Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's always a risk of putting at least one innocent person to death in error by the state. There is no better reason than that to abolish the death penalty altogether in the United States of America. The number one deterrent against violent crime is a well-armed society and such a society trained in personal defense with arms.
Here's the problem with no death penalty (which isn't really a deterrent but a punishment) is what do you do with the Life Without Parole inmate who kills another prisoner? He already has the heaviest penalty given so do you give him another LWOP?
And don't say "Put him in solitary" because many states, Maryland being one, have abolished solitary confinement.
Here's the problem with no death penalty (which isn't really a deterrent but a punishment) is what do you do with the Life Without Parole inmate who kills another prisoner? He already has the heaviest penalty given so do you give him another LWOP?
And don't say "Put him in solitary" because many states, Maryland being one, have abolished solitary confinement.
I expect it would be a very effective deterrent if they applied it swiftly. Espcially in the cases where's there's absolutely no doubt as to guilt.
As it is, you can plot to kill somebody, tell everybody you know you're going to kill somebody, videotape yourself killing somebody, and STILL wait around 20 years for all the appeals to process.
Is the death penalty to rid the world of nasty people?
Is the death penalty to punish? Does it punish -- the person is dead and is gone. Not really punishment.
Is it payback?
It definitely isn't a deterrent
I think first and foremost -- any discussion on the death penalty has to decide what is the goal first.
And of course, we would all agree it should only apply to those cases where there is absolutely no doubt, not any of this reasonable doubt stuff.
Is the death penalty to rid the world of nasty people?
Is the death penalty to punish? Does it punish -- the person is dead and is gone. Not really punishment.
Is it payback?
It definitely isn't a deterrent
I think first and foremost -- any discussion on the death penalty has to decide what is the goal first.
And of course, we would all agree it should only apply to those cases where there is absolutely no doubt, not any of this reasonable doubt stuff.
Nobody here can disagree that at least one innocent person througout the course of human history in this world has been put to death by some man-made government entity. I'd rather live with the risk that "the true guilty might kill again" than live with the risk that I might be strapped to the chair simply because the partial Southern jury hated damn Yankees. If sombody tries to murder me, at least I have some chance of surviving that encounter because I'm an armed citizen. What are the chances of survival when one is strapped in by prison guards?
where's there's absolutely no doubt as to guilt is never entirely possible. The jury never saw the accused "do it" with their own eyes. Witnesses can make honest mistakes. Forensics tests can be botched. Whenever the death penalty is on the books, YOU, yourself, undergo the risk of being sent to the chair out of gross judicial error. Please think about that one.
Educate yourselves as to the useful nature of having a death penalty available but not applying it unless absolutely certain and the person won't take the life-no-parole deal. Make application require a certainty of wrongdoing.
I don’t support it regardless of level of guilt determined.
The risk of one innocent is enough.
On top of that; I do not believe the state has the right to take the life of a citizen. Just like I do not believe the state has the right to use private prison systems; as prison is a responsibility of the state and the state alone.
That doesn’t mean I don’t believe in an eye for an eye but that’s why we have a right to a jury of our peers.
Unless executions are on public display and carried out swiftly, I don't think they are much of a deterrent. And unless prison sentences are publicly known as being harsh, they aren't much of a deterrent. I would prefer that people be publicly shamed in the pillory/stocks or public hanging.
I don’t support it regardless of level of guilt determined.
The risk of one innocent is enough.
On top of that; I do not believe the state has the right to take the life of a citizen. Just like I do not believe the state has the right to use private prison systems; as prison is a responsibility of the state and the state alone.
That doesn’t mean I don’t believe in an eye for an eye but that’s why we have a right to a jury of our peers.
So some of you are okay with a prisoner killing guards and other prisoners with no risk of a death penalty? If they are already in for life they have nothing to fear. Mighty big of you not to care about others' lives. Maybe you should take a murderer home with you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
