Are you .....pro death penalty or anti death penalty

[HillGoose]

Anti, because death is the easy way out and people who commit truly heinous crimes should have to suffer through their lives in prison, hopefully becoming basically a punching bag for other inmates.

[TPIG]

Pro-death penalty. Some people have done things so horrendous, that society should justly rule that they've forfeited their right to live.

[Storr]

Yes, but only for serial killers/mass murderers. It is much cheaper to convict, feed, and house someone for life in prison than the years of legal preceding it takes for someone to be executed. But some people are simply so heinous, the death penalty is warranted. What I don't want is a situation like California or North Carolina where the death penalty exists and people continue to be sentenced to death, but no one has been executed for more than a decade. The death penalty seems pointless if it doesn't actually lead to executions. California has over 500 people on death row, but it doesn't seem anyone will ever be executed in the state again.

[Former President tack50]

Easily anti-death penalty. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I am also anti-life in prison without parole. I think all life sentences should have at the very least the right to go out under parole after a certain amount of time, say, 30-40 years.

Disagree on this. Someone who murdered or raped another person should not ever, ever see the light of freedom again. Taking another's life on purpose, or mentally tearing them apart with the heinous crime of rape, should be punished by the strongest means. If it's a mistake, the prisoner would be released (and should be heavily compensated).

Yeah, this is a controversial position I know, but I still think that a 70 year old is not the biggest threat to public safety and that everyone, even the most despicable members of society, still deserve a 2nd chance.

It might also be because life imprisonment is actually a hot issue here since it was reintroduced in 2015 for the first time since 1928.

Life imprisonment also defeats the argument that prison is meant as rehabilitation and not punishment.

[YL]

Easily anti-death penalty. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I am also anti-life in prison without parole. I think all life sentences should have at the very least the right to go out under parole after a certain amount of time, say, 30-40 years.

Disagree on this. Someone who murdered or raped another person should not ever, ever see the light of freedom again. Taking another's life on purpose, or mentally tearing them apart with the heinous crime of rape, should be punished by the strongest means. If it's a mistake, the prisoner would be released (and should be heavily compensated).

Yeah, this is a controversial position I know, but I still think that a 70 year old is not the biggest threat to public safety and that everyone, even the most despicable members of society, still deserve a 2nd chance.

It might also be because life imprisonment is actually a hot issue here since it was reintroduced in 2015 for the first time since 1928.

Life imprisonment also defeats the argument that prison is meant as rehabilitation and not punishment.

This is actually something I think the UK has right.  Murderers get a "life" sentence which in most cases doesn't actually mean life, but in certain particularly serious cases (or if the prisoner doesn't show the necessary signs of rehabilitation) it does.

I'm totally against the death penalty, both on the grounds of finding it morally objectionable and the wrongful convictions problem.  I disagree with making an exception for terrorists; many of them are actually after martyrdom, and it isn't as if the problems with wrongful convictions go away.  (Look up the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four.)  Governments also have a nasty habit of extending the definition of "terrorism" to suit them.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

Anti-death penalty. It's a waste of money and occasionally kills innocent people.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Anti-death penalty. It's a waste of money and occasionally kills innocent people.

[thumb21]

Anti death penalty except for extremely rare cases like nazi war criminals or genocide. It's not just prone to mistakes and inhumane, but also ineffective.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In the abstract, I am pro-death penalty; but anti-our current system, life without parole seems better to me than what we have now in this country.

[TJ in Oregon]

Anti-death penalty. I admit in principle that it can be used justly, but I don't see it happening in modern America, outside of some truly extraordinary circumstances.

As for the pro-life thing, I get irritated when people try to equate the death penalty with abortion. Other than killing, they have next to nothing in common.

[Peanut]

Anti death penalty except for extremely rare cases like nazi war criminals or genocide. It's not just prone to mistakes and inhumane, but also ineffective.

[daveosupremo]

This might be the issue where I've shifted the most over the years. I used to be gung-ho pro death penalty, but now I feel that in all but the most extreme circumstances we should do away with it.

[MarkD]

Anti-death penalty. I admit in principle that it can be used justly, but I don't see it happening in modern America, outside of some truly extraordinary circumstances.

As for the pro-life thing, I get irritated when people try to equate the death penalty with abortion. Other than killing, they have next to nothing in common.

Regarding an effort to compare the abortion issue to the death penalty issue, if my only two choices were between saying that: I want the guilty to die and the innocent to live, or on the other hand, I want the guilty to live and the innocent to die, then that choice is, if you'll pardon the expression, a no-brainer.

Ask me where I stand on the death penalty.
Where do you stand on the death penalty?
Right next to the switch.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I believe anyone who is convicted of being involved in a terrorist attack should get the death penalty and that should be the minimum sentence for the crime.

[brucejoel99]

In an ideal world (i.e. not the one in which we live in b/c, among other things, there's too many mistakes & innocent people have been sentenced to death), I'd support the death penalty, but only in limited circumstances as a legitimate exercise of the state's responsibility to administer justice, & as a deterrent to crime.

In my opinion, it's a suitable retribution for truly heinous crimes, such as mass murder, terrorism, the abduction, rape & murder of a young child, etc. in which the perpetrator is caught on camera or is seen by multiple witnesses, where the evidence is *overwhelming,* & where there are no issues of mental incompetency.

In such cases, I'd support swift prosecution, w/ all necessary safeguards taken to provide for due process & fundamental fairness, & only if the appropriate application of the death penalty would be the best way to render justice, deter future crimes, & allow the victim's family & community to heal.

[Perlen vor den Schweinen]

100% oppose. It is a penalty that ultimately achieves nothing more than a dead person and a brief "thrill" of revenge. There is no evidence of actual substance that the death penalty is a deterrent (think about it: do terrorists actually care about their lives? You're making them martyrs with their executions), and it costs more than life in prison with how our system works. We have also ended up with an innocent person dead.

All this stupid punishment is, is a morbid spectacle. Of course your average Joe wouldn't want to die if he committed a crime, but he wouldn't want to go to prison either.

[YE]

I am pro-life so figure it out.

[Person Man]

Anti death penalty, except in very extreme cases (like a terrorist or someone who has committed genocide) where they are literally "too dangerous to be kept alive."

This

[Leinad]

Very much against and it shocks me how over a third of you crazies think it's okay.

Anti death penalty, except in very extreme cases (like a terrorist or someone who has committed genocide) where they are literally "too dangerous to be kept alive."

This is just another word for "we have sh!tty locks/guards." Maybe if the prison system spent less time with non-violent drug offenders they'd figure out better ways to keep people locked up, if that's really a problem...

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Considering ~5% of those convicted of crimes in the United States turn out later to be innocent, anti-death penalty.

[°Leprechaun]

Anti-death penalty. I admit in principle that it can be used justly, but I don't see it happening in modern America, outside of some truly extraordinary circumstances.

As for the pro-life thing, I get irritated when people try to equate the death penalty with abortion. Other than killing, they have next to nothing in common.

Since they both involve killing, they have a lot in common. It is disingenuous to say you are pro-life if you support murder which is what you do if you are pro capital punishment or pro war.
If you are pro death penalty, what if a woman is pregnant? Is it right to spare her life? Do you think that any pregnant women are killed in war? It is, therefore, logically inconsistent to call yourself "pro-life" and support capital punishment for pregnant women or war if there's any possibility that a pregnant woman could result from civilian casualties, which inevitably occurs during war.

[TJ in Oregon]

Anti-death penalty. I admit in principle that it can be used justly, but I don't see it happening in modern America, outside of some truly extraordinary circumstances.

As for the pro-life thing, I get irritated when people try to equate the death penalty with abortion. Other than killing, they have next to nothing in common.

Since they both involve killing, they have a lot in common. It is disingenuous to say you are pro-life if you support murder which is what you do if you are pro capital punishment or pro war.
If you are pro death penalty, what if a woman is pregnant? Is it right to spare her life? Do you think that any pregnant women are killed in war? It is, therefore, logically inconsistent to call yourself "pro-life" and support capital punishment for pregnant women or war if there's any possibility that a pregnant woman could result from civilian casualties, which inevitably occurs during war.

I think part of the issue here is one of language: the phrase "pro-life", because it is a political slogan rather than a rigorous description has a certain degree of vagueness to it. Indeed, based on the meaning of the words alone, being "pro-life" could be defined as vegetarianism. In a similar vein, "pro-choice" could be defined as referring to the choice of incandescent and fluorescent light bulbs (or practically any topic for that matter). But that's not how language works. Both phrases clearly, and specifically, refer to abortion.

This carries with it some important distinctions between different types of killing that are clearly relevant to both its moral and legal ramifications. Not all killing is the same. There is a real distinction between willfully killing an innocent person on your own volition and between killing someone in a war and between killing someone as a sentenced execution. War, if it is just, is in defense of yourself or of other people. That's of course not to say we've always waged only just wars, merely that it is another question with its own set of complicated moral issues and clearly distinguishable from abortion or capital punishment.

As for the other point, when was the last time the US executed a pregnant woman? I think the course of action here is obvious for a pro-life death penalty supporter (not that I even support the death penalty but the logic remains): wait until after she gives birth before executing her. Yes, that means that child will grow up without a mother, but so would any other child whose mother is executed.

If supporting either the death penalty or war, in principle, in your opinion precludes being pro-life due to the fact that pregnant women may be killed (which is very unlikely with the death penalty anyways but I digress), then so do a wide range of other things from planes to trains to automobiles (all of which have killed pregnant women before).