7.3 million Americans, is in prison, on parole or probation, at a cost to the states of $47 billion in 2008, according to a new study.Criminal correction spending is outpacing budget growth in education, transportation and public assistance, based on state and federal data.
I think saving money would only be a bonus, let us build more schools and teach every one about how its wrong to take innocent people's lives. P.s. I'm sorry for all the innocent victims of the system they deserve a memorial.
 
 JR  24 Jul 2009 20:57
 1 Comment
 
 You say the only reason it doesn't work is because it isn't used enough. Please tell me why is it that the US has a higher homicide rate per capita than the UK?. There is no death penalty in the UK. I would think if it was really a deterrent, then the country that had the death penalty (but only uses it a little) would have a lower homicide rate then the country that has none at all.

No wonder they laugh at us.
by  ABCXYZ
 24 Jul 2009 21:31
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I think if someone kills another person, they should be killed themselves. Its really not fair that people get a few years in prison for murder and other extreme cases. Its not fair.
The death penelty is stilll around in some places in America which is a very good thing as people like that really really shouldnt be granted the privilage of a life.
 
 Lynchee  02 Jul 2009 13:12
 Add a Comment
 
 
What is a fair punishment for killing someone
sitting in jail and getting TV three square meals and facilities that some law abiding citizens do not even have?
The simple punishment for murderers should be death!!!
 
 4willis  28 Mar 2009 19:13
 1 Comment
 
 The death penalty is only used in certain cases. Even if someone is guilty of murder, the death penalty might not be an option in the sentencing for that criminal. I have mixed feelings on the death penalty. I don't really have any pity for those who commit crimes horrible enough to land themselves a death sentence, but I think it is a quick and painless way out. In the case of serial killers, many have tortured their victims before killing them. How is justice served by giving them a painless death that many of them ask for anyway? In most cases where parents murder their kids, leaving them to suffer the guilt for the rest of their lives seems to me to be more of a punishment than killing them in a painless and cruelty free way. Each violent offender has to answer to God (in my opinion) when they do pass away. If they have truly found Christ and have asked for forgiveness, they will be forgiven. If we execute them and they get to go to Heaven more quickly, they have not really suffered much punishment for what they have done. Then again, if God sees fit to spare them, I suppose I shouldn't really worry myself about how much suffering we, as a society, can inflict on violent criminals before they die of either natural causes or execution.
by  my2cents2u
 22 Jun 2009 14:38
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Yes. If you murder somebody, you do not deserve to live. Instead of murderers languishing in prison for decades, paid for by tax-payers, they should just be executed. Those who show no mercy to the innocent deserve no mercy themselves.

Of course, one has to make sure that the accused is definitely guilty before proceeding.
 
 IdeasMan  14 Feb 2009 12:53
 1 Comment
 
 Quite correct and the only reason I am against the death penalty. DNA evidence alone, would not be enough to convince me, the person is guilty.
by  keepmindok
 14 Feb 2009 13:32
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
This is very simple.....an EYE for an EYE....
 
 lubster  29 Jan 2009 10:38
 1 Comment
 
 EYE for an EYE is an outdated method which will never help us advance in civilisation. Although, what if a person has been wrongly executed and is proven innocent? It is impossible to bring this person back after his or her death.
by  GKDebator
 27 Sep 2009 12:06
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
First of all, my response will be well-considered, and I will not cuss you or use name-calling for having the courage or audacity to bring up this, debate. Plenty of other debaters, likely will, so I will leave the verbal-abuse to the lesser mortals. The domain of the animal to them. And bring this topic to a higher level = The Mind.

Good topic, by the way.

No matter what the religious community says, and I have heard it all; there ARE degrees of wrong/sin/crime.
This topic presents a very good venue to analyze this fact :

1. Murder is taking someone's life with malice-aforethought.
2. Execution is the State taking the life of a convicted murderer.
3. Killing can be the hunting of animals for sport or for food,
and in Hitler's Germany and Mussolini's Italy etc etc they killed
for sport and for "fun" only it is of fellow-human-beings.
4. Accidental-Death is when someone's life is taken but not
with knowledge-aforethought, like a car-accident.
5. Euthanasia, and this is called, "mercy-killing" suicide, only
the hiring of a Physician's hand to administer the poison,
the medical equivalent to the gunner in the back of a black
limo by the Mafia......Some think this is murder too.
6. Self-Defense : Someone tries to rape or murder you, you
do them in before they can do you in. Dog eat dog world.

There are many levels and forms of taking of human life.
To understand this fully one must look at this topic from many
angles, to fully realize what this topic entails and ethics involved.
 
 Mystery  18 Dec 2008 02:38
 3 Comments
 
 Might as well start with...
Man is on a bus. Man pulls out a gun, walks down the aisle and starts shooting people point blank in the face. Man is apprehended when bus stops. People are alive who he shot while standing and talking right in front of them. Everyone on the bus, including bleeding survivors know it was him.

Man should be shot and killed on site.

Instead, survivors who he shot had to go to his trial and face his questioning because he was representing himself.

True story. We are an idiotic society.
by  justsumguy
 18 Dec 2008 02:48
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
ABSOLUTELY!!!

From a prior posting in a similar topic:

Hell Yes!!! Bring back the Death Penalty! First it would save the different levels of government (ultimately the tax payers) a whole lot of money. Not having to pay for the babysitting services of thousands of adults would please everybody's wallets. Secondly, the number of prisoners in the United States is staggering...bringing back the Death Penalty would enable us to free some space which would in turn again save a ton of money (not needing upgrades to prisons or new prisons, etc...). Thirdly, bringing back the Death Penalty would (hopefully) lower the crime rates...if the criminals know that there actually is an ultimate punishment then prehaps they would think twice about breaking the law. And if the crime rate did not drop because criminals didn't care about the penalties of their actions...then oh well, they would be sentenced to death so their loss...I would not lose any sleep.
I only wish that if they did / when they do bring back the Death Penalty that they decrease the amount of time between sentencing and the actual carrying out of the sentence. Give the person a little time to appeal and then (provided they lost their appeal) kill them.

Cleanse the community!!!
Nolimit 17 Nov 2008 01:11
 
 nolimit  18 Dec 2008 01:58
 Add a Comment
 
 
Some people say its not right to kill a killer and if you do that , then your no different from the murderer. Oh really? Big difference between killing, murderering, and executing. Murdering is killing an innocent person purposefully for some messed up reason, killing is the ending of ones life, and executing (death penalty)is the killing in the form of punishment for a person who murdered and ruined the lifes of others.
People will argue that it doesn't solve anything. Well you may be partialy right. I don't believe it deters anyone from murdering and or raping but i feel the person doesn't desearve to get pleasure or enjoyment out of life wether its masturbating or looking at the sky or seeing any sights for the slightest fragment of a second after wat they have done because now the victims cant either. I really would like some one to prove me wrong
 
 pattheman  10 Dec 2008 06:00
 Add a Comment
 
 
I believe it is.
 
 n-stein8_  26 Oct 2008 07:27
 Add a Comment
 
 
As long as it isn't painful, it isn't cruel, and it isn't unusual.
 
 yu_yevin  15 Oct 2008 00:22
 Add a Comment
 
 
It is highly necessary. Considering all the innocent lives that are taken is rediculous! It majorly depends on what they do, though.
 
 imright20  07 Oct 2008 02:12
 Add a Comment
 
 
Some people deserve to die immediately for what they've done(ex:9/11,Columbine,VTech,Helter Skelter's group) but i also believe that others should live a few years because death is too good of an easy way out for them, but i'm the type of person that believes that if you've killed someone, you deserve to die. Same thing goes with rapists,child molesters, and such
 
 ckell663  24 Sep 2008 04:11
 Add a Comment
 
 
Yes, I believe the death penalty should exist. I think there are crimes that people cannot come back from. Point and case, Joseph Edward Duncan, who had a history of child assault and molestation charges going back to his teenage years, gets out of prison and kills an entire family save for a young boy and girl. He then takes the boy and girl to a campground where he sexually molests the boy over and over. The boy eventually stumbled out in front of the girl and Joseph puts a gun to the boy's head and kills him. The girl saw her brother get his brains blown out. Then Duncan takes the girl to a restaurant a week or two later where the waitress recognizes the girl and calls the cops.

Are you telling me this guy can be saved? If you think he can be saved, why don't you let him live in your neighborhood and play with your kids...maybe then you'd understand after you kid turns up raped and murdered. I say a quick death penalty is letting these people off the hook too soon. I like when the chair acts up on people like Duncan and doesn't kill him the first couple of times...

Besides the fact that keeping people like Duncan in prison and paying for his psychologists, psychiatrists, and all the meds he'd be on would be costing the taxpayers an arm and a leg. Slap 'em in the chair and let 'er rip!
 
 Damien  22 Sep 2008 19:08
 Add a Comment
 
 
I believe if someone kills another person the murderer should be killed.
 
 antojo  21 Sep 2008 08:53
 1 Comment
 
 you've killed millions buying certain items in the malls and shopping centres around you, therefore you should be killed. see now? do you want to die? changes everything doesn't it
by  chow0jason
 29 Oct 2008 21:15
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I agree there are already high crime rates in the u.s. No matter what party holds the presidents seat. Why do we want to keep people alive and continue paying taxes on them to eat three meals, have an exercise activity, smuggling drugs in prisons, arranging more crime, murders should be put on the death penalty and they should be given a maximum of 1 year before there day comes
 
 rhodescain  24 Aug 2008 02:20
 Add a Comment
 
 
Eye for an eye, the way I see it. I don't see why my tax dollars should pay to keep a murderer alive who is serving a life sentence.
 
 camsmommy  24 Aug 2008 01:15
 Add a Comment
 
 
For crimes such as murder, rape, child abuse and terrorism it should be brought and should be applied when there is absolute proof, indisputable DNA evidence, caught on camera or reliable witnesses then it could be very necessary to a country like Britain.
 
 kddan  31 Jul 2008 12:52
 Add a Comment
 
 
I do believe that the death penalty should be present for people who murder, rape, molest, such and such. They do not deserve to live!!!
 
 emokid832  07 Jul 2008 10:06
 1 Comment
 
 What about the chance, however small a chance, that the prisoner is innocent. Is it accaptable for an innocent man to be murdered by the state just so we can justify killing a hundred rapists, murderers, etc?
by  Kirsty08
 17 Jul 2008 18:55
Comment
  
Comment
  
The purpose of criminal punishment is not to enact vengeance, and such an attitude should not be advocated for.
Without that, there are no good reasons for capital punishment. Empirical evidence does not indicate that it will reduce violent crime. Further, false convictions do happen.
Lastly, capital punishment is not really less expensive than keeping criminals imprisoned, so financial concerns do not amount to an argument for capital punishment (despite popular belief).
 
 ohon  01 Apr 2013 05:02
 Add a Comment
 
 
A eye for an eye don't make things better. It just makes two people blind.

(Its a saying not a literal thing.)
 
 Kryten4000  02 Oct 2012 01:26
 Add a Comment
 
 
Actually, government surveys in the US have proven that states without death penalty have a much lower crime rate than those with death penalty. So its clearly not a crime-deterrent.

That aside, No one can prove or assure us that they know exactly where people go off to when they die. How can we be so sure that these criminals are actually being somehow punished after death? It think it makes more sense and is more assuring to simply send them to jail, where we KNOW that they are being punished and are suffering.

That aside, death penalty places a risk on those who are innocent. Many countries have a legal system where if you're rich you can easily afford a good lawyer and get out of your case. Its all about who can fight their case better not about who is actually guilty. So given the circumstances, it is too risky to pose such a threat on all of us with death as a punishment for it is utterly permanent.
 
 raya  16 Jun 2012 14:55
 3 Comments
 
 I''ve also seen a government survey in the US prove that states with a death penalty sentence have far less serious crime that ones without a death penalty.
by  jdawg92
 10 Jul 2012 10:02
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
It is a primal response to a morally complex issue. Humans should moved beyond this primitive mentality eons ago.



 
 pollywog  12 Jun 2012 19:51
 Add a Comment
 
 
Death is the easy route out of their offence, as it is an instant punishment. If guilty, they should have to suffer for the rest of their life for what they have done. If not guilty and falsely charged then they should have the opportunity to find more evidence so that they may be released. There is always the possibility the 'criminal' may have been set up and could be innocent. Till they find this evidence, however, I'm all for painful torture.
 
 evangela  22 Apr 2012 15:44
 Add a Comment
 
 
No you should just keep the criminials in jail for life not kill them...
 
 rjk10123  09 Mar 2012 14:17
 Add a Comment
 
 
Under no circumstances should someone take a human life!!!!!
Unless said person is medically ill and they are on life support and wish to be disconnected or as in abortions they cant feel it or understand it
 
 Jayfeather  02 Mar 2012 18:07
 1 Comment
 
 abortions are abortions, they are still killing a human being.
by  poyatevale
 25 Sep 2012 12:01
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
The death penalty does not work as a deterrent, because criminals do not believe they will get caught. As such, the severity of the punishment makes no difference. Also, there is too much risk that we will kill someone who has not committed a crime. If you falsely imprison someone, they can be released; if you falsely execute someone, there's nothing you can do.
Justice is not about satisfying the emotional need of "that person did something wrong, we must get them back for it". Humans do not need a legal and judicial system to facilitate revenge. Justice is about taking rational steps to protect citizens from crime, and given the argument against deterrent above, there is nothing that execution can do to protect people that life imprisonment can not.
 
 Copsonator  24 Feb 2012 17:58
 7 Comments
 
 It actually does work if the law is heavily enforced. I.e. Singapore.
by  Antares
 24 Feb 2012 19:31
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I think that death penalty is necessary but only in extreme cases like repeted offences from terrorsts and othe cases like that but it would make the world a less peacful pace if we used the penalty all the time . . .
 
 Chaaaz  20 May 2011 15:14
 Add a Comment
 
 
If someone killed my daughter and I was able to get my hands on him, I would kill him. But that is revenge, anger, and emotion not justice. That dead murderer can't feel pain anymore. Rationally I would rather have someone suffer a life time of guilt then get out of it with death. But if that murderer is a psychopath or a sociopath there is no guilt and they need to be removed from society, and I don't know if death is the right thing. It's like killing a bird because it flies.
 
 Volans  31 Mar 2011 20:26
 2 Comments
 
 Uhhhh it's nothing like that at all
. Flyings not a evil crime
by  ilovemw2
 08 Oct 2011 22:16
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Better to let them stay in prison and rehabilitate them than to just kill them. That's a brutish, unintelligent way of dealing with problems.

"Hey! That person did something bad! Let's kill them!"
 
 ceebee  23 Apr 2010 04:22
 3 Comments
 
 "Hey! That person did something bad! Let's kill them!" is a lot more logical than "Hey! That person did something bad! Let's use tax dollars to punish them by putting them in prisons that are a small step down from hotels!"
by  dlmiller82
 23 Apr 2010 05:50
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Depends who you are.
 
 gamenut  08 Jan 2010 05:12
 Add a Comment
 
 
I'm on the fence with this issue. Honestly, its bigger than me.
 
 Cemetary  30 Nov 2009 15:44
 Add a Comment
 
 
I have to say that I am against it. The reasoning is, I don't believe it to actually have an effect on the alleged perpetrator of any crime.

Speeding is a crime. The logic in that is; when you are driving above the posted speed limit, you are endangering others on the road. Unfortunately, many people are killed in driving related accidents or collisions if you prefer. If traffic violations were a crime that carried with it a death sentence, would that stop people from speeding, running red lights, not using turn signals, driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol (the list is huge) ? I doubt it. I would postulate, that if you are going to commit a crime, you are willing to accept the punishment, whether that punishment is known or unknown to the alleged perpetrator.

On a side note here, doesn't the killing of an inmate effectively end their sentence as they are no longer living in a cage, but rather no longer living ?

Killing is wrong. Don't do it.
 
 thevotist  12 May 2009 06:03
 Add a Comment
 
 
It actually costs less to keep people in jail for their entire life than to execute them (due to court appeals). I also do not think it is a very nice thing to do.... People can, although sometimes rare, at least change internally.
 
 Dustin0550  11 Apr 2009 02:23
 Add a Comment
 
 
So when you murder someone, it is because you as an individual do not have the authority to say who lives and dies...so sending someone to death in court implies that if you have 12 people who say "YUp, you no what that guy can die" its legally right???
No, when you kill someone you don't automatically hand you life card into your ruling govnt.
 
 coelho  16 Mar 2009 20:10
 Add a Comment
 
 
I disagree I believe that no man has the right to take the life of no man or woman's life under any circumstances. Yes it is wrong to kill to kill family,rape women, rape children,and kill a body of people. But are you no different than the killer if you kill him or her. Yes you may have had a so call honorable reason of killing him or her but at the end of the day you still took that man or woman's life. I say let the killer feel the pain of the family mentally let him sleep in the bed of person he kill let them live in house that the person kill live in (of course with police around) let him or her learn about the person they killed till they cant stand it.
 
 afocentric  01 Dec 2008 20:01
 1 Comment
 
 you couldnt be more wrong when you say "but are you no different than the killer if you kill him or her." Murder and killing are 2 very different things. Murder is the killing of the innocent for some twisted pleasure or satisfaction and killing is the ending of a life. Someone who ruins/ends the life of another should be executed(killing as the form of punishment). And you say let the killer sleep in the victims bed to let the feel the pain.... HELLO!!! if they did not feel the pain as the slit the persons throat and raped them with blood everywhere than how is letting get away with it and giving them a bed and home going to do anything.
by  pattheman
 10 Dec 2008 05:42
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I disagree, although not completely. Some people murder because they are provoked, are acting within self defence or defence of others. Also, there are people more evil than murderers at times like seriel rapists and paedophiles. Yet, giving them the death penalty is the easy option, give them all tough mandatory life sentences where they work to live, if not, let them stare for a few days but keep them alive. I know if I were a criminal, I'd rather be given the death penalty than be tortured for years or even life.
 
 MaYbCaKe  23 Oct 2008 09:25
 1 Comment
 
 agreed i also don't disagee completely it depends
by  mk1999
 10 Mar 2012 05:15
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
No I believe the death penalty is the easy way out.
 
 J_Allen  04 Sep 2008 23:32
 2 Comments
 
 this is where im not sure... maybe if you locked the murderer in a 3x5 cell and not let them out, they will eventually lose there mind which would be perfect punishment but i would make sure the bastard does not get A SINGLE enjoyment out of life, not even for a second as there victim is also no longer able to do that
by  pattheman
 10 Dec 2008 05:45
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
No no no death i f you think about it is death really necessary we all make mistakes and death is creel.
 
 bre  01 Sep 2008 18:35
 4 Comments
 
 We all make mistakes? We all rape and murder children? We all go on killing sprees? Really?
by  Damien
 22 Sep 2008 19:09
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I disagree with this because, even though there are terrible people in this world, what does killing them solve? They'd be gone, yes, but without being given the chance to learn and grow and see their fault. What kind of people take away the chance for someone else to find themselves? To find God? To apologize? If anything, killing them is not punishing them, a real punishment would be to let them live every day knowing in their heart what they did was wrong, and having to live with that pain. Death penalty is the same as murder, it's not justifiable. To kill them would be endorsing crimes and sin. Thou shalt not kill. Plain and simple. People make mistakes, and some dont learn til late in life, but you never know. How can we just give up on people like that?
 
 erinargues  05 Aug 2008 00:28
 2 Comments
 
 umm... forgetting to pick up your son at soccer practice is a mistake, not doing wat your parents say can be a mistake, BUT killings and raping an innocent person is not a mistake and most of these people are messed up in the head and wont/cant learn from their actions and most when giving the opportunity would do it again because the get pleasure from it so I WOULD WANT TO MAKE DAM SURE that they don't get that opportunity
by  pattheman
 10 Dec 2008 05:52
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Problem is when they get the wrong person, That becomes murder.;-(
 
 keepmindok  23 Jul 2008 11:19
 Add a Comment
 
 
There are other types of punishment, STRONG PUNISHMENT
 
 corted  01 Jul 2008 13:46
 1 Comment
 
 Yeah, unfortunately though, we can not torture...kinda not kosher world-wide...fix the problem...quickly...easily...cheaply....kill them.
by  nolimit
 18 Dec 2008 02:01
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
When you think about it yes the people who are serving time in jail do deserve to be punished but they they are already being punished by living in a jail cell. Their freedom is taken away. The last thing they have is life. Everyone makes mistakes but you shouldn't take their life for it. And if the crime they committed was murder then you are doing the same thing they did continuing the cycle. They took a life so take theirs. That's not the way two wrongs don't make a right. What if they were innocent sitting behind bars? How would you feel then? Killing an innocent human being? What then?...
 
 amberbee90  24 Jun 2008 01:59
 2 Comments
 
 Sure they are stuck in a cell, but they get many luxuries for murdering someone, stealing, etc. For instance, a person in jail gets a free education, everyone outside has to pay for theirs, they get to watch tv, and do nothing all day and they still get food to eat. Prisoners are better off than many of the people who have done nothing wrong.
by  shortdawg
 02 Jul 2008 19:46
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I don't really get the point of the death penalty......yes you are punishing someone for what they did to another human being and such....but wouldn't you rather have that person live their life horrible...locked up....screamed at....etc....why would you want them dead...that is just letting them off easily...
 
 Preppyboi4  20 Jun 2008 03:58
 1 Comment
 
 Trouble is they aren't locked up, screamed at etc. They are allowed to study, go to the gym, learn new trades, play pool, playstation, watch films, t.v have xmas play productions and so on and so on. They no they are safer inside as no one (relatives etc of the people they've murdered, raped etc) can get at them. Our prisons need to be like san quentin in America....bare cells no pictures, no t.v,s no games just bare cells and a bucket that is punishment and being kept locked up that way if ours were more like that perhaps they would be more of a deterrant but they are,nt. Death penalty is....
by  julieann
 06 Jul 2008 14:49
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
There are criminals who pose a danger if allowed back into society. But most states in the U.S. Now have sentences of life without parole for capital crimes -- meaning exactly that. Other states won't allow a parole hearing until 25 or 30 years later.

Unfortunately, juries who decide sentences are denied that info in most states. They think their choice is b/w death or the defendant getting out in 10 years.

Death penalties have consistently failed to show any evidence of deterrence; the costs are extremely higher; the victim's families are constantly dragged into new turmoil by the series of appeals and hearings -- neither do they receive restitution from the defendant. Most of these families receive little solace from the execution.

Also consider the inequitability of death sentences. Poor people w/ court-appointed defense attorneys of questionable competence (10 - 20% later disbarred) make up the majority of death row inmates.

A substantial number of death row inmates have been freed in the last decade as DNA evidence cast overwhelmingly doubt on their guilt.

The scientific rigor of DNA (b/c of its substantial use outside of forensics) has prompted scientific analyses of other forensics tests and methods, such as the certainty of bite marks, fingerprints, bullet patterns, etc. The validity of eye witness testimony has already been relegated to the "uncertain" category.

There are no do-overs in executions. And it is not the best solution economically, socially, or legally.

(refer to www.deathpenaltyinfo.org for more facts)
 
 Lynn  18 Jun 2008 09:42
 Add a Comment
 
 
I would never say that it is wrong to kill people if it hadn't been written in the bible that killing a human is not allowed, but it is.
And an other point is that there were people who had been punished by the death penalty ,who hadn't fault on the crime ,which had been discussed.
But they were already killed so you had no chance to rehabilitate them.
 
 thevoter08  07 Jun 2008 19:53
 Add a Comment
 
 
I might support the death penalty If I had more trust in the accuracy of the legal process.
 
 finsch  04 Jun 2008 03:21
 Add a Comment
 
 
Compared to spending the rest of your life in prison, death would be sweet and not a punishment. Thou shall not kill.
 
 Desert_Rat  04 Jun 2008 02:14
 Add a Comment
 
 
What good is it to kill someone? How would it help? I think we should him or her behind bars for the rest of their life instead of death.
 
 ice_cold  04 Jun 2008 02:11
 Add a Comment
 
 
We aren't the ones to give or take life from someone, that's god's job
 
 stricken36  04 Jun 2008 00:10
 1 Comment
 
 Do you really want to leave it in his hands (God's)...this is the same figment of your imagination that "makes the choice" on what innocent lives will be allowed to be lost for "no" reason. Apparently God needs help in the decision of who's life should be taken...he lets too many criminals take the lives of innocent people...then he allows the same people to live out their days in prison. Either he has it ass backwards or he was hoping that you would be smart enough to go ahead and kill the sick deviant that killed one of "God's innocent children".
by  nolimit
 18 Dec 2008 02:12
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I used to be for it, but really, being trapped in a cell for the rest of your days is far worse. You'd wish you were dead. But you can't be. It should only be used if there is no prisons, but since we have plenty, forget about it.
 
 Mark  04 Jun 2008 00:04
 Add a Comment
 
 
Its an uncivil act.
 
 moreno  04 Jun 2008 00:00
 Add a Comment
 
 
Let's think about the degree of suffering that the prisoners must have. With the death penalty, it is possibly a minute of pain, and then death, while with a life sentence, you live in your cell for countless years, doing nothing. To me, spending my life in prison would be a lot more painful than death, and if we are concerned about equaling the amount of suffering that killers gave to their victims, then life in prison is the better option.
 
 Custommade  27 May 2008 21:40
 Add a Comment
 
 
What if someone didn't do the crime and gets killed
 
 markrjg  11 May 2008 12:38
 Add a Comment
 
37 More Responses
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
Civilization Is The Root Of All Evil
Time Does Not Heal All Wounds
Casey Anthony Is The White Female OJ
12 Million Of Illegal Immigrants Should Be Legalized
You Learn By Listening, Not Talking.
How The Teenage Population Seems To Think These Days.
Ginger Bashing Is So Wrong
Charles Darwin Was Actually A Christian.
If Any Other Debate Site Comes To This Site To Advertise For New Members, They Should Pay The Members...
Social Security And Medicare Are Like A Dying Family Farm
New Debates
K2 Should Be Banned!!!!!!!
Marriage Is Strictly Religious And Between A Man And Woman
There Is No Fixed And/or Physical Center Of The Universe.
You Can Never Truly Get Rid Of Poverty, Disease, Racism, Depression, Homelessness, And Other Negative...
Manufactured Board Vs Natural Timber
IPads In Senior School
Margaret Thatcher Was A Good Prime Minister
IS Teenage Love Stupid
Progress Is Dangerous
Is It Okay To Reveal That You're A Polygamist Shortly After You Have Married?