I'm not saying that I'm "for" the death penalty (I'm quite undecided on the issue), but there are several issues that you fail to broach. [1] Does the death penalty - that is: the mere existence of the death penalty - act as a deterrent to crime? (Proponents say that it does.) [2] Is the death penalty - on average - more or less expensive to the average taxpayer than is life imprisonment? (Proponents say that the death penalty makes things considerably cheaper for the taxpayer.) [3] How secure and how final is "life imprisonment" really? That is to say: how well does it GUARANTEE that the criminal will not escape and/or will not again commit a crime, in comparison to the death penalty? [4] Is life imprisonment sufficient punishment for the worst of crimes? Some would contend that life imprisonment is equivalent to WELFARE, that the convicted criminal receives plenty of nutritious food, television, a clean, secure room, and several other amenities - free of charge - for the rest of the criminal's life as "punishment" for the crime. In other words: the criminal receives - free of charge - a living that is much healthier and safer and well-maintained than many people who have never committed any crime. *** Morally speaking, IN AN IDEAL WORLD (economically speaking) we should not have to resort to the death penalty. We can simply "put up" the person for life (in a penitentiary). But in reality "putting up" a person for life - that is: nutritious food and well-maintained shelter, not to mention the several additional amenities - is something that we cannot afford to provide even to our non-criminals. Given that we do NOT live in an economically-perfect world, what really IS the best solution, morally? That is: what is best FOR THE SOCIETY as a whole? The answer is NOT simple.

We'll take all of your money first to feed them, o.k.? And we'll put that prison right next door to you. And we'll be sure to put the gang that raped you, your sister and mother in there, too. Sorry your sis was only two when that happened, man. But maybe you can invite them to dinner since you're feeling so accommodating! As has already been said, once someone breaks the law and are convicted they no longer have the rights of a law abiding citizen. Execution should happen to everyone who willingly murders another human. And if they are innocent then they go to heaven, so what's the big deal?

As I live in a country too weak to hang murders rapists peadophiles or drug trafficers. Crimainals have no respect for our laws they live better in jail than at home. . Lock them up for 5 years wip them everyday then hang them.

There's a number of views. 1) The person took a life and so clearly does not value the life of others, so why value their life, eye for an eye. 2) Practically, it costs a lot of money (taxes) to keep a prisoner and less to dispose of them. 3) Morally, a person may see this as becoming the murderer, by inflicting the same on the person, as they did others. In a world where morals are relative or subjective and not objective, then in practical terms to dispose of the person is to not only rid the world of a person that commits such acts, so making it a safer place, but also it costs less. A serial killer doesn't kill out of hate or anger. A serial killer moves from victim to victim, purely out of a desire to kill. For them, it's a joy, or at least a compulsion. It is — as Edmund Kemper, one of the worst serial killers of all time, put it — a thrill: "There was actually a sexual thrill. You hear that little 'pop' and pull their heads off and hold their heads up by the hair. Whipping their heads off, their body sitting there. That'd get me off." That's where the terror of serial killer stories truly lies. It's not just the gore and the violence of the act – it's the joy. It's the disturbing glee that a man like Edmund Kemper gets when he drives a blade through another person's neck. For the worst serial killers, there's no horror or fear in the act of killing. When the Son of Sam, David Berkowitz, killed his first victim, he was so filled with euphoria that he sang on his way home. He felt nothing but release. Leonarda Cianciulli murdered three women by drugging and murdering them. Once dead, she cut their bodies into small pieces, used the fat to make soap, and their blood to make tea cakes to serve to her neighbours. The Moors murders were carried out by Ian Brady and Myra Hindley between July 1963 and October 1965, in and around Manchester, England. The victims were five children—Pauline Reade, John Kilbride, Keith Bennett, Lesley Ann Downey, and Edward Evans—aged between 10 and 17, at least four of whom were sexually assaulted. "We do whatever we enjoy doing. Whether it happens to be judged good or evil, is a matter for others to decide." Ted Bundy confessed to 30 homicides before his execution in the electric chair in 1989. "You learn what you need to kill and take care of the details. It's like changing a tire-the first time you're careful, by the 30th time, you can't remember where you left the lug wrench." Westley Allan Dodd abused as many as 175 children over a fifteen-year period. During that time he exposed himself to his victims, fondled them, and sexually assaulted them. Over time, he became more sadistic, eventually kidnapping and killing three young boys. Amelia Dyer was a "baby farmer." She housed pregnant women, then farmed their babies off to adoptive parents who would be able to give them a better life. At least, that's what she said. In reality, Dyer neglected the babies until they died of malnutrition. Later in life, she strangled the them using white edging tape. These are the haunting words from BTK killer Dennis Rader: "When this monster entered my brain, I will never know. But, it here to stay ... Society can be thankful that there are ways for people like me to relieve myself at time by day dreams of some victim being tortured and being mine. It's a big complicated game my friend of the monster play, putting victims number down, follow them, checking up on them waiting in the dark, waiting, waiting ... Maybe you can stop him. I can't. He has already chosen his next victim." Arthur Shawcross, AKA The Genesee River Killer, murdered at least 14 people. "I took the right leg of that woman's body, from the knee to the hip, took the fat off, and ate it while she looked at the other girl. When I bit into it, she urinated right there." Henry Lee Lucas was convicted of murdering 11 people and is serving a life sentence in prison. " Sex is one of my downfalls. I get sex any way I can get it. If I have to force someone to do it, I do... I rape them; I've done that. I've killed animals to have sex with them, and I've had sex while they are alive."

Killers remain killers, whether in prison or out. There was a gang leader in a San Joaquin valley prison awhile back, who ordered the killing of his enemies on the outside. He only stopped after his execution. Same with killers who continue to kill in prison. They kill because they can and because they like it. Eliminate them from the gene pool is the proper solution, IMHO. 10/11/22

A lot of people think they should be put to death, others don't. Are people who murder for money or fun evil, or the victim of a handicapped mind? Nobody can really answer that but the answer to whether they live or die may turn on that.😏

I don't think it's the case that people who are pro-death-penalty are just not thinking about the morality of the government taking a life. I think it's a sort of vestigial leftover of traditional thinking. The penal system, prior to the late 19th century, was never intended to reform convicts- it was intended to keep the dangerous people away from the innocent people that they might harm. As such, a person capable of killing another person was seen as too dangerous to have around at all, so it was necessary to end their life, if and only if they were convicted beyond any reasonable level of doubt in court. As that philosophy has shifted, some people still lean into the death penalty out of that tradition, but there are others who justify it for other reasons, either budgetary or as being more humane than a lifetime spent locked rotting in a cell. Any talk about the prisoners' rights is kind of misguided, since convicts don't really have rights anyway- or else they wouldn't be forced to stay in prison. But, I think, most people in the modern western society see the death penalty as barbarically outdated. The truth is that, at the end of the day, for every criminal who was executed, there exists some person out there who had to push the plunger, flick the switch, flip the lever, or open the valve that resulted in the death of another human. And our justice system in the USA is piss poor, with a shocking proportion of people sentenced to die being exonerated. Could you imagine being the guy who flicked the switch to electrocute another human, only to find out years later that that person was innocent?

Too expensive to keep a killer in prison for life.