The death sentence doesn't actually save tax payers as much as you'd think. Considering that the criminals are in jail for absolute ages before they're killed, and then the cost for the equipment needed to execute them, it ends up costing about the same as a life sentence.
I am very much against the death penalty. It achieves nothing in my opinion. The aim should be to prevent criminals from doing any more damage, not to get revenge. You may say that for the sake of the family of the victim(s), the criminal should be killed, but what about the criminal's family? It must be difficult enough for them as it is, and killing the criminal would only make it worse for them.

The aim of the death penalty is not to prevent crime or obtain revenge. It's intended to be a punishment, and it can be argued that it is a deterrent (though I do not think so personally).

It is supposed to be a deterrent as well as a punishment, but apparently some people are still willing to do horrible crimes while most likely knowing what the consequences are.

It amazes me how people think sometimes....not in a positive way, though. I hate people 95% of the time so... that's just me.

I personally feel that the person who committed the crime should be punished in the exact way they punished the innocent person who put them there. An eye for an eye and all that mumbo jumbo jazz. If they rape and then murder a victim...they should be forced to undergo the same treatment. I personally feel that they are not punished enough for the hanus crimes they have committed. Death penalty is a favorable option though in my opinion but only for the cases of murder or multi murder, and intentional. Not in the cases of accidental murder.

I don`t think that man has the right to take someone`s life. Only God can do that. I think life sentence is good. I find death penalty harsh.

Life sentence is worse.
Death is an escape.
Prison is terrible.

Why else would people kill themselves in prison?

If a life sentence is truly worse, do these offenders not deserve the worst punishment we're allowed to give them? For crying out loud, most of these offenders have killed at least one person.

I think it depends on the conditions of the jail. When the death penalty was first created conditions in jails were much worse than they were now, and were being overcrowded. I think that a life sentence is better than the death penalty, but that an undefined sentence is better. I think that those sentenced for life should be tested for their social behaviour when they enter jail, and that we should work on rehabilitating so that one day they can be free, and hopefully never commit another crime. If this doesn't work, and previous supposedly rehabilitated offenders end up with a new sentence, then it will be clear that a life sentence is the only way, no matter how horrible that is, without killing the person.

I have spoken to people who have come out of jail though, and no matter how boring it is, they didn't think it was THAT horrible. They would not have rather died. This of course was not a life sentence though.
She told me that they got 2 hours of computer time where they could look at porn or play video games, send emails, things like that. Besides that all they did was read and work out. She learned Japanese, Russian and Spanish while she was in jail. She said the only way to maintain sanity was to stay focused on a goal so... I donno' I totally see how horrible jail is but I don't think death is better.

There is also the fact that people have been proven innocent after receiving their life sentence. If they had been killed it would have been for nothing.

well,i guess the only opinion i can raise in this issue is this:

the punishment put down on someone should match the merit of the act in which the person has done.

that said, i really don't care what punishment is dealt, as long as due process has been served to all parties concerned and that it should be appropriate for the crime done.

Wowzer, my opinion is the complete opposite as I do not believe in revenge/vengeance, and I think that people obviously choose to commit the crime knowing they will have that fate, I really don't think the vast majority think they will get away with never being caught.

I think the point of condemning criminals is to protect society, thus either locking them away or killing them are he two common options. I don't really care whether they 'pay for their crime' or not, I'm sure criminals have enough problems in their lives and do not end up seeing it as a positive thing that they have committed the crime. Most of them are messed up enough that they don't need even more added on. I'm not saying because society picked on them, that they have the right to pick on society, but this should mean that because they picked on society this should not mean that the authorities should pick on them. It's stopping to their level.

thank you for expressing your point, miss. it shall be taken into consideration.

first, i wrote in my statement the phrase "as long as due process is dealt to all parties concerned". you presented in your argument that most of the criminals are messed up enough that they don't need even more add on. but doesn't that seem a bit unfair to all those who might be in the same situation and yet chose not to commit crime?

second, you may have presented to us that the motives are a variable, and it does weigh with the action committed, but lets not forget that we do not exist in a time of anarchy. Law and Order is in check, and a System where all can and should be protected is established. Why can you say that Society is stepping down to a criminal/convict 's level when Society acts on the actions that these individuals have done when we all know that when something bad happens, that someone who is responsible for it will ultimately be made to answer for it.

Should'nt that apply to the criminal/convict too? As to even the playing ground a bit? I mean, if innocent people can be sued, tried in court, metted out a court decision and accept the punishment (or appeal it), then why can't they?

lastly, you implied in your argument that authorities pick on criminals. can you present to us proof or statistical data of such? if so, please correct me, and i shall bend to what you have to say. But to conclude thereof is somewhat a fallacy. Authorities maybe known for corrupt practices, but most of them do know when an act is illegal as to the perspective of the Law.

Life without parole.

I think that if they feel the need to act above the laws set forth to govern society as a whole, then we have the right to elevate ourselves in the correct manor to stop that kind of behavior that would threaten our way of life

Of course exceptions exist...but thats a whole another debate I think :P

I like the way you put it as I quote 'playing the role of god'. I personally am against the death penalty. It is not our right to determine when a person should or should not die. That is why the person was arrested. They took a life. I am not a believer in an eye for and eye. Murder does not justify murder.

To be imprisoned for life forces you to live a life reflecting on the horrors you committed. It is only fair you do so. I do not see it as a harsher punishment, but a fair one. The families of your victims have to suffer the repercussions of you actions and thus so should you.

I do not disagree with the death penalty because it is the easy way out.I disagree with it because it is wrong.

This is somewhat related on my thread located at General Discussion entitled "How do you perceive death". Many of the menewsha members who gave their opinion there, do really have their own picture of it, which I find it very informative. As for the question of yours, I dont like to put a person into death Penalty. For me, death is not what we think as very easy as ABC. This is somewhat another beginning for a new adventure and we never know wither it's good nor bad. Every body has the choice to do what ever they wanna do, but death is something that ain't a joke. We don't have the very right to play like a GOD in order to discipline that people. We are given brain to exploit and look for another way. So, we have to see some alternative ways. As of life sentence, is somewhat okay. In the since that, it is matter thinking over what that person had done (i mean, those people who commit murder and others) and changes is some what possible for them. Well, you can disagree with me or agree with me, people. Hehe. IM just giving my own opinion. hehe:vicky:

I don't see anything wrong with a death sentence if the person is proven without a reasonable doubt. And with technology today, that is quite possible.

Jail is expensive. Keeping someone in jail for 50 years is a huge toll on tax paying citizens. Is it more ethical? Probably. Is it better? Not necessarily.

I am also up for the castration of violent criminals. Testosterone levels are reduced (one cause of aggression), no babies are made thereafter that may be susceptible to similar high-aggression, and no children are harmed by being raised by a criminal at all.

I am pretty harsh against violent crime.

ETA: For the sake of argument, what if it is "God's will" to have the death penalty or an eye for an eye? Not everyone believes in the Judeo-Christian god, as well. What if the 10 commandments actually came with footnotes and we just never got them due to creative editing?

Just sayin'.

Jail is not that much more expensive than the death penalty because the criminals are kept in jail for months and months before their actual execution and then there's the cost of whatever method is used to kill them. A lot of people go on about how tax payers are paying for criminals to stay in jail when they should be killed, but tax payers are also paying for criminals with death sentences to stay in jail.
As for castration, I can see where you're coming from with the aggression thing, but I don't think any good will come from trying to improve people. And just because a parent is a criminal it doesn't make the child a criminal as well.

I am against the death penalty. I'm against it for the fact that it is so perminant. There's always the chance that the person is really innocent for one thing (I know that's a rarer occurrence now a days, but it does happen) and if that person is put to death for a crime they didn't commit, we have no ay of fixing that mistake. And by putting someone to death, I feel that it is bringing the government down to the murder's level. Also, the death penalty is playing god with people's lives, and I don't find that right at all. I would love to see the death sentence repealed in all the states that have it, but I kno that isn't going to happen any time soon.

It depends on the crime. Pedophiles should be put to death or at least castrated.
Serial Killers really can't be brought back to society. The parents did so such damage to
them as a kid that remorse and love for other human being can't really be taught. I really wish
someone would off Charles Mansion. I'm paying for him and I don't like it.
I don't believe that all crimes should deal in the death penalty. People that do the high end
unthinkable should.

I'd have to disagree with that statement about pedophiles being put to death...yes, they've done terrible things, but killing them isn't the answer. It may seem like the easiest way to deal with them, that doesn't mean it's right.

Pedophile is not always Psychological issue. It's brain function issue. The animal part of the brain is not fixable for the most part since a lot of "crime" issues that create killers, pedophile's, serial racists is actually biological electricity pulse in the back of the brain There is no way to actually help them.

doesn't mean we should be killing them. The death penalty to me is just a form of legalized murder. No matter how terrible the person is. Who are we to decide who dies and who doesn't? And so what if we can't "fix" them? Pedophiles shouldn't be let back on the street, I agree with you there. But I wouldn't wish the death sentence on anyone no matter how terrible they are. Have them imprisoned for life.

Life Sentence is worse than death. If you committed a crime just that awful, it's much more suitable that you spend the remainder of your life rotting in a cell thinking about what you've done, the only time I think it's unjust is whent he trial is faulty.

Death, I believe, is letting someone off easy. This really does boil down to religion in the end, though. Let's just say there was no afterlife and you just die and rot. You'll forget what you've done and even though you're facing one of the biggest fears in humankind and what all fears boil down to in the end, you will forget it and you will forget the pain.

Life.

Although, I also think criminals in life sentence have too many comforts. They should not be allowed TV or special treats.

I disagree; I know several people in the same religion with different views and different religions with the same views.

i agree with tayee