Really, the thing about prison in general is how many factors play into which punishment is "right" for the criminal. If you think about it too long you're head will start to spin and you start vollying between the two sides, seeing the pros and cons of both.

I agree, having to suffer in prison is a much bigger punishment. And who gives the government the right to murder people anyway? If you jail them, and then find out it was an incorrect statement, atleast yoiu can let them out. But if you KILL them, then you wrongly killed someone, there's no going back.

However, there are a few cases where I'm sure the death penalty is the better option. But I can't actually think of anything. I rather make a dictator suffer, like he did to his country, than let him free by killing him. :1

Actually, there is no correct answer. D: Either way it's horrible. There's always loopholes, always differences of opinions, etc etc.

If only we had a perfect world.

• It seems to me that the death penalty is just doing the same thing that the criminal was doing in the first place. :?.

• The only problem with giving Life Sentences is that WE have to pay to keep that jailer in prison. And I think our money can go to something better than keeping a criminal alive.

Originally Posted by Deja Vu

• The only problem with giving Life Sentences is that WE have to pay to keep that jailer in prison. And I think our money can go to something better than keeping a criminal alive.

I agree.

Morally, I should be against the death sentence.
But realistically? I'm undecided.
There are too many pros & cons to battle out.

• Honestly, I'd rather my taxes went to keeping people alive than killing them. Morally, I'm against the death penalty, and realistically, I'm not willing to pay the government to kill people I don't think should be killed.

Oh joy, another subject I can give a boring, educated rant about.

For years and years now, this has been a controversial topic. Bleeding hearts of the world unite, saying that the death penalty is "inhumane" and "intolerable".

We're stooping to their level are we not?

Personally, I am all for it, but again...there are two sides.

The Pros of the Death Penalty:

- Ending the life of a convicted felon.
- Reduction in the number of inmates in our prisons.
- Less taxpayer's money to support said inmates.


The Cons of the Death Penalty:

- Inhumane to take another human being's life.
- Giving this person the "easy way out".
- The risk of executing an innocent person.

My head's a little bit off today on account of a lack of sleep, but I'll try to be as clear as I can.

Hundreds of years ago, the death penalty was handed out for misdemeanors such as thievery, assault, and in some areas, for religious reasons.

In today's age, the death penalty isn't handed out enough...ugh...

Forgive me, but my head isn't all here right now. I cannot continue. I'll make an attempt to finish this at a later date.

• I'd say the fact that the state doesn't have the right to kill living people cancels out all supposed financial benefits, I mean, honestly, that's basically saying that money is more important than justice :?.

Originally Posted by poet`s playground

that's basically saying that money is more important than justice :?.[/size]

You can't live off justice, can you?

Honestly, if a convicted criminal was put to death and it was stated in the news once and a person had no ties to the criminal, I don't think remorse for that fellow would stay in that person's head for very long.

Originally Posted by Xanadam

You can't live off justice, can you?

Honestly, if a convicted criminal was put to death and it was stated in the news once and a person had no ties to the criminal, I don't think remorse for that fellow would stay in that person's head for very long.

• No, but that doesn't make it right :?. It wouldn't be remorse for that fellow so much as anger toward the government that performed it. I don't want my money going toward deaths, I'd rather it went toward preventing innocent people from being killed. The only way you can guarantee you'll never kill an innocent man is by eliminating the killing.

It is impossible to eliminate even half the killing in the world.
I'd be more angry at the government for sending who-knows-how-many troops to a pointless war than if they killed off one or two convicted criminals.

• I'm angry for all of it, myself. And honestly, it may not be that detrimental to the world, but stooping to the level of the criminal, killing innocents, convicting people for corporate reasons, personally, it would be better if they didn't duplicate the murder. Honestly, if someone in my family was murdered I'd prefer the killer wasn't killed, and suffered all that time in jail. Consider what a guilty criminal running free would feel if he saw that he wasn't ever going to be convicted because the man convicted in his place was killed :?. He'd feel like he could go on killing.

i'm for the death penalty
you took someone else's life so you'll get yours taken away
Life is something that as far as i know only comes once
It is probably one of the most precious things that can be taken away
etc etc
you kill someone and/or do something equal to that
then you should be eliminated and not be given the chance to do the same again DX<

Originally Posted by poet`s playground

• I'm angry for all of it, myself. And honestly, it may not be that detrimental to the world, but stooping to the level of the criminal, killing innocents, convicting people for corporate reasons, personally, it would be better if they didn't duplicate the murder. Honestly, if someone in my family was murdered I'd prefer the killer wasn't killed, and suffered all that time in jail. Consider what a guilty criminal running free would feel if he saw that he wasn't ever going to be convicted because the man convicted in his place was killed :?. He'd feel like he could go on killing.

• what you're talking about is someone getting wrongly convicted, right? That's a whole different issue.
  
  Yeah, I wouldn't want to pay to keep a killer alive and at the same time I don't want the innocent to suffer wrongly.
  
  Our money isn't being put into improving the justice system if too many people are getting wrongly convicted right? I'd be upset that most of it is going to keeping the worst of the criminals alive instead.

I do believe in the death penalty. If you intentionally kill someone why shouldn't you have to die because of it. Plus, as it is, our prisons are way over crowded and it costs taxpayers a lot of money to take care of people doing nothing. They're not making any money, they're not really able to give back to their community in anyway...

I'm all for the Death Penalty.Even way way back in the Day they used the Death Penalty. Whenever someone killed a member of someones family when the killer was caught the family would stone people to death. But if it was an accidental murder then they would send that person to another town out of respect for the family.

Some people actually do not suffer more in prison. Some of our prisoners have it better off then poor people. They get daily meals and some have large tvs. I think the punishment should fit the crime.

Like if a guy rapes a girl I'm all for his junk getting chopped off, but thats just me XDD

• Here's a quote that I like, I'm not sure who it's from (it's been attributed to Martin Luther King, Jr., but I've seen other attributions as well), and it says:
  
  "An eye for an eye would leave us all blind"
  
  And in criminal justice, I'd say that's my philosophy. Actually, in politics, too, but that's a different story.

ah see, here is where we enter a grey area. in all honesty if the people we actually put on death penalty were ACTUALLY killed lets say a week after they were condemned then i think a lot less people would be doing stuff in which the death penalty was a punishment *shrugs*

today most of the jails are too.. privledged? they have cable, they have clean place, good food, they are allowed to work out in a gym. there are people outside of jail that dont have all these commodities. i think its incredibly unfair to the families of people that have been subject to the pain some of these people cause.

Penalties are too lax these days. For example... my family, my sister was run over by a drunk pot head.. on a CLOSED street.. closed as in 3000 people were crossing it and it had been marked off and blocked with cones and road blocks. not only was she killed, but another girl was as well, and my brother had his head smashed in (5 brain surgeries later, hes still recuperating). now.. did this retard get punished for being drunk.. being on drugs.. and frekkin driving a motorcycle at 100 mph + down a closed road? no... did his license get taken away? no, did he get fined? no. he killed 2 people severely damaged another.. and nothing, he walked away with a broken finger and then turned around and tried to SUE our family and the other girl that died for his broken finger. where, i ask, is the justice there?

there is a country (im afraid i cant recall the name at this time) that actually cuts off your hand if you steal, and you die if you kill someone else. its a very harsh penalty system.. but their crime rate is almost none existant...

I tried to read as much of this thread as possible before commenting (sorry - some of the font colours/sizes and walls of text were skimmed), and of all of the arguments, this is the remark I think is probably worth highlighting the most.

Originally Posted by eig

And who gives the government the right to murder people anyway?

I do not believe that life is a privilege that any government has the right to "revoke". By supporting the death penalty, what people are essentially saying is "yes, go ahead - you have the final say over whether I live or die" (this doesn't just apply to criminals - it applies to everyone).

One of the problems, I think, with gaols is that a lot of inmates are imprisoned for non-violent crimes - I fail to see how this helps the community in any way at all. It doesn't rehabilitate the offender (robbery recidivism is not on the way down), and the hardships of prison life don't do much to encourage people to obey the law.

I disagree with non-violent offenders being imprisoned at all, actually - it's just a waste. The money spent on gaoling people could go towards addressing the issues of why they commit these acts.

• Life in jail, just in case new evidence comes up that shows they're innocent. This does happen, even after decades in jail. If we sent druggies to treatment centers instead of jail, we'd have plenty of room and money.

Originally Posted by Wood Sorrel

• Life in jail, just in case new evidence comes up that shows they're innocent. This does happen, even after decades in jail. If we sent druggies to treatment centers instead of jail, we'd have plenty of room and money.

What if they admit to being guilty? Or if there is undeniable proof?

I think there are certain crimes that warrent the death penalty. I think if a person gets life for killing one person, someone who kills 10 people deserves a harsher sentence. And the only thing that seems 'fair' is to take their life since they took the lives of others.

• There are times when an innocent person will admit to being guilty; it's happened in the past. They'll get tired of being on trial, so they'll admit to being guilty. Maybe they'll even feel that they must have done it since others are so insistent that they did, and that they might not have been doing what they thought they were doing, etc. Then, years later, proof of their innocence will surface. And the government's against killing innocents :?.

But in instances where there is proof in the form of dna, and the person admits guilt, why shouldn't they be put to death?

• Because the state doesn't have the right to dole out death. It's a tired practice, and I think life in jail is a more suitable punishment.

Originally Posted by poet`s playground

• Because the state doesn't have the right to dole out death. It's a tired practice, and I think life in jail is a more suitable punishment.

But normal citizens do have the right to dole out death?

If you dish it out,you can take it back.

A person can decide to take the life of another... and all they get is a jail cell to live in for the rst of their lives? One family can never see their loved on again, but the person who killed can get visits from their family for the rest of their life?

Hardly seems fair to me.