The death penalty should not be used on common petty thievery and destroying. It should be used the the child rapists, mass murders, and war criminals. If those three types of people were sent to Death row. You should be happy! Lives saved, children saved, and America, safe. So you would feel great, not cuzed u have killed a man, but you haved saved lives.
Warning: MASSIVE WALL-O-TEXT. Proceed at your own risk. Capital punishment has a wide range of methods for execution (pun not intended), as well as a selection of reasons to be used. Let’s take an in-depth look. One of the earliest and most widely-known instances of laws that have to do with capital punishment was Hammurabi’s Code. Lex Talionis, or “Law of Retaliation,” and Mirror Punishment were the ideas there, where a criminal could expect to have either a specifically tailored punishment or the same crime administered/committed to them for breaking a law. As far as our debate goes, the laws stated something like “Those who willingly commit murder shall be killed in return.” This is the same concept for capital punishment today. However, we now have these touchy feelings about the matter, and the death penalty has been called into question multiple times. Certain circumstances must be met before it can be used, but even so, there are still arguments against it. Crimes Worthy of Capital Punishment: · Murder – Willingly taking another human’s life with no justifiable purpose (an example of a “justifiable purpose” would be if they were a soldier who killed an enemy or someone who acted in self-defense. I revisit the latter one below). · Espionage/Treason – Spying on or betraying a nation with the intent of causing it harm to benefit an enemy state in a time of conflict. · Martial Law – There are certain times at which capital punishment may be administered to or by members of the Armed Forces of a nation in accordance to specific Martial Laws. These normally do not apply to civilians. In other nations, sexual and religious crimes as well as the trafficking of humans can warrant the death penalty. However, it should be noted that capital punishment is not used in all countries around the world. Even within the U.S., only 36 states still use it. This is due to issues involving religion, humane treatment, etc. I’ll visit those in my personal opinion later. Common Means of Administration: · Decapitation – The separation of head and body, usually via guillotine or axe (This method is ancient, and is usually not used today). · Electrocution – Passing an electrical current with lethal amperage through a person, usually via electric chair. · Firing Squad – The use of an armed human squad or mechanical rig to shoot a person. In many cases, one random person was issued a gun loaded with a blank cartridge to ease the remorse. Nobody knew who had that firearm. · Gas Chamber – An airtight room that is filled with toxic gas to poison the occupants; infamous for its use in the Holocaust. · Hanging – The use of a noose and fall to kill a person via suffocation, severance of the spinal cord, or in rare cases decapitation. · Lethal Injection – The use of an intravenous (IV) system to deliver a three-stage sequence of drugs to a person, usually resulting in unconsciousness, relaxation, and cardiac arrest respectively. Issues with Capital Punishment: The primary issue with capital punishment is that it is inhumane. This argument has been used against every form of execution. In the event that an execution is botched, the victim would be subjected to intense amounts of pain, enough that the process could be considered cruel and unusual. It is also put forward that nobody deserves to have their life taken for any crime that could be committed. The other main basis for opposition would be religion. In certain cases, pacifist-type religions could have a moral disagreement with such punishment. Christianity, for example, could argue against it by citing the New Testament’s ideals of love and peace. However, that can go two ways because Genesis 9 states “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” My view: Personally, I am in favor of having capital punishment for the purpose of eliminating threats to society, not as a means of getting back at a criminal if you are the victim. Those who read my other massive wall of text in “Religious Problems with Video Games” remember that I am an atheist, so I am not influenced by religion. Morally, I figure this: if you are determined to commit a crime punishable by death, then you accept that penalty when it comes. However, there are certain things I would like to clarify about this in terms of what deserves capital punishment and how it should be administered. I find that homicide, genocide, and treason/espionage (when it puts the lives of others in mortal danger) are really some of the only major crimes that ought to warrant capital punishment. I’m sure that there are other crimes that deserve it that someone will bring up, but until then I’ll keep the list short and sweet. As far as means of execution go, I believe that the criminal should be administered cyanide. This will result in a rapid, almost stupid-proof execution with no need for specialized machinery/systems. Just one tablet (I say one, but I mean however much the lethal dose is for the individual) ground into his or her food. I agree with Draw the Line in stating that any method of killing a criminal is morally wrong, but if the threat of said criminal is great enough, the path must be taken. I’m not saying that it should be done without anyone feeling remorse, just that it must be done in the interest of the greater good. As far as the argument that someone needs to suffer for murdering another, I know what it’s like. But I never felt the need for the murderer to suffer. People who think opposite of this need to consider that they are not alone in the world. Removing a threat to society is much more logical than keeping that threat in existence just so the victim of his or her crime can take pleasure at their suffering. The government exists to act on the behalf of the greater good. I know it’s hard for some, but you have to let it go and accept that. Imagine having your pain and the murderer being alive, then escaping and striking again. Now others have to live with that overwhelming sorrow just like you do. If there is an opportunity to eliminate the chance of that happening, the path needs to be taken. While I’m posting, I also wanted to take the time to address the “self-defense” issue. Someone who kills in self-defense, assuming that such a measure was necessary, should not be punished for it. Two reasons. One, it is mankind’s basic instinct to survive. Eliminating someone who poses an immediate and mortal threat is therefore instinctive. Doing it to protect others is not only that, but highly noble. Two, assuming that the person killed was acting with the intent of harming someone, then they have been removed as a threat to society, which is beneficial. I do not mean that we should rejoice at the death of a fellow human being, but there are cases in which it is better off with that death having occurred. [/wall-o-text]
I don't think killing humans it too bad after all the **** we've made to do it with. However hunting is wrong. STOP HUNTING TODAY!
I think the death sentence is very babrbaric. But I do think some people deserve it. Like some insane serial killer, that killed like 30+ people, and would probably still kill people in prison. I think they deserve it. although a humane death. I dont think child rapist should get the death penalty. when/if they get out of prison they should have to put a visble sign in there yard saying they are sexual predator.
I feel the death penalty is outdated. With our "updated" (I cant believe I couldnt think of a better word) and more morally based and humane society there are much better ways to punish someone, without taking their life. Besides, if someone killed one of my family members I would rather see them rot in prison than die in a painless way. And if they had to be killed, I think I would want to do it myself.
You say that capital punishment is wrong because it is immoral, yet you then negate your own argument by clearly implying that capital punishment is moral by stating, "...I would rather see them rot in prison than die in a painless way." Your argument is completely invalid the way its phrased and, therefore, worthless to this debate.
I agree with the OP here in that if you take the killer/offender's life, then you are no better that him/her. I don't think that anyone should die because of another human. Instead, if you have a convicted killer on your hands, then you give them the next worse thing- life imprisonment in solitary confinement. The room that they would be kept in would be completely dark and made of hard surfaces (so it would be extremely uncomfortable.) When he is given meals, they would be given in a way that no light enters the room. There would be nothing at all given to entertain him. To me, this is more humane than putting them to death. Oh, and if you haven't already come to this conclusion, I think that the death penalty is utterly wrong.
dude, an eye for an eye means if you poke out ones eye your eye shall be poked out Hamurubi's code ftw
i think that whatever the person convicted of the crime did (murder, rape, assault, etc.) should have whatever they did, done back to them.
Well honestly if you go rape someone and kill them yeah you deserve to die. That crap isn't accidental you did it on purpose
I believe it's wrong, no matter what you do you don't deserve the power to end someones life. It's not our decision to end it, we don't own his life. I think the rule should be banished from being used at all.
so if someone killed your friends and family brutally then tortured you to verge of death you want him to live?
Yes I'll answer for him: Yes. Besides being unbelievably hypocritical it is just a more fitting punishment. If you kill him he gets the easy way out......no suffering.......no time to be tortured by the reality of what he had done. That's what prison is for. Life in prison is surely a more painful punishment than lethal injection. Imagine the killer waking up every morning in a concrete closet with the haunting reminder of killing your friends and family and torturing you. I would feel more justice was done if the killer is condemned to life in prison rather than a quick death easier than most of us will have in our lives.
No way. The death penalty is wayyyy over doing it. If you do that you are taking a life just like that person did. So, shouldn't you be put on death penalty?
Well, if there was a death penalty, it would could only be one method. Injection. On all other cases, jail time is the best option. Criminals do not learn from their mistakes if they are automatically killed for committing a crime. Also, as someone mentioned earlier, if it is not the "criminals" fault, such as public intoxication, the person who committed the crime should not be executed. That's my opinion.
This method is very controversial. However, most of you have forgotten the fact that there aren't enough jails to store all of these people. Our tax money pays for these jails and to FEED these bastards in jails. I personally don't agree with the death penalty. And i don't believe in prison either. I think these people should be put to work. Mandatory military time is one of these options. There just has to be a better way to manage these people besides storing them in jails and killing them.
Great comment, I totally agree with everything you just said. They should have to work for their jail time.
Drug Laws Our jails are overpopulated for many reasons. The fact that we can't execute them fast enough is not one of them, though. Nearly a third(higher in some jails) of our jails are made up of drug offenders. Our drug laws are not working and it's time to take a different approach. Please don't bring tax payer dollars into a debate about whether or not you should kill someone.
No, this has always been done, they are special people called executioners. I support the Death Penalty, the Court should decide weather they actually go to their death or walk free. Those should be the only two options. If you get drunk and go and commit a crime you should be put to death, because your the moron who decided that drinking 10 cups of beer is fun. You choose to drink. If the person is unwillingly intoxicated then the court would handle that through trial.