ANSWERS: 12
  • Killing to punish for killing makes no sense. Killing to deter killing makes even less sense. The death penalty is almost always carried-out on those of lower socioeconomic status, who cannot afford competent legal counsel. It solves nothing.
  • While I think punishment should exemplify "eye for an eye," capital punishment tends to be more financially expensive than lifelong incarceration. I would rather see people put away for life than see court time and resources wasted on death penalty appeals.
  • I don't think the death penalty is a good idea because is best that criminals are left alive and punish and incarcerated til they die that way they will suffer more instead of just suffering for a couple of minutes
  • Hang em hang em low no matter just hand em. Mr Bill
  • I am for swift justice when the case is clear. It seldom is. The system tends to waffle on this sort of thing and to get lost in technicalities. It would seem appropriate that these sorts of cases (pre-meditated murder, terroism, sex and arson crimes causing death) be put into a system that facilitates there being handled expidtiously. If there is doubt, then conviction should be for a lesser crime with provision for parole or reinstatement of the death penalty should new evidence surface.
  • Only those who opt for an easy but unrealiable and fraudulent way of punishment support death penalty.....there's no proof that death penalty is a deterrent.....
  • it is very good for humanity.i m strong supporter of strong punishment.
  • I think its become an ineffective process, but I will elaborate as my view is derived from many factors. It now has so much cost with seperation measures and appeal procedures. I partially consider it immoral, but over the years I have reduced my opposition. Morality and vengance have too much effect of the prison regime. No punishment really matches the crime, we have moved on from punishing eye for eye. Now we estimate what is a reasonable punishment, instead of how do we get people to not reoffend or offend in the first place. I think prison's in the future will be more focused towards rehabilitation than punishment. I see no reason why prisoners couldn't be used to perform menial tasks and potentially supply an energy source. Each criminal probably costs the equivilant of many hundred law-abiding citizens. I also like the idea of getting the criminal and the victim together to understand each other better.
  • I think it's the only way to truly make sure that violent offenders do not repeat offend. Jails are far from escape proof.
  • I think it should be abolished worldwide.About 70% of world nations have outlawed it permanently.They,to me,are the civilized countries.It serves no purpose except bitter revenge,which is a terrible trait in its own way.An "eye for an eye" is very cruel and outmoded.
  • Kill em all! I don't care if it's a deterrant or not. It's punishment.
  • The one thing that I most like about the death penalty is when a capital criminal excapes to a non-death penalty country, they refuse to extradite the criminal back to us unless we take the death penalty off the table. I don't think we should EVER take it off the table, but let the SOB stay right where he is, and commit his evil in THEIR country. If they tell us they won't send him back until we promise that the death penalty won't be imposed, I'd tell 'em..."No deal...he's yours. Good luck!" Who wants the bastard back here in our luxury prisons, anyway?!?

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy