Your position on the death penalty

[A18]

I support the death penalty only for murder and rape.

[Bono]

I support the death penalty much more strongly today than I did yesterday.

Why?  Because a sub-human piece of filth, a parole violator, wanted for a string of robberies and a murder in several states, walked into a jewelry store in my town last night and murdered both owners (husband and wife) while carrying out a robbery of the store.

His name is Christopher DiMeo, and if I got onto his jury, I'd have him on death row so fast your head would spin.  It is for people like this that we need the death penalty.

See, now had those peope been gun owners, nothing like that would've happened.

[dazzleman]

I support the death penalty much more strongly today than I did yesterday.

Why?  Because a sub-human piece of filth, a parole violator, wanted for a string of robberies and a murder in several states, walked into a jewelry store in my town last night and murdered both owners (husband and wife) while carrying out a robbery of the store.

His name is Christopher DiMeo, and if I got onto his jury, I'd have him on death row so fast your head would spin.  It is for people like this that we need the death penalty.

See, now had those peope been gun owners, nothing like that would've happened.

Not sure that's true, but it might be.  I don't know what their security precautions were.  This took place in a very low crime area where security has never been much of a concern.   That's probably why he selected this area to do his dirty work.

His heroin-whore girlfriend drove the getaway car in this robbery, and in another robbery, his MOTHER drove the getaway car.  Unbelievable.

[Nym90]

I am fully against the death penalty in all cases. It should never, ever be up to the government to decide when someone has done enough bad deeds that their life should automatically end.


-Dan

I would only support it in extreme cases, such as when a person who is already in prison for life commits murder (since there would otherwise be no way to punish them at all). I also wouldn't mind it for heinous cases like serial killers, terrorism, or murdering a police officer. Overall, though, I'm pretty strongly against it. I don't think that the government should respond to killing with more killing; a better option would be to give them life in prison without the possibility of parole, and then make them work their a** off while they are there. It would be more productive for society as well to make them hold a job of some sort while they are in prison rather than simply killing them.

[dazzleman]

I am fully against the death penalty in all cases. It should never, ever be up to the government to decide when someone has done enough bad deeds that their life should automatically end.


-Dan

I would only support it in extreme cases, such as when a person who is already in prison for life commits murder (since there would otherwise be no way to punish them at all). I also wouldn't mind it for heinous cases like serial killers, terrorism, or murdering a police officer. Overall, though, I'm pretty strongly against it. I don't think that the government should respond to killing with more killing; a better option would be to give them life in prison without the possibility of parole, and then make them work their a** off while they are there. It would be more productive for society as well to make them hold a job of some sort while they are in prison rather than simply killing them.

From what I hear, death row is a living hell, at least in Connecticut.  Prisoners on death row are basically not allowed to talk to anybody, and are locked in their cells all the time.  Sounds good to me.

In my own personal experience (obviously nothing at this level), I have found extended periods of forced inactivity and forced lack of communication to be the worst punishment of all.  Every minute seems like an hour, and there appears to be no end in sight.  I used to have trouble getting through a couple of hours of that type of punishment when I got in trouble in school; I can't imagine doing it for 20 years without letup.  When I took a tour of the police lockup in my town, I thought about how bad it would be to spend just one night in those cells, with no room to walk around, nothing to read or look at, and nobody to talk to.  Pure torture.

Work details, on the other hand, even if they are hard, allow for activity and socialization to some degree, and that is actually a lot better.  The time passes more quickly and there is human contact.  I don't think there's much productive that can be done in prisons, other than making license plates.  Isn't it also against human rights laws to use prisoners to make items that are going to be used for profit?

In any case, I still favor the death penalty.  My stand is not totally practical, but emotional also.  When somebody commits a cruel and brutal crime, I want to see him fry.  It's that simple.  I think we owe it to the families of the innocent victims.  It restores a sense of balance after a heinous act.

[Redefeatbush04]

The Death Penalty Worldwide
According to Amnesty International, during 2003 more than 1,146 people were executed in 28 countries, and more than 2,756 people were sentenced to death in 63 countries. See also U.S. Figures.

Death Penalty Outlawed (year)1
Andorra (1990)
Angola (1992)
Australia (1984)
Austria (1950)
Azerbaijan (1998)
Belgium (1996)
Bermuda (1999)
Bosnia-Herzegovina (1997)
Bulgaria (1998)
Cambodia (1989)
Canada (1976)
Cape Verde (1981)
Colombia (1910)
Costa Rica (1877)
Côte d'Ivoire (2000)
Croatia (1990)
Cyprus (1983)
Czech Republic (1990)
Denmark (1933)
Djibouti (1995)
Dominican Republic (1966)
East Timor (1999)
Ecuador (1906)
Estonia (1998)
Finland (1949)
France (1981)
Georgia (1997)
Germany (1987)
Guinea-Bissau (1993)
Haiti (1987)
Honduras (1956)
Hungary (1990)
Iceland (1928)
Ireland (1990)
Italy (1947)
Kiribati (1979)
Liechtenstein (1987)
Lithuania (1998)
Luxembourg (1979)
Macedonia (1991)
 Malta (1971)
Marshall Islands (1986)
Mauritius (1995)
Micronesia (1986)
Moldova (1995)
Monaco (1962)
Mozambique (1990)
Namibia (1990)
Nepal (1990)
Netherlands (1870)
New Zealand (1961)
Nicaragua (1979)
Norway (1905)
Palau (n.a.)
Panama (1903)
Paraguay (1992)
Poland (1997)
Portugal (1867)
Romania (1989)
Samoa (2004)
San Marino (1848)
São Tomé and Príncipe (1990)
Serbia and Montenegro (2002)
Seychelles (1993)
Slovak Republic (1990)
Slovenia (1989)
Solomon Islands (1966)
South Africa (1995)
Spain (1978)
Sweden (1921)
Switzerland (1942)
Turkmenistan (1999)
Tuvalu (1978)
Ukraine (1999)
United Kingdom (1973)
Uruguay (1907)
Vanuatu (1980)
Vatican City State (1969)
Venezuela (1863)
 

Death Penalty Permitted in Exceptional Cases2
Albania (2000)
Argentina (1984)
Armenia (2003)
Bolivia (1997)
Brazil (1979)
Chile (2001)
Cook Islands (n.a.)
El Salvador (1983)
 Fiji (1979)
Greece (1993)
Israel (1954)
Latvia (1999)
Mexico (n.a.)
Peru (1979)
Turkey (2004)
 

De Facto Ban on Death Penalty3 (year)4
Algeria (1993)
Benin (1987)
Bhutan (1964)
Brunei Darussalam (1957)
Burkina Faso (1988)
Central African Republic (1981)
Congo (Republic) (1982)
Gambia (1981)
Grenada (1978)
Kenya (n.a.)
Madagascar (1958)
Maldives (1952)
 Mali (1980)
Mauritania (1987)
Nauru (1968)
Niger (1976)
Papua New Guinea (1950)
Russian Federation (1999)
Senegal (1967)
Sri Lanka (1976)
Suriname (1982)
Togo (n.a.)
Tonga (1982)
Tunisia (1990)
 

Death Penalty Permitted
Afghanistan
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Chad
China (People's Republic)
Comoros
Congo (Democratic Republic)
Cuba
Dominica
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Ghana
Guatemala
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Korea, North
Korea, South
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
 Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Malawi
Malaysia
Mongolia
Morocco
Myanmar
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Palestinian Authority
Philippines
Qatar
Rwanda
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Somalia
Sudan
Swaziland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
United States of America
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
 

[Cashcow]

In any case, I still favor the death penalty.  My stand is not totally practical, but emotional also.  When somebody commits a cruel and brutal crime, I want to see him fry.  It's that simple.  I think we owe it to the families of the innocent victims.  It restores a sense of balance after a heinous act.

Dazzleman, I share your emotional stance on this subject; perhaps 30% of my ancestors were taken from their homes and killed in the Holocaust. It is important that criminals are brought to justice in any way that the state can provide. After all, nobody is ready to deny that certain people simply deserve to die - for the sake of the families affected by a tragedy such as murder.

However, a case I read about last year comes to mind. A man whose daughter was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing had originally favored the death penalty for conspirator Terry Nichols, but a year later, changed his mind and began fighting for his right to live. He had been against the death penalty for his whole life and was not ready to permanently change his position. Once the matter of emotion dies off, a new issue of justice arises.

To me, a proper form of retribution for brutal murder or torture does not lie in simply erasing the figure, but instead seeking a way to deter similar actions by other criminals. It's been all but proven over the years that the death penalty is a terrible deterrent; those who would commit such disgusting acts against mankind clearly have no concern for their own lives or feel any sympathy for the world around them. Hard labor would be infinitely more effective. By this, I certainly don't mean washing dishes or mopping floors... it would be brutal and miserable, whatever it may be.

Killing Timothy McVeigh didn't bring back a single man, woman, or child that he murdered. But if my family had died in that building, I would want to know that he was truly suffering, not being given an easy pass to death and freedom.

[dazzleman]

In any case, I still favor the death penalty.  My stand is not totally practical, but emotional also.  When somebody commits a cruel and brutal crime, I want to see him fry.  It's that simple.  I think we owe it to the families of the innocent victims.  It restores a sense of balance after a heinous act.

Dazzleman, I share your emotional stance on this subject; perhaps 30% of my ancestors were taken from their homes and killed in the Holocaust. It is important that criminals are brought to justice in any way that the state can provide. After all, nobody is ready to deny that certain people simply deserve to die - for the sake of the families affected by a tragedy such as murder.

However, a case I read about last year comes to mind. A man whose daughter was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing had originally favored the death penalty for conspirator Terry Nichols, but a year later, changed his mind and began fighting for his right to live. He had been against the death penalty for his whole life and was not ready to permanently change his position. Once the matter of emotion dies off, a new issue of justice arises.

To me, a proper form of retribution for brutal murder or torture does not lie in simply erasing the figure, but instead seeking a way to deter similar actions by other criminals. It's been all but proven over the years that the death penalty is a terrible deterrent; those who would commit such disgusting acts against mankind clearly have no concern for their own lives or feel any sympathy for the world around them. Hard labor would be infinitely more effective. By this, I certainly don't mean washing dishes or mopping floors... it would be brutal and miserable, whatever it may be.

Killing Timothy McVeigh didn't bring back a single man, woman, or child that he murdered. But if my family had died in that building, I would want to know that he was truly suffering, not being given an easy pass to death and freedom.

In isolation, I could deal with abolishing the death penalty if I knew the perpetrators of capital crimes would suffer for life.

But I have no faith in the system.  More than likely, we would discover that some airhead liberals passed laws allowing them unsupervised furloughs, or that they spend their days working out in the prison gym and watching premium cable channels.

There is also no truth in sentencing.  If somebody has a "life" sentence, then why are they considered for parole.  Why is somebody like Charles Manson, who was originally sentenced to death, coming up for parole every few years.  A few flaky San Francisco liberals on the parole board, and he's free.  I'm very uncomfortable with that.

I also loathe the organized opponents of the death penalty, more than I actually like the death penalty.  These people are ultra-liberal, have no feeling for the suffering of the victims' families, and don't think that criminals should take any responsibilty for their actions.

My basic position is - I see no reason to ever ease up on serious criminals.  I will alway choose the most severe punishment within reason for people who deliberately harm others.  In our rush to be compassionate to vile criminals, we have inflicted great cruelty on innocent victims, as this compassion has led our crime rates to go through the roof.

[Cashcow]

...and surely you can understand the merits of my idea.

[Ebowed]

Death Penalty Permitted
Afghanistan
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Chad
China (People's Republic)
Comoros
Congo (Democratic Republic)
Cuba
Dominica
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Ghana
Guatemala
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Korea, North
Korea, South
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
 Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Malawi
Malaysia
Mongolia
Morocco
Myanmar
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Palestinian Authority
Philippines
Qatar
Rwanda
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Somalia
Sudan
Swaziland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
United States of America
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

I'm glad to see the United States in good company with so many well off, civilized countries.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

United Kingdom (1973)

Outlawed in the late '60's actually

[Virginian87]

I support the death penalty for murdrer unless the criminal was insane when he committed the crime and wasn't fully aware of what he was doing (such as John Hinckley in 1981).  I believe that if a person like Timothy McVeigh or John Muhammad (the Washington area sniper) just goes out and decides to kill some people, such people are not worthy of the privilege to live.  Put yourself in the place of the victim or of the family of the victim, as David S. says.  Your best friend has been shot.  Don't you want to see the bastard who killed him dead?  Some of you are trying to argue rehabilitation as a viable option, but how can you change someone who just mowed down some people?

[Ebowed]

Do I want to see the bastard killed?  Yes, but does that bring the original victim back..?  No, so there's no point.  It's bloodthirsty revenge and nothing more.

[MODU]

I'm for the death penalty. 

[MissCatholic]

Death penalty for child molesters.

Murderers and rapists  no.

[MODU]

Death penalty for child molesters.

Murderers and rapists  no.

Would you rather keep murderers and rapists locked up under life sentances, or let them go free after they do their time, just to risk killing or raping someone again?

[Ebowed]

If you ask me, LWOP is the best option.

[MODU]

If you ask me, LWOP is the best option.

"Life without parole" or "Leave without pay" . . . both are terrible choices.  hahaha 

My thought is . . . if someone is a cold-blooded killer, and has a history of being a repeat offender, why keep him locked up?  All he will do is cost the taxpayers money.  Save the people their lives and their money.

[Redefeatbush04]

Save the people their lives and their money.

(sigh)....you would save more lives if you used the criminals for medical experiments instead. You would save more money if you used the criminals for medical experiments instead. That is all. Thank you.

[Giant Saguaro]

I guess I generally support it - I'm in support of it for extreme cases, can't say I'm blanket for or against. Placing myself in a governor's position, I can say I'd have a difficult time signing a death warrant unless the case were very extreme. These people who go on killing sprees, murder their families, and stuff like that - that would qualify.

What upsets me are obviously guilty people who tie up cases in appeals courts for decades and of course, many judges in some states will give criminals every chance to beat the wrap. I mean you hear about it on nightly news, but it is interesting - my theory is that this is one of the negative after effects of fascism - some are perhaps understandably reluctant to use any kind of force or "throw the book" at some of these people.

The rapists and child molestors - shut them up somewhere in a dungeon. Just toss them in there and leave them alone, forget about them. Feed them however often they need fed and forget about it.

[Dave from Michigan]

I seem to find myself liking the idea of letting people rot in prison if they have no outside  contact more and more, I still would  support the death penalty though. I'm somewhat undecided overall on the death penalty issue. I use to be very pro death penalty.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Support in principle, Oppose in current practice.  We need a moratorium and a complete overhaul of the way we dispense Capital  Punishment.

[MHS2002]

Option 4, although I think it should be reserved for serious, serious crimes. Life without parole where criminals are forced to perform laborious tasks should be used whenever possible.

[A18]

Save the people their lives and their money.

(sigh)....you would save more lives if you used the criminals for medical experiments instead. You would save more money if you used the criminals for medical experiments instead. That is all. Thank you.

Yeah, medical experiments sounds like a better idea.

[MissCatholic]

Death penalty for child molesters.

Murderers and rapists  no.

Would you rather keep murderers and rapists locked up under life sentances, or let them go free after they do their time, just to risk killing or raping someone again?

If a murderer or rapist is younger than say 30 then they have to do a minimum of 30 years. No less. They have to have access to full education. By giving them full access to education they will learn to understand over such a long period of time that what they did was wrong and why society doesnt accept it.

After 30 years they will be used to the environment and will be allowed to choose whether they want to leave or not. Alot of people that spend that long in prison dont want to leave and just commit a crime to get back in. So they will be given a choice after 30 years. If however they have failed to educated to a good standard then they have to kept in prison.

Psychologists have stated that alot of poor people commit crimes because they have been let down by the community. They have got involved with drugs, gangs etc. which lead to one of two things - a coffin or prison. These people are the only people that i believe dont deserve the death penalty particularly those under 30 as they tend to have had a very troubled life.

Alot of jails have a policy to work. If they do work then around 80% of their pay goes back into the community that they harmed. The victim is most likely to reject it. Though they should be given a say. I think meeting with a family member who died is also important for the rehibiliation after few years of the crime commited.