Your position on the death penalty

[MAS117]

in favor of, NJ has it but doesnt use it really anymore.

[European]

I'm against the death penalty in all cases. I believe that the state should have the right to punish but I do not believe that the state should have the right to kill.

I think that when killing it citizens becomes a right of the state, a right that the indivudal dosen't have, i think that it's something that could be used against the citizen, especally minorities.

I have voted for removing the death penalty from my countries constitution and it's something that I am very proud of. If the argument that the death penalty is a deterent to violent crime then there should have been an explosion, or at least a rise as people realised that they wouldn't be killed if they killed someone, of violent crime when the death penalty was removed from the constitution. Guess what....nothing happened. If memory serves the number of murders for the republic of ireland is 10 for 2004 and that's a population of 4million.

I think that would be a rate which any american city or state would be proud of.

[Bono]

I think the right of punishing otehr with death is an individual rights that the state should never strip.
IE, from the moment X violates the +person or property of Y, X's life, liberty and estate are at Y's disposition. Having the state punishing people, as well as having the state sue criminals,, instead of being the victimes to sue, damages the victimi's right to restitution.

[David S]

I'm in favor of making the death penalty automatic for two crimes:

• Homicide in the commission of a felony
  If someone dies because of an act you commit during a felony, then your life should be forfeit as well.  Note that this includes such things as felony DUI.
• Attempted murder
  Excellence in all matters, even criminal, should be encouraged.  Society should never encourge people to do less than their best.  Hence, I am not in favor of rewarding someone who failed to accomplish their objective by giving them a lesser sentence than that which they would have received had their intention been accomplished.

Other than that, no death penalty.

Basically I agree with you but I would add some crimes that do not involve murder. Two that come to mind are; 1) people who kidnap children and force them into the sex trade. 2)  a bizarre case that occurred about 20 years ago when some man raped a 16 year old girl and then cut off her arms. It seems to me that death would be a just punishment in such cases.

[Redefeatbush04]

in favor of, NJ has it but doesnt use it really anymore.

we have people on death row

[Cashcow]

And no executions in decades.

[A18]

The only reason I have problems with the death penalty is that I don't want innocent people being put to death.

All the guilty people I would happily torture to death.

[Redefeatbush04]

All the guilty people I would happily torture to death.

What would that accomplish?

[Cashcow]

It would make the Republichristians smile with glee.

[A18]

All the guilty people I would happily torture to death.

What would that accomplish?

Okay, maybe not torture. But if someone killed my sister or something, I would want to know that bastard is either dead or suffering.

[Cashcow]

That's why we should have hard labor, of course.

[Rob]

I strongly support the death penalty.

[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.

[MaC]

I think it's only fair to give the death penalty, but I don't trust the government to administer it.

[Redefeatbush04]

All the guilty people I would happily torture to death.

What would that accomplish?

Okay, maybe not torture. But if someone killed my sister or something, I would want to know that bastard is either dead or suffering.

Once again....what would that accomplish

[dazzleman]

I strongly support the death penalty.

I agree.  Since the vicious murders in my town, I have swung back to strongly supporting the death penalty.  I never opposed it, but my support had been lukewarm.

I think that the liberals who argue against the death penalty are making the classic liberal mistake of establishing moral equivalence between good and evil.  To equate the vicious cold-blooded killing of innocent people with the execution of a person guilty of those killings is totally wrong.  But this is an integral part of the liberal mindset.

Now that they have caught the murderer of the people in my town, I'd love to sit on the jury and play a role in condemning that monster to death.  I'd gladly perform the lethal injection myself too.  I think that it is incumbent upon society to rid itself of people like this, and the only concern is making sure you have the right person.

Now I've heard that death row prisoners in Connecticut are going on a hunger strike to protest the conditions under which they are imprisoned.  This is the sign of a society gone mad.  These people know that there are air-headed liberal supporters of them out there who would do far more to help this subhuman vile scum than they would ever do for the victims of these people.  As far as I'm concerned, they can starve themselves right to death.  And the more horrific their conditions are, the better.  They'll never get an ounce of sympathy from me.

[??????????]

I support the death penalty for all murderers (non-crime of passion), child rapists and child torturers and also for drug lords.

[nclib]

I'm not sure if I've posted in this topic, but I voted 'strongly disagree'.

[angus]

I'm not sure if I've posted in this topic, but I voted 'strongly disagree'.

I think we might actually have found a point of agreement. 

[Redefeatbush04]

I strongly support the death penalty.

I think that the liberals who argue against the death penalty are making the classic liberal mistake of establishing moral equivalence between good and evil.  To equate the vicious cold-blooded killing of innocent people with the execution of a person guilty of those killings is totally wrong.  But this is an integral part of the liberal mindset.

Since Philip seems incapable of providing an answer perhaps you can....what does this accomplish? What benefits does the death penalty provide that life in prison would not? The first problem with the death penalty is cost. Several states have done studies comparing the costs of death penalty cases to non-death penalty cases and the result is always the same: death penalty cost more than life in prison. The state of Tennesee concluded that death penalty cases were 48% more costly, which is a nominal figure when compared to the study by Kansas, which found the death penalty to be 70% more expensive.

I feel it is not worth the excessively high costs to do something that cannot be reversed in the event that new evidence emerges. This inability to reverse death is a huge problem. If someone is vindicated of murder after getting the death penalty, the government has just killed an innocent man who cannot be allowed to returen to his family and a normal life because.....well......he is dead. The most common reason that people have for supporting the death penalty is revenge. Sure their are a few weaker reasons such as "the prisons are overcrowding" or "it will make criminals scared" but the truth is that most just want to see some suffering. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. What kind of crap is that. Ghandi says it will leave the whole world blind. Jesus condemns the expression (which interestingl enough is supported in old testament). One murder does not justify another however "evil" that person may be.

So you say that it lowers crime. How come the states that have no death penalty are the states with the lowest murder rates? And that doesn't even include government authorized murder. I want a constitutional amendment banning cruel and unusual punishment so that the death penalty, legal in 38 states, will be ruled unconstitutional and the United States can join the rest of the industrial world in abolishing it.

[dazzleman]

I strongly support the death penalty.

I think that the liberals who argue against the death penalty are making the classic liberal mistake of establishing moral equivalence between good and evil.  To equate the vicious cold-blooded killing of innocent people with the execution of a person guilty of those killings is totally wrong.  But this is an integral part of the liberal mindset.

Since Philip seems incapable of providing an answer perhaps you can....what does this accomplish? What benefits does the death penalty provide that life in prison would not? The first problem with the death penalty is cost. Several states have done studies comparing the costs of death penalty cases to non-death penalty cases and the result is always the same: death penalty cost more than life in prison. The state of Tennesee concluded that death penalty cases were 48% more costly, which is a nominal figure when compared to the study by Kansas, which found the death penalty to be 70% more expensive.

I feel it is not worth the excessively high costs to do something that cannot be reversed in the event that new evidence emerges. This inability to reverse death is a huge problem. If someone is vindicated of murder after getting the death penalty, the government has just killed an innocent man who cannot be allowed to returen to his family and a normal life because.....well......he is dead. The most common reason that people have for supporting the death penalty is revenge. Sure their are a few weaker reasons such as "the prisons are overcrowding" or "it will make criminals scared" but the truth is that most just want to see some suffering. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. What kind of crap is that. Ghandi says it will leave the whole world blind. Jesus condemns the expression (which interestingl enough is supported in old testament). One murder does not justify another however "evil" that person may be.

So you say that it lowers crime. How come the states that have no death penalty are the states with the lowest murder rates? And that doesn't even include government authorized murder. I want a constitutional amendment banning cruel and unusual punishment so that the death penalty, legal in 38 states, will be ruled unconstitutional and the United States can join the rest of the industrial world in abolishing it.

I think it would be great if people who get up on their high horse about capital punishment, without ever having experienced real evil, gave half as much thought to the victims of the heinous crimes that condemned prisoners have committed as they give to these vile people.

I think that in a case of senseless and vicious murder, we owe it to the families of the victims to execute the person responsible.  I don't care whether unrealistic and idealistic liberals think it accomplishes anything.

Let's face it - liberals who say they support life in prison as an alternative to capital punishment will only support life in prison until they have succeded in abolishing the death penalty.  Once that is accomplished, they will start with their usual garbage about how criminals are really victims because they had a bad childhood, blah, blah, blah, and they'll push to have the criminals put back onto the street, just as they have before.  Forgive me for my cynicism, but I have been around too long to fall for any "tough on crime" pose by liberals opposed to capital punishment.  It is simply a ruse to bring them closer to their real goal of putting criminals back out onto the street where they can victimize us again.  This is what the liberals did in the 1960s, and crime exploded as a result.  And being liberal means never having to take notice of how disastrously your policies have failed.

[David S]

Many years ago I heard a speech by Brooks Patterson, who was the Oakland County prosecutor at the time. He explained how he came to be a supporter of the death penalty. Two cases which came before him convinced him. In one case two thugs beat a young girl to death by slamming a car door on her arms, legs and head until she expired. They were caught because they were bragging about it in a local bar. When Patterson asked one of them why he did it, the thug said he just wanted to see someone die!

In the second case some nut carjacked a young mother and her small children. He forced her to drive to a desolate location. He took her out of the car raped her and murdered her. Then he came back to the car and took the children down to a nearby stream and drowned them one at a time.

After that Patterson came to support the death penalty, not as a deterrent, but because its justice. I agree with him.

If you don't support the death penalty, put yourself in the place of the victims. Imagine the pain, the anguish, and the sheer terror they felt before they died. Then come back and tell me you don't support the death penalty.

[dazzleman]

Many years ago I heard a speech by Brooks Patterson, who was the Oakland County prosecutor at the time. He explained how he came to be a supporter of the death penalty. Two cases which came before him convinced him. In one case two thugs beat a young girl to death by slamming a car door on her arms, legs and head until she expired. They were caught because they were bragging about it in a local bar. When Patterson asked one of them why he did it, the thug said he just wanted to see someone die!

In the second case some nut carjacked a young mother and her small children. He forced her to drive to a desolate location. He took her out of the car raped her and murdered her. Then he came back to the car and took the children down to a nearby stream and drowned them one at a time.

After that Patterson came to support the death penalty, not as a deterrent, but because its justice. I agree with him.

If you don't support the death penalty, put yourself in the place of the victims. Imagine the pain, the anguish, and the sheer terror they felt before they died. Then come back and tell me you don't support the death penalty.

I agree completely.  There is a saying that showing mercy to the cruel is to show cruelty to those who deserve mercy.  To show mercy, and to care about, vicious murderers is a severe affront to those who have been victimized by these awful people.

Much of my support for the death penalty comes from my deep, deep distrust and dislike of anti-death penalty "activists."  These people care not a bit for the victims, and really don't think criminals belong behind bars at all.  They believe crime is "society's" fault and that criminals are simply victims of a society (rather than parents and family) that has failed them.  Therefore, that society has no right to punish them, and owes them "services" to "rehabilitiate" them.

I'm all for rehabiliitation before a criminal gets to the point of committing violent crimes.  However, the reality is that a person has to want rehabilitation, and without punishment, criminals don't usually want to change.  That is what fuzzy-headed liberals fail to understand.

But once a person has committed a brutal murder, rehabilitation is out.  Only the most severe punishment will do at that point, and the appropriate punishment in cases like that is no less than execution.

[opebo]

I support the death penalty for all murderers (non-crime of passion), child rapists and child torturers and also for drug lords.

Hey, Drug Lords are freedom fighters, defending my right to use drugs.

[PBrunsel]

I support the death penalty for all murderers (non-crime of passion), child rapists and child torturers and also for drug lords.

Hey, Drug Lords are freedom fighters, defending my right to use drugs.

That makes absolutely no sense opebo. Do you think before you speak?