100 Pro Death Penalty Quotes by Supporters of Capital Punishment
|
Execute the guilty. Honor the victims. Educate the uninformed. To murder an innocent human is a tragedy; to execute a killer is a victory! |
|
Well, if your logic holds true, then we must abandon life in prison
without parole because a in the realm of infinite possibility an
"innocent" person may rot in prison until they die...an
"innocent" person may die during any term of imprisonment. Innocent
people die every single day in car crashes, but you aren't going to stand in the
way of people driving automobiles are you?
No, please feel free to find one documented case of a wrongful execution. You can’t presume it is the case without evidence and then call me naïve for stating the same fact that Paul Cassell pointed out about there not being a documented case of a wrongful execution over the second half of the Twentieth Century. Between 832-850 executions in 28 years versus some 500,000-600,000 homicides. You do the math! Yes, in capital cases, it takes an average of 10 years and 6 months to carry out the sentence. I’ve seen cases where people had been on death row for 20 years and more. We allow defendants in capital cases to have ample opportunity to appeal, appeal again, and again in addition to clemency hearings. To think an innocent person is just going to somehow get accused, tried, convicted, and have the conviction upheld repeatedly by appeals courts is naïve in the extreme. You don’t mind if a person is wrongfully left to rot until they die in prison, but you are opposed to capital punishment. You don’t mind if they are sent to prison and killed. Where is your heart when we have innocent people die every day of every year? Its funny how a handful of exonerations emboldens people to ignore the fact that it shows the systems of checks, usually appeals courts, works. |
|
Friday, January 8, 2010Neither Deterrence nor False Convictions are Valid Arguments For or Against the Death PenaltyThe rate of innocence is not an argument against the death penalty. Anyone using it that way must stop using any form of transportation until the problem of accidental deaths in crashes has been "solved." We need a moratorium on cars, trucks, planes, subways, bicycling and walking. These kill 1000 times as many people as the death penalty, and 5000 times as many innocent people as the death penalty. These crashes kill 40,000 people who have committed no crime, without procedural due process, without trial. They made the mistake of driving over black ice. They are dispatched by crushing and slicing by metal edges emerging during the crash. There were over 10 times as many children executed by by vehicles, as they walked, as there were death penalties carried out.No. The rate of innocence is being used as a pretext to abolish the death penalty. The abolitionists will use the slightest mistake or imperfection to try to shit the death penalty down. Therefore the use of the rate of innocence represents a form of bad faith. Bad faith gives moral justification to invalidate the advocate. |
|
|
Years ago I was an opponent of the death penalty and had subscribed to the many arguments against its use. It is inhumane, not worthy of a civilized society. The wrong person might be executed. No other advanced society continues to execute, only countries like Iran or Communist China. It is given unfairly, only to the poor and minorities. There is no evidence that it is a deterrent. It is legalized murder by the state, little different than the act of the criminal, (the most absurd of all the arguments). A life sentence serves the purpose just as well. And on and on go the tired arguments from watery intellects that
appeal to emotion over reason. I grow more conservative with age and many
of the views I hold today I would have considered ridiculous twenty years
ago. I read somewhere once that any man who at the age of 18 is not a
liberal has no heart; and any man who at the age of 35 is not a conservative
has no mind. I think of that quote whenever I hear a liberal argue about
anything, especially the death penalty. The death penalty is just. What good is a society that does not proclaim the right to life as one of the ultimate values? A person who wantonly takes the life of an innocent human being should pay the ultimate price, if the sacredness of life is to have any meaning at all. The focus should be on the life of the innocent and the death penalty a statement by society that for certain acts, a person forfeits any right to a life of their own. Life is sacred, and despite the liberal mindset that abhors passing judgments or making distinctions between good and evil, the value of an innocent life over one of a cold blooded murderer must be acknowledged. It is not the death penalty that cheapens life or makes the society that employs it barbaric. There was nothing barbaric about the execution of Mr. Graham. What is barbaric, as well as tragic and pitiful, is the thinking that fails to make the distinction between the lives of Mr. Graham and the life of the young girl he was responsible for ending. It is the society that fails to make that distinction, in a way that is dramatic and without equivocation, which is truly the barbaric one. |
|
|
Favors capital punishment February 18, 2011 I've read that murderers want to return to Iowa, as they know Iowa doesn't have capital punishment. The majority of Iowans are in favor of capital punishment. |
|
Death
Penalty Essay on 14 May 2009 -
The anti-death penalty activists in this country would have you believe that every time a murderer is executed the justice system has just committed murder as well. They would have you believe that every person on death row is a victim. What they don’t talk about is what that person did to get onto death row. They forget about the people that where killed, and the people whose lives where affected by the murders; these are the real victims. They had a right to live just like every else in the world but their lives where snuffed out by a murderer. In my opinion, every one has a right to live, but as soon as you murder another human being you forfeit that right. I cannot see a convicted felon as some sort of victim, because it was his own actions that brought about his fate, not the actions of another person. Death
Penalty Essay on 14 May 2009 -
Some people would argue that putting a murderer to death will not bring their victims back to life, or console their victims family, so what is the point? Well, putting someone in prison for the rest of their lives, or any other punishment for that matter, won’t bring their victims back to life either. So do you suggest we just don’t punish the killer for his actions? What punishment is supposed to do is prevent the killer from ever killing again, and what better way to do that than to take their own life away from them. If the most severe penalty a person can receive is to spend the rest of his/her life in jail, then what do you do when this is no longer enough? For example, a New York prisoner named Lemuel Smith, while serving six life sentences for his various crimes, including murder, strangled a female security guard, then mutilated and dismembered her body. Because New York has no death penalty, there is nothing that can be done to punish him beside another meaningless life sentence (Koch 562). What better way to preserve innocent life than to eliminate the people that would seek to destroy it? As for consoling the victims family, true, the death of their loved ones murderer may not make them feel better, but at least they can rest easy knowing that the killer is dead and gone instead of sleeping soundly in a prison bed. Death
Penalty Essay on 14 May 2009 -
What would you do if Osama Bin Laden walked into the room right now? Most people would say they would kill him for the crimes he committed against our country. This is the same thing that the family’s and friends of most murder victim’s feel about the person that took their loved one away from them. Then the anti-death penalty activists complain that the death penalty is cruel and unusual. They don’t like the quick and painless death that is awaiting the convicted murderer. They cite the way the prisoner is treated, the way he has to wait for the inevitable. I hope that this is the most terrifying experience of his/her life. While it is not possible to let victims family’s personally strangle the murderer, they will know that the killer felt, at least a small part, the fear that their victims felt just before they where brutally killed. Is the death penalty barbaric? No: raping, beating, torturing and killing people is barbaric. Fast, effective, painless execution of someone convicted of the aforementioned crimes is not barbaric; it is justice. Death Penalty Essay on 14 May 2009In
conclusion, I hope that next time you hear about a death penalty being carried
out that you will be able to see through the media about the murderer being a
victim, and remember who the real victim’s are. The death penalty is justice;
it is not wrong. Think about the horrible crimes that the person committed to
get himself on death row and remember that they brought this upon themselves. I
value human life, and the best way to preserve it is to send a message to those
people that would seek to destroy it; we will not tolerate murder. |
|
|
Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) TheHuntsman There are two fundamental
arguments against the death penalty for murder which compel me not to support
its reintroduction. The
guilty already go free, to kill again. A 1997 Home Office report records that
362 ‘life licensees released between 1972 and 1990 were reconvicted of a
standard list offence within 5 years. Of those released 66 had been convicted
of a grave offence by the end of 1995’. Another report records 30
homicide convictions between 1997/8 and 2007/8 of people already convicted
of homicide. ‘A convicted killer who murdered two of his neighbours …’: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-14189216 ‘Wright fired a final, fatal shot into his neck. … Wright, who had already served a life sentence for a murder he committed in 1971’: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/bradford/8586576.stm Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) can you imagine the violence that would ensue once we started hanging Is-Rad terrorists? Try and quantify how many more would die. Murder is never right, whether by a drug crazed gunman, a terrorist or a Norwegian psychopath. Neither can it be right to respond by murdering the murderers. Human life is scared from he moment of conception until natural death. Cobblers. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) All those
who are for the death penalty - are you willing to have the executioner
executed if an innocent was executed? Good idea..........and when our military kill civilians in one of our many overseas invasions, we could have mass executions at the MoD. Look, so many of you use this argument that an innocent just maybe killed.
For goodness sake, give the system some credit , so mistakes get made, but to
clear out our jails [which are full of evil criminals ] & or to stop
further killings .........you should be more pragmatic. Which is far greater in number ! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) It
is interesting how few of the comments here say anything about the information
in the article, evidence that capital punishment is effective in preventing
crime and saving lives. Of course, the criminal justice system will
always be far from perfect, as will everyone in the world. We can't use
that as a reason to allow convicted murderers, etc to live to murder again and
again. What about those innocent lives? Are they not worth
saving? The thought of an innocent person dying as a result of a wrong
decision in the criminal justice system is awful. But, the reality of
innocent lives being lost on a much larger scale, because we are not dealing
with crime as we should, is more awful. We devalue human life and
undermine confidence in justice when we allow people to murder and then live to
murder again. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Have you observed how
death-penalty opponents do their utmost to make the victim vanish? While
sometimes almost poetic in begging sympathy for the convicted murderer, not one
word can they spare for the victims. They routinely depict the executed as if
immaculately conceived and without sin, rather than meeting their end as a
consequence of murdering another human being. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Rather
the guilty go free than an innocent man be punished. kingorry Not a very compelling argument. The average murderer is out of prison in a little over a decade, hard to explain that to their victim's corpse or their family. It
is hard to apologize to a corpse: have you tried apologizing to the at
least 30 dead at the hands of already convicted murderers? Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Nonsense. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Would you still be making the
same argument if the innocent person executed was your
brother/sister/child/spouse/parent/friend? And if one of the 30 dead at the hands of
an already convicted murderer ‘was your
brother/sister/child/spouse/parent/friend?’ Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) The British practice was three clear Sundays absent
appeals. I understand the three
weeks allowed the process of appeals; appeals did not extend this period. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Oh here
we go again. It must be the silly season. Not much news going on so dig
up some report.
Some US states which do not have the death penalty have lower rates -yes the always did. Some countries have low murder rates because they are historical less violent countries than others. Most of this is mere
assertion. The death penalty does not act as a deterrent? This
might be what you want to believe, but it is almost certainly untrue. If
it was, why did the murder rate in this country rise disproportionate to
all inputs, such as population increase and general crime rate, after the
abolition of the death penalty? Murder rates had been rising slowly
throughout the 20th century, but they really took off after abolition was
imposed on an unwilling country. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Is
it acceptable to you that Donna Wilson died so that a convicted murderer should
live? Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Gregyank The scum that killed those kids in Norway did not want to die. He wanted to make a political statement and after his arrest one of his earliest concerns was access to a PC so he can get on with the next phase of his political struggle. My opinion is that the death penalty under these extraordinary circumstances would have deterred this individual who's every breath is an insult to civilization. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Expatnhappy The death penalty "works" every
time a murderer is put to death. Capital punishment is not the correct
punishment for all murders, but for certain types of murder, in particular the
murder of children or of more than one person on separate occasions, or the
murder of a stranger, what is the US are category 1 capital murder cases, then
it is the only proper punishment. The alternative: whole life sentences in
which the killer is incarcerated for ever with no possibility of parole, are
sadistic: a really cruel and unusual punishment if ever there was one but one
which can never allow the families to forgive the perpetrator, since their
loved one is dead and the killer is not. It is really very simple. People say
that there is a danger of wrongful convictions. Well it is for the legal system
to reduce those to a minimum and for any of those unlucky enough to be put to
death for a murder they didnt commit, to have the grace to admit that their
deaths are a price worth paying for a better society. In the same way the loved
ones of innocent persons who die in horrific accidents on motorways have to
accept that the inevitability of one or two terrible accidents is the price
society is prepared to pay for a better road transport system. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Bodaniel Tell it to Angela Cannings, Donna Anthony, Mark Dallagher, Sean Hodgson and the Cardiff Three among many others. Real people with real lives. They would have hanged. Tell them their lives were worth sacrificing. I'd like to tell you to tell Sally Clark, Kevin Callan, Stefan Kiszko and Anthony Steel but sadly their health suffered so much after time in jail for murders they did not commit they died decades early than they should have. danielfg Bodaniel Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) danielfg A
few statistics from the House of Commons library of cases initially recorded as
homicide by the police per year - the charges may have been altered before
trial: Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Andrew Dawson: murdered a 91-year-old man
in 1982. Released, he then murdered John Matthews, 66, and Paul Hancock, 58, in
2010. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) and with satisfying symmetry, an innocent person wrongly convicted of murder will be saved the unpleasant prospect of being wrongly convicted again And
with rather less satisfying symmetry, an innocent person murdered by an already
convicted murderer will not be murdered again by another already convicted
murderer. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Donna
Wilson, Maria Stubbing, Hazel Dix. They were human beings. They deserved better
than to die at the hands of convicted murderers. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) You really are a bottom-dweller
aren't you - mawkishly invoking details of murder victims' lives just to
bolster your tawdry case for the state killing its own citizens. That
you so easily resort to abuse rather than civilised rebuttal says much about
you and your cause. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) So what would you do with a John
Cooey sparky? And
death-penalty opponents try and make themselves feel better by pretending that
the victim does not exist; see article linked. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) theseaoon There could be an easy way to decide if a death sentence is safe and that is DNA. If a capital case is proven by DNA confirming that the suspect (don't you just love that word) is without doubt the culprit then the trial should include the death penalty as an option for the jury, if no DNA is proven then the death penalty should not be an option. However my take on it is if someone kills another in cold blood for a crime of theft or malice or rape or whatever, if convicted including DNA proof they should be executed after only one attempt to overturn the trial result as revenge, yes revenge. Take them out of the system because they have lost the right to be part of civilisation and why should we pay to keep them alive for years putting guards lives at risk? If these statistics are half right it makes a case to reinstate the death penalty in the UK.....but of course its only make believe because of all the bleeding heart liberals cracking on about human rights. My feelings on human rights are for the victims and families of victims. They want revenge they want these animals to be exterminated.....exterminate....exterminate....exterminate.....Dr, Dr....its the.....arrrrrrr Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) cogent_one What
if there is absolutely no doubt that a person has committed some ghastly crime
like beating a child to death or starving it? Or abducting a young girl
and then raping and killing her? Or luring a girl to a forest and callously
bashing her head in with a rock? Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) cogent_one surely they've only ever sentenced someone to death where they thought there was no doubt. And yet still got it wrong. Because we are human beings that make mistakes, we don't have the right to give a death sentence Yes
we do ! Making a statement does not make it so ! Umm we have not killed lots of innocent Afghans the Taliban have and they would have killed more of them if we had not been there to prevent it. cogent_one We certainly have killed many Afghans: mostly in misdirected air strikes. The Taliban have killed many more, no doubt. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) As
Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it
works; Misdirection
! the death penalty was not available ! If it had been it maybe that the
standard of proof would have been insufficient for a jury to find them gulity !
And they might not even have spent time in prison at all ! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) villain57 If you
believe that the US as not executed innocents in over 100 years you are totally
naive. Which makes the point ! Strong doubts are
not proof of innocence and many innocents - did not get executed ! So the
system works ! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) daviduk84 @strangerheremysel
Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) villain57 Highly
emotive. All murderers are cold blooded psychopaths and what about the families
of those left behind. We are no better if we do not do whatever gives victims families some peace and at the very least that is not a derisory sentence Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Think of the people who would have been executed
though they were actually innocent: The Guildford Four, The Birmingham Six etc
etc ... the death penalty is completely unacceptable. Life should mean life for
'aggravated murders'. But they weren't were
they ! The chances are that a more robust police force and criminal justice
sytem would have established the case much more completely if there had been
any chance of them swinging for it! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) JessieXL If you
are in favour of the death penalty, then imagine how you would feel if it were
you or someone you loved facing it, having been wrongly convicted. Not_taken_in Have you ever imagined what it would feel
like to be looking down the barrel of a shotgun watching the trigger being
squeezed and knowing that thanks to warped liberalism your killer would not pay
with their own life and you would not have the option of giving them pause for
thought as you would wish that you otherwise had ? Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Imagine how you would feel if the
murderer-rapist of your daughter was given life in prison where he earned a law
degree, trimmed himself into great shape, eating well and working out, and 15
years later was paroled by a liberal bunch of criminal loving scumbags. Kill
the murderers ASAP, pay per view. Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Just
a few thoughts on this topic: Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Animals also rape, murder, and disembowel each other. Do you think we should do that, too? Animals kill their young - are you condoning child murder? Animals
do none of the above - only we humans have the ability to 'classify' what we
call crimes. To the animals - it is just life - they are born, exist,
(hopefully) mate as often as possible and die ! There is not any other plan
involved for them ! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) hardtruth01 "Have you ever imagined what it would feel like to be looking down the barrel of a shotgun watching the trigger being squeezed and knowing that .... your killer would not pay with their own life and you would not have the option of giving them pause for thought as you would wish that you otherwise had ? " I suspect what little "comfort" I'd take from knowing my
killer would die too might be outweighed by the realization that, had the
killer already used one barrel to kill another, he would, having killed once,
have no disincentive whatever not to shoot me too. Someone who will kill without thought
will not be deterred by the death penalty, lets not be under any illusion here!
However the person who 'thinks' will be well aware that although they have
committed a crime they will only be imprisoned for that crime and come out the
other side - will more likely not kill if the option is there - because simply,
if they are afraid of getting caught - they will be aware the the rope beckons
if they step over the line! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) So if the
state kills an innocent person for murder; because I hope you're not stupid
enough to trust the state; you will of course compensate the victim of that
mistake by killing yourself? There is no link to be made here ! You
are comparing apples with doughnuts ! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) Your
point doesn't address the key issue. How do you compensate for a mistake when
someone has been executed in error? Life
is risk: weighing costs and benefits. You take a risk by going into
hospital—even the best nurses, doctors and surgeons make mistakes, have
off-days, and some manage to qualify who should not. But the benefits of modern
medicine outweigh the risk of the occasional mistake. A mistake occurs, an
inquiry is held, very occasionally it is so serious as to warrant criminal
charges; sometimes the medical practitioner is struck off; other times changes
are made in procedure; sometimes, it’s just life. But
the thing is - everyone in support - by default is accepting their own
potential for a miscarriage of justice ! Commenting on As Britain debates the death penalty again, studies from America confirm that it works ( US politics Last updated: August 5th, 2011) So you do support the death penalty - but
only for those who disagree with you! Good sound basis and very dictatorial in outlook! However - for all your claims of the author lying - it has for a long time been the case that the anti-lobby has denied and slandered to their own purpose the fact that the death penalty saves lives ! |
|
Life in prison
for heinous murders is not justice. It is a propitiation of the worst kind. In
dealing with these cases, our system of justice needs to be streamlined to
ensure that the execution of heinous murders is workable, less drawn out and
significantly less expensive. (Wants death penalty streamlined, not
eliminated from state law Published 05:41 p.m., Monday, June 13,
2011) |
|
|
The solution to this problem of murder is as follows. Before I go on let me say that at the age of about fourteen I was being encouraged to kill someone and my reply to them was Oh I won’t do that because if you kill someone they hang you. So there you are it deterred me from committing murder. Right here is what we need. 1/ Reintroduce the death penalty. 2/ Juries are only to be made up of professionally trained personnel. 3/ nobody is hanged on circumstantial evidence. 4 Introduce the three tests into all trials, ie, the truth drug, the lie detector test and the hypnosis test. Just remember, Collin Stag took two of these tests just to prove his innocence and past both with flying colours. 5/ Remove the right for barristers to choose the jury, which is just an act to make it easier for them to get a not guilty verdict. Just remember, they are not the least bit interested in justice,. All they are interested in is money. Just think if there were no crimes committed they would be made redundant. It is in their interest to keep the crime level high. 6/ Make it a criminal offence for barristers to tell LIES. Which they are allowed to at the moment. I say this because I did experience such action when I served on a jury. ie the case. Six men on trial for stealing and selling motor oil, OK. Four were charged with stealing and two partners in an auto shop charged with selling on. All had different barristers. When the judge said about the two selling on, you must have known this was a dodgy deal because the oil was so cheap, the barister for one said that they were told it was bankrupt stock. If that was the case why didn't all baristers use that for defence? |
|
|
So the obstruction--some might call it deliberate, endless obstruction--of a statutory penalty justifies the demise of the death penalty? In the name of "fairness" to the victims and their families? I don't think so. The silenced victims deserve better than to be cast aside by lawyers and former officials who impose thir own qualms on the process to the detriment of us all. Opponents seek endless habeas writs years--no decades--past the trial leading the US Supreme Court in one case (Robert Alton Harris) to tell the 9th Circuit "no more writs." Of course its expensive when there is no finality and writs and appeals having nothing to do with actual innocence can be filed without end. Perhaps instead of conceding defeat, we could streamline the route to enforcement even more. That is what the People have asked for repeatedly. There is no reason it shouldn't happen. I vote for justice to the victims. One appeal. One writ. All done within 5 years. No more challenges to the method either. We adopted injection to appease the people upset at hangings, and electrocution, and now they are litigating the formula, the dose..it never stops. Opponents don't care about the victims. Their litigation is transparent obstruction. Deal with the opponents, not the penalty. |
|
|
Rogelio Cannady: To be Killed for Killing a Fellow Killer 18 May 2010 at 3:25am - For the October 10, 1993 robbery and murder of a fellow inmate at the medium custody housing area at the McConnell Unit in Beeville, TX. The victim, Leovigildo Bombale Bonal, who was Cannady’s cellmate, was beaten with a steel lock attached to a belt and kicked repeatedly in the head with steel-toed boots by Cannady. Bonal, who was serving a 15-year sentence for murder from Tarrant County, died two days later. Cannady was the first Texas prison inmate to be prosecuted under a 1993 statute that allows for capital murder convictions if the offender is serving 99 years or life as a result of previous murder convictions. Well…for the first time in my death row blogging, I will not shed a tear or give one rat’s ass about the victim, Leovigildo Bombale Bonal, who was also a murdering POS and the world is a better place without him in it, too. Rogelio Cannady: To be Killed for Killing a Fellow Killer 18 May 2010 at 3:25am - However, that doesn’t make Cannady any less of a POS — remember, he was already serving two consecutive life sentences for murders he committed in 1990. Even if Cannady didn’t deserve the DP for doing us all the favor of killing a fellow killer, he still would be deserving of the needle on Wednesday night for his two previous murders. Rogelio Cannady: To be Killed for Killing a Fellow Killer 18 May 2010 at 3:25am - Cannady’s case is also another reason why I support the death penalty for brutal animals like Cannady instead of Life without Parole. Because as long as they are alive, they are a danger to every single living person that comes into contact with them — cell mates, prison guards, medical staff, administrators, their own lawyers. |
|
|
Griffin Pardales wrote this letter on 1 March 2011. I am writing to talk about Capital Punishment. I resolutely believe that Capital Punishment is one of the best forms of legal castigation that this country is entitled to legally perform. It is the definitive punishment that is enacted when an atrocious crime is committed. Capital Punishment is a benefit to our country because it permanently dispenses those wrongdoers who were sentenced in the first place. As of 2009, nearly 650,000 inmates are released from prison each year. 67% of these incarcerated persons are back in jail within 3 years. In some cases, I do believe that help should be administered to people who are not a lost cause, but if the person is a recurring committer of heinous crimes, then he is a threat to society and should be dealt with accordingly. I believe that, to preserve our freedom and our way of life, we must carry out the morally and judicially correct course of action, not letting our moral ambiguity be distorted by misguided beliefs and political bumbling. |
|
|
Capital Punishment (2000) - Anti-death
penalty advocates believe that death penalty is irreversible and may become a
cause of irreversible mistakes. Once a person has been sentenced to death and
thus death penalty practiced, there is nothing that can be done to undo the
punishment if the accused turns out to be innocent. I agree that death penalty
is irreversible, but the chance of making a mistake in death penalty is
extremely low. Death penalty is considered an extreme punishment and the
judicial system takes a lot of care in finalizing the decision. There are
several safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death
penalty. For example, "Capital punishment may be imposed only when guilt
is determined by clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an
alternative explanation of the facts", "Anyone sentenced to death
shall receive the right to appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction", etc.
(Capital Punishment: Life or Death, Internet). There are several other
privileges provided to the convicted that assure that death penalty is given to
the rightly accused person. According to Haag, "Trials are more likely to be
fair when life is at stake - the death penalty is probably less often unjustly
inflicted than others" (192). Statistics reveal that there is far less
number of death sentences than life imprisonment sentences without parole given
out every year. According to Federal Justice Statistics, in 1998, there were
approximately 5000 criminals sentenced to life imprisonment as opposed to 74
criminals sentenced to death (Internet). This shows that judicial system itself
is very careful with death sentences. Even if we assume that there are chances
that an innocent person is executed, it is the problem with the trial, not the
punishment. "It is not the penalty - whether death or prison - which is
unjust when inflicted on the innocent, but its imposition on the innocent",
writes Haag (192). When an innocent person is sentenced to death, it is not the
fault of the punishment itself, but the trial that led to this punishment.
There have been cases in which a person has been sentenced to life imprisonment
without parole, and then after several years, it was revealed that the person
was innocent. No court or compensation in this world can return the horrifying
years spent in the prison by that innocent person. If we stop giving life
imprisonment sentences to criminals on this ground, then probably most of the
criminals would be walking around free on the streets within ten to fifteen
years. The fear and trust that the society has in the judicial system would be
lost. The judicial system has minimized the chances of mistakes. It is almost
impossible to sentence a wrongly accused person. Then, why cause death of
several innocent victims just on the bleak assumption that some day we might
make a mistake? Capital Punishment (2000) – Incapacitating a person is "depriving s/he of the physical or intellectual power of natural il/legal qualifications" (Webster, 574). Death penalty is not advocated for all criminals. Those criminals, who commit murders during self-defense or during times of passion, do not deserve death penalty. However, those people who just do not seem to learn the lesson the first time, or those who kill for fun, definitely deserve death penalty. Defendants (murderers) are allowed to shield themselves from justice by pleading insanity. Insanity means a failure to respond to the usual sort of incentives in the usual ways. If insane people are completely unresponsive to incentives, then their profits serve no social purpose, thus leading to another beneficial factor of the death penalty. People who have no social purpose do not benefit society, culture of mankind, or the basic rules of humanity. For example: This drug related brain-damaged killer barely knew his own identity when he murdered a mother and her daughter in front of a 3 year old boy. When he was finished raping the females and performed their deaths, he move on to sexually molest the boy in which he then left him to die. The retarded man then pled insanity, got to stay in jail for 22 years, eating three square meals a day, sleeping on a mattress with a blanket in air conditioned comfort and having a roof over his head (Shapiro, 61). Where do we draw the line between mentally incapable and criminally insane? When are they going to learn to resume the responsibility for their actions? I am not saying that all mentally disabled people should be subject to death penalty because they are no good to the society. However, some people pose a great fatal danger to the society in such a cruel way as seen in the above example. In such cases, death penalty becomes crucial for the benefit of the society. I believe every criminal, no matter how cruel he is, should be given at least one chance to change himself/herself. Thus, I do not advocate death penalty for people who have performed only one murder. However, there have been cases in which people have committed several murders (e.g., serial killers), or have committed crime even after imprisonment. For such people, I advocate death penalty. There needs to be a limit to which society should put up to. If somebody does not understand that going around killing people is wrong, then I believe, that letting such people live is not only a great threat to the society, but also a great burden. Advocate of anti-death penalty, Adam Bedau, wrote, "Prevention by means of incapacitation occurs only if the executed criminal would have committed other crimes if he or she had not been executed and had been punished only in some less incapacitative way (e.g., by imprisonment)" (Capital Punishment and Social Defense, 301). If people commit a crime while facing an imprisonment sentence, then their sentence should be changed to death sentence, since it is evident that they are just habitual to committing crimes and are a constant threat to the society, including the other inmates. Capital Punishment (2000) – Some people might think that death penalty is inhuman and barbarous, but ask those people who have lost their beloved or whose lives have been tied to a hospital bed because of some barbarous person. I am sure they would be very unhappy to see the person who ruined their lives just getting a few years of imprisonment or mere rehabilitation. Consider the example of the rapist and killer given above. Now, suppose the woman raped was your wife, sister, or daughter. How would you feel knowing that the person who ruined your family is calmly enjoying the benefits of an asylum and an air-conditioned room? Anti-death penalty supporters believe that death penalty is barbarous. Well! So is murder. Death penalty is not revenge. Rather, it is a matter of putting an end to a life that has no value for other human lives. Sentencing a murderer to death is in fact a favor to the society. Despite the moral argument concerning the inhumane treatment of the criminal, we return to the "nature" of the crime committed. Can society place an unequal weight on the tragically lost lives of murder victims and the criminal? This is not an exam question in a college philosophy course but a moral conundrum at the core of perhaps the most intriguing issue facing the U. S. Supreme Court today. Punishment is meted out because of the nature of the crime, devoid of any reference to the social identity of the victim. In "The Death Penalty in America", Adam Bedau wrote, "even in the tragedy of human death there are degrees, and that it is much more tragic for the innocent to lose his life than for the State to take the life of a criminal convicted of a capital offense" (308). I believe that if one cannot value the life of another human being, then one's own life has no value. Capital Punishment (2000) – Death penalty is good and serves a definite purpose of reducing crime as well as bringing justice to the criminals and innocent. In order to serve its purpose, it must be adjusted and made more effective and efficient. The justice system has changed dramatically in the past thirty years in order to make sure that the rightly accused is brought to justice. I believe that death penalty should not be abolished, as it ensures the safety of the society, brings justice to those who have suffered and most importantly helps in reducing crime and criminals in our society. Death penalty is important to keep the brightness of justice and public safety shining brightly on our society. |
|
|
No, the death penalty is cheaper that having one person in a high security prison for life, if you add up the total costs the death penalty is cheaper. Plus those who have committed such crimes deserve to die. How much of taxpayer money must we waste for all these people who are emotionless people who murder for fun. The U.S could use all of that money to go through with president obamas plan for education and high speed rail. |
|
|
One of the main arguments against the death penalty is that it is not a deterrent. I would, however, counter with two points. First, deterrence is not even an appropriate issue to discuss in this debate. Punishment should occur primarily because an offense has been committed, not to keep other people from doing the same thing. The deterrence argument is nothing but a smoke screen which keeps us from considering the real issue - justice. Second, nothing is a deterrent if it is only rarely and inconsistently applied, as is the death penalty. We've all seen the parent who tells his child he will punish him for some offense and then applies that punishment inconsistently. That inconsistency just breeds more misbehavior; it does not deter the child or anyone else from committing other offenses in the future. - Yes: Penalty is a matter of justice 3:56 AM, May. 7, 2011 Another argument against the death penalty deals with the claimed occasional finding of guilt when someone is actually innocent. There are two legitimate responses. First, if the possibility of a mistake is justification for not meting out equitable punishment, then on what grounds do we punish anyone at all? I mean, is there not also a possibility of a mistake when we send someone to prison? Sure there is; but we do not let the offender just go home because he might actually be innocent.. But the other side will say, "But death is so final!" True, but that is not the issue at hand. Stick with me, folks. The issue here is whether the death penalty is illegitimate because of the possibility of a mistake. And the fact is that though its finality may be a consideration, that specific possibility is not legitimately central to the issue of whether the death penalty is an equitable punishment for murder. - Yes: Penalty is a matter of justice 3:56 AM, May. 7, 2011 Secondly, a mistake, especially in a capital case where it is sent up and down through the court system, where everything is examined with a fine-toothed comb, is extremely unlikely. It is far more likely that a guilty person will go free, or have his sentence overturned or reduced, than that an innocent person will be executed. - Yes: Penalty is a matter of justice 3:56 AM, May. 7, 2011 Then, there is always the argument about what supposed hypocrites anti-abortionists are when they take a pro-death penalty position. That argument is taken, however, only because some people do not apparently recognize the difference between the value of an innocent life and one which has given up its right to life by murdering. To compare the value of a murderer's life to the value of an unborn child's life is simply obtuse. - Yes: Penalty is a matter of justice 3:56 AM, May. 7, 2011 |
|
The death penalty A follow-up on barbarism Jul 7th 2011, 18:52 by E.G. | AUSTIN http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/death-penalty-0Reluctant Polutter wrote: Jul 11th 2011 10:56 GMT @ Hamakko: "Why then are you so willing to accept life in prison without possibility of parole as an acceptable alternative to the death penalty?" This is easy to answer: after the ah so human campaigners against death penalty got it totally abolished, without even taking a day off they will start new campaign - against life in prison. You know this lefty mantra "criminals are victims of the society"... Just google "Nidal Hasan" and you'll see that the humanists from the left whined collectively how he was just a little bit overboard in his actions, but otherwise reacted against totally real and legitimate grievances. |
|
|
On Monday 28 February 2011, he believes that a resumption of hangings will send the crime rate down and is calling on the Opposition to support the bill. “Remember what happened when Dole Chadee was hanged...It put fear into the heart of criminals and there was a downturn in the crime rate,” he said. He lamented that the even penalties for smaller crimes were not harsh enough. “The authorities should increase the crimes that will be dealt with by capital punishment,” he said. |
|
|
Lynn Taylor Says: Whether this man was innocent or guilty does not matter at this point, the damage is done, his loved ones are the real ones that have been punished by his execution, his suffering is over, they are the ones having to live with our societies mistakes. The fact that we are not God is important, and who do we think we are trying to play God? Who are we to say who should be killed and why they should be killed? Murder is murder, it makes no difference who is doing the killing. How can we teach our children that killing is wrong when we are killing people that we THINK may have killed someone.I Based on the new evidence that has been found, feel that this man could have been innocent of the charges against him and i hope the people that was on that jury and the prosecution has a real hard time sleeping at night…
R. Pierce Says: To Lynn Taylor.
|
|
|
Unionplumberscrack is an ex-YouTube user who commented on Step by Step A Journey of Hope: Marietta JaegerGod Bless this lady as she has lived through something I am sure would ruin me. Where I disagree is her stating the DP is revenge. The DP is cause and effect. This is where anti DP advocates argument is flawed. The DP is not citizens running around with hurt feelings. We do not execute solely for the victim's closure. The main reason is punish and make certain this person never offends again. Life without parole? Kenneth McDuff and many others discount that myth... The DP is about JUSTICE... |
|
Did you know that out of a sample of 164 paroled Georgia murderers, eight of them murdered again within seven years of release? The United States is one of the countries that will allow executions, unlike Canada. The death penalty is something we need in this country because prisons are becoming more and more overcrowded, it’s completely immoral for the victims’ families to support the criminal and the chance of executing the wrong person is very slim. - Opinion: Death penalty teaches murderers right Wednesday, April 13, 2011 By Kaila Gonzalez At least five prison officers have been killed since Dec. 1982 in the United States by prisoners and at least three of those prisoners who killed them were serving life sentences. By giving people like those inmates a life sentence, we are risking the lives of others such as officers because once somebody is given a life sentence they just lose hope in life and don’t care about who they hurt anymore. Those inmates are going to continue to kill, which first of all is what brought them to prison and they feel free to kill without anything to lose. - Opinion: Death penalty teaches murderers right Wednesday, April 13, 2011 By Kaila Gonzalez No matter what the conditions of the prison, the only way justice can be done is by making that murderer give up his life for the life he took. - Opinion: Death penalty teaches murderers right Wednesday, April 13, 2011 By Kaila Gonzalez People often argue that the death penalty should be banned because an innocent person could be killed or that it falls under the “cruel and unusual” punishment amendment in the Bill of Rights. In reality, the chance of killing the incorrect person is actually very unlikely and it continues to become unlikelier because the improvements that have been made in modern technology and forensic science. While many people believe that the death penalty is “cruel and unusual”, they are wrong. The framers of the constitution supported the death penalty and even left laws for carrying it out correctly. If the framers of The United States of America thought the death penalty was good enough and appropriate, then who are we to want to change it? - Opinion: Death penalty teaches murderers right Wednesday, April 13, 2011 By Kaila Gonzalez Having the death penalty is really helping the world by ridding the world of people who like to do harm to others. Less crowded prisons, closure for families of victims, and acceptance of the death penalty would be positive outcomes of having the death penalty. We can make a difference in this world by all being pro-death penalty. - Opinion: Death penalty teaches murderers right Wednesday, April 13, 2011 By Kaila Gonzalez |
|
The death penalty A follow-up on barbarism Jul 7th 2011, 18:52 by E.G. | AUSTIN http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/death-penalty-0LarryInIowa wrote: Jul 9th 2011 9:05 GMT Please give the quote from Jesus in which he opposed the death penalty. Perhaps one from anywhere in the Bible? Redemption? I always love it when the non-religious use that word when it's useful in their argument. Death penalty too expensive? I wonder if that argument really works since it's those who oppose the death penalty who cause that to be the case. Lastly, there is one death penalty almost all liberals support. The one where you kill unborn children for the crime of being inconvenient. Until and unless the coddlers of murderers start to oppose killing for birth control they pretty much forfeit their moral authority. |
|
|
The
death penalty A follow-up on barbarism Jul
7th 2011, 18:52 by E.G. | AUSTIN http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/07/death-penalty-0
Jofukia wrote: Jul 11th 2011 3:06 GMT > As far as preventing someone from killing again, there is no public-safety benefit to killing someone as opposed to locking them up forever, and people seem to recognise that. It would be great if they did lock up such murderers for life with the chance of parole. But in my country (Netherlands), where we don't have the death penalty, this doesn't happen. Instead such monsters are given 15 to 20 years and then released early for good behavior. Example, look up: Sander Vreeswijk, a cop who raped and murdered a 12 year old neighbor girl. He got just 18 years. Vreeswijk is in his late 20s, so he will walk free again. His victim however will never get a second chance, and her parents, bother and sister and school friends have been traumatized for life. Their "punishment" doesn't end ever. So why should Mr. Vreeswijk's punishment end?
|
|
|
A study released by Duke University and Sam Houston State University in early 2010 concluded that the 2009 executions of two dozen murderers in Texas may have saved as many as 60 innocent lives. And when the anti-capital punishment advocates decry the high cost of executions, one wonders what price they would put on the 60 lives saved. - Death Penalty Is A Deterrent The Hartford Courant The
study is an "analysis of an issue and is not a political statement,"
according to criminologist Raymond Teske. It focused on Texas which has used
capital punishment to execute 447 murderers since 1982. Statistically, what
better place to evaluate the efficacy of the death penalty? It concluded that
in the month following a murderer's execution, there was a decline in the
number of homicides of between 0.5 and 2.5. The study's results have been
statistically validated by other researchers. If those numbers apply to
Connecticut that would mean that the execution of Stephen Hayes could result in
saving the lives of another Petit family. - Death Penalty Is A Deterrent The Hartford Courant
Of course, there may be members of the state legislature who believe that saving the life of a murderer like Hayes is worth the risk of losing innocents like the Petit family. I do not agree with those legislators. - Death Penalty Is A Deterrent The Hartford Courant |
|
|
They are entitled to their opinion. It is nevertheless true that in the history of the world there has not been a single executed murderer who then went on to kill again. - Death penalty morally rational 12:00 PM, Apr. 18, 2011 The rational reason that capital punishment is moral is that it gives support to the victims! The authors' offer of "prayers," while compassionate, seems pretty thin gruel in comparison. In the modern world, it is important to know that your neighbors support your values and goals even to the point of protecting you from those who would harm the people you love. While guarantees are impossible to us in this life, the rule of law and the jury system have served very well since about the 12th century. - Death penalty morally rational 12:00 PM, Apr. 18, 2011 |
|
|
Art Cummings gives us the bottom line in opposing capital punishment (The News-Times, April 24). It is simply wrong, he reasons, to "kill people." If we substitute "exacting justice" for the word "kill," a more definitive portrait emerges. I speak for those who vehemently oppose Mr. Cummings' position. - Supports keeping death penalty among Connecticut's state laws Published 05:25 p.m., Thursday, April 28, 2011 While he acknowledges the evil of certain crimes and offers life imprisonment instead, we on the other side believe some acts to be so heinous that denial of life is the only fair and balanced option. Some people, in other words, have by their own actions forfeited the right to live. - Supports keeping death penalty among Connecticut's state laws Published 05:25 p.m., Thursday, April 28, 2011 |
|
|
Tuesday 4 September 2012 - Whenever a horrendous murder case occurs, the debate over the execution resurfaces.
|
|
|
"These prisoners get three hot meals a day, a place to sleep, and in most cases, TV. These are all things that our tax dollars pay for. If you commit murder, you should be put to death. Gov. Quinn's decision spares 15 death row inmates including Andrew Urdiales, a serial killer, convicted of murdering several women. All this makes me wonder how the families of these victims feel. Are they seeing justice served?" |
|
|
Quinn Didn't Make Wise Decision in Abolishing the Death Penalty Rochelle Connery Wed Mar 9, 6:46 pm ET - The death penalty is generally reserved for the worst of the worst, such as felons who have committed heinous rapes and murders, sometimes repeatedly. How is life imprisonment adequate punishment for such cases? Life imprisonment without parole still entitles offenders to carrying out something they wrongfully took away from someone else -- their lives. And although they won't be living their lives the way they want to, taxpayers make sure they get to live them out in the most comfortable way possible, considering the circumstances. Simply being locked away for life isn't adequate punishment for the crimes they committed. Quinn Didn't Make Wise Decision in Abolishing the Death Penalty Rochelle Connery Wed Mar 9, 6:46 pm ET - What does a prisoner on a life sentence without parole do all day? Plot their escapes, for one. Life sentence prisoners have nothing to lose if they're not going to receive the death penalty. What says they're not going to attempt escapes -- perhaps successful ones -- and hurt someone else in the process? Or worse yet, what if they do succeed in getting back on the street, if only for a few days before they're recaptured? Why take the risk? In other words, having the death penalty in places reduces the possibility of heinous criminals committing more crimes. Quinn Didn't Make Wise Decision in Abolishing the Death Penalty Rochelle Connery Wed Mar 9, 6:46 pm ET - What do potential criminals have to lose if they commit murder in Illinois? Not their lives, that's for sure. At least not any more. Losing your life is a deterrent for anyone, even a psychopath. Even those who say they don't fear death still want it on their own terms -- not as a result of a death penalty. Keeping the death penalty in place makes people think twice about
committing serious crimes like rape and murder. But if the worst that can
happen to them is no longer having to work for a living and staying in shelter
rent-free (courtesy of taxpayers) in a penitentiary, a good portion of the
threat is eliminated from their strategy. |
|
|
The death penalty
following on a fair trial is not primitive and animalistic, it is just. Not
only that - it prevents serial killers from constantly reoffending. I give you
one recent example, plus an older one. Anthony Edward Sowell released from 2005
after 15 years in jail. In 2009, when he was arrested, he was charged with 85
counts of murder, rape and kidnapping - and found guilty of all but two
charges. This charge included the deaths of 11 women whose bodies were found in
his house or buried in his backyard. Remember Lucky Genovese? Given a light
sentence for murder as a young adult (teenager) he came out to form the
Genovese crime family. Countless people died at his hands or on his
instructions. (Death penalty justified Published
in Jamaica Gleaner: Saturday | August 6, 2011) |
|
|
Jeff Laszloffy, a former MT State Representative, said, "Abolishing the death penalty in my opinion is not the solution to this problem. We need to come to grips with the fact that there are people among us who kill, that's just what they do. There are people in this world that are evil." |
|
|
However, if the execution of sadistic murderers like Ted Bundy and John Gacy is state-sanctioned murder, then state imprisonment of rapists, child molesters, drug dealers, burglars and murderers is state sanctioned kidnapping and state taxation on consumer goods is state sanctioned theft. - Death penalty plea misguided 6:08 AM, May. 5, 2011 When foes of the death penalty cite "Thou shalt not kill," we must reply that the commandment is more precisely understood as "Thou shalt not murder." Some killing is morally justified such as killing in self-defense or in a just war. - Death penalty plea misguided 6:08 AM, May. 5, 2011 If the state has the moral right to authorize its citizens to wage a just war, then the state also has the moral right to authorize the executions of vicious, unrepentant murderers. - Death penalty plea misguided 6:08 AM, May. 5, 2011 |
|
|
"Though I consider myself a moderate or even liberal with regard to social programs, I am disappointed in Gov. Quinn and the General Assembly for taking the death penalty away as an option for prosecutors. At some point, we must realize that our penal system fails in the mandate to rehabilitate prisoners and must punish those who are guilty of the most heinous crimes against society -- murder and rape of children, multiple murders, or murders in extreme fashion. Without this option, our prisons become a much more dangerous place for guards who are already understaffed." |
|
|
Murder is an inexcusable offense that must be demeaned as much as possible in order to preserve the dwindling amount of morality that has partially fallen into a precipice of rhetoric. (Using the death penalty is beneficial 5:47 AM, May. 21, 2011)
|
|
|
Your views on death penalty (By CHRIS DEARY Published: 25 Feb 2008) Hi folks. Interesting thread, here. Being from the
Lone Star State myself, I can at least tell you why we believe executions are
effective: |
|
|
Death penalty may not deter, but does punish Sunday 16 January 2011 - Again, with the terrible massacre of innocents in Arizona, we are bombarded by those who will raise the issue of capital punishment. The author of the letter titled "Death penalty offers no solution to killing," published Jan. 13, reiterates the tired statements about how the death penalty doesn't stop the killing. Well, taking a driver's license doesn't stop people from stealing cars, driving drunk and killing others. Who says that the death penalty is imposed to stop others from killing? Death penalty may not deter, but does punish Sunday 16 January 2011 - Nobody speaks to the death penalty for what it is meant to be. Punishment. Not for the deterrence of others. However, it may be a deterrent. I can imagine that some people have thought better about killing another because of the death penalty. By the way, going to prison doesn't stop it in this state. Two words: Steven Hayes. |
