Death penalty?
I just read an article concerning Texas and the death penalty. I'm Texan, and I believe that death is a very harsh consequence for any crime. I believe in self defense, obviously, and I understand the seeming necessity of war. I just don't understand the main reasons behind the death penalty. Is it to keep our prisons from overpopulation? Most people on death row stay for 10 years before execution ... Is it the "eye for an eye" mentality? Most would consider chopping off a theif's hands barbaric. Is it a religiously influenced law? How does it differ from state to state?
I'm really interested to hear where you're from, and what your opinion is!
Answers:
I'm from Michigan and we do not have the death penalty. We do have over crowding of our prisons, and have been making cuts (the Governor is proposing to release non-violent felons) in order to eliminate the budget crisis we are in. I don't think that the death penalty is a way to reduce prison costs, with the average prisoner on death row costing around $25,000 per year and the felons sitting there for an average of ten years.
The death penalty is the ultimate price to pay for committing a crime. People who commit crimes in states that carry the death penalty generally know that the act they commit could result in sitting on death row. I am in favor of the death penalty, but not the way the US handles it. With forensic science available and reliable, it is harder to convict new felons of crimes they did not commit. But, the felons on death row should all be allowed DNA evidence to be tested to make sure they really committed the crime. If that returns positive, then stop wasting money and execute them.
I think it is supposed to be a deterrant to others not to commit those crimes...working well, isn't it? Actually, i support the death penalty for certain crimes. I'm canadian, so we don't have it here. however, i do think that sometimes the punishment fits the crime - say, some young women are raped and murdered and it is on video tape and there is no doubt about who did it and that they should stay in prison forever...the sad part is that some innocent people do get the death penalty... now that is scary.
Death penalty is not harsh. People that kill people need to be put on death row. If someone killed your loved one what would you think about it.
It is a religiously influenced law - coming directly back from eye for an eye. The cost to keep and prosecute an inmate for the death penalty is more and it is cruel and unusual punishment. I believe however to cleanse the population of inherently irreversible crimes such as murder, rape, child molestation however it does have merit.
However there is no way to make the death penalty work in our nation. Either go back to barbarism - ie death squads and simply have it done with or scrap it. This middle of the ground crap with 10 years for appeals and all that is nonsense.
The death penalty is the ultimate penalty and should only be paired up with the ultimate crimes. I live in Texas, too, and I think we hand out the death penalty way too often, and for questionable stuff sometimes.
I say we should reserve this penalty only for criminals who commit the most evil and damaging crimes.
IL. IT is suppose to deter the crime of murder. But it does not work. I think that part of the problem is with the long wait for exicution. As you stated most murderers stay on death row for a long peorid of time. Perhaps if you were exicuted within say a month of sentancing that might reduce the population and murder rate.
Whew, alot to answer.
We could build more prisions, but if a prisioner is released there is no hope of a crime-free life, and to continue their existence would be a drain on society.
It is an effort to try to protect what is left of the innocent mentality.
Not so much religious as based with morality in mind. If a convicted killer were set free and had the slightest motive to begin killing again. It would be have to find, catch, confine then support him endlessly. What about more victims and their families. At what point do you determine that the repeat offender is hopeless for rehabilitation? That is why our system is suppose to protect us from criminals. Unfortunately, I believe there are too many chances given, and needless more victims are added, before appropriate pushisment is administered. Justice does have to be served and until there is a better way to enforce extreme punishment, the death sentence will have to do. Life is not cheap, it is precious but it is our responsibility to preserve and protect it from those who seek to destroy it when it becomes possible.
Good question. To get you started, you might want to visit the website of the Death Penalty Informatin Center. It is very user friendly and organized by topic. www.deathpenaltyinfo.org.
In the meantime, here are answers to questions about the practical aspects of the death penalty system and its alternatives, with sources listed below.
What about the risk of executing innocent people?
124 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence.
Doesn't DNA keep new cases like these from happening?
DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee against the execution of innocent people.
Doesn't the death penalty prevent others from committing murder?
No reputable study shows the death penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in states that do not.
So, what are the alternatives?
Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states, including Texas. It means what it says. It is sure and swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole is less expensive than the death penalty.
But isn't the death penalty cheaper than keeping criminals in prison?
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process. Anytime the death penalty is a possible sentence, extra costs start to mount up even before a trial, continuing through the uniquely complicated trial (actually 2 separate stages, mandated by the Supreme Court) in death penalty cases, and appeals.
What about the very worst crimes?
The death penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was sentenced to death, let alone executed??
Doesn't the death penalty help families of murder victims?
Not necessarily. Murder victim family members across the country argue that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.
So, why don't we speed up the process?
Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.
I am all for the death penalty, but the only problem is the possibility of killing someone who turns out to be innocent. Don't think that would happen very often, but it could happen. I think there are many people in this world who deserve to die for what they have done in their life. The problem is I know I am not qualified to judge who should die and who shouldn't, and can't think of anyone else except god who is qualified.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: