How is society brutalized by the use of the death penalty?
537076
by becoming what we loathe , killers\nand because it is applied disproportionately to minorities who are executed for lesser crimes than caucasians , who get prison time\nbecause dna has proven a significant numbers of minorites were wrongly convicted and on death row\n states that use the death penalty have a higher rste of murder and violent crime because this helps dehumanize us, \nit helps create a social darwinistic society as wealthy or educated people with resources will  have an awesome attorney not a public defender and will most likely demand dna testing to prove his or her innocence and wil most likely be in court in a suit looking nice if they are brutal butchers but the thug in the orange jumpsuit in shackles is guilty looking because he is to poor to be free on bail his clothes socially stigmatize him as guilty\n and because we are applying it to childern and no other country is, and we the US have executed two mexican nationals and a german with out providnig a translator for the whole process , elicited confession by signing a english confession and no translator and no translator to defend self in cort, and not informing the nationals of their rights to be in touch with their consulate or right to counsel until right before they were executed, \nbecause it is so flawed biased and ineffective , and revenge is not a deterrent,
949305
It's called the right to fair trial and it's enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. \n\nAnd your argument doesn't wash. There is no death penalty in Western European countries, yet they all have much lower crime rates - both violent and non-violent.
1040164
The death penalty is not revenge.  Instead that, it is the punishment assigned a person after having been found guilty of a crime by a jury of his peers\n\n.There are laws that determine what crimes and under what circumstances a person may be eligible for the death penalty if he is convicted.  \n\nThis may not be a matter of "revenge" by the state - but might felt so by the victims' family.  Finding an individual guilty and later putting him to death provides a form of closure for the victim's family.. In some states, most prisoners only get life imprisonment without any opportunity for parole.
1185434
NOTHING is absolutely painless.  Not even sex.  The Constitution speaks out against "Cruel and unusual punishment."  In France, they still use the guillotine.  Since it is used as a standard, it is not crueler to one than to another and not unusual.  The bleeding hearts feel that WE have to be kinder and gentler, but not the killers.  The problem IS, there are still TOO MANY Innocent individuals being railroaded into a conviction.  If we could get the cops to do an honest job, then I would be in favor of turning a convicted killer over to the surviving family to deal with as they feel fit.
149964
Lethal injection is uniquely American. \nYes, it is an unusual punishment for the non-Americans.  \n\nDeath penalty is irrevocable. It is a direct violation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yes, lethal injection is a cruel punishment like any other capital punishment.\n\nMore than half the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty in law and practice. \n\n86 countries for all crimes, \n11 countries for ordinary crimes, \n25 countries in practice.\n\nUSA, -the world role model for human rights-, is among the countries such as Zimbabwe, Qatar, Iraq, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Congo, Chad, Sudan, Iran, Tanzania, Comoros, North Korea, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Ghana, China … which are just ‘retain’ the death penalty for 'ordinary crimes'. \n\nOn the other hand, it looks like lethal injection is currently the favoured method of execution in USA. The statistics for the period of 1976-2002 are;\n\nLethal injection - 618 executions \nElectrocution - 150 executions \nGas chamber - 11 executions\nHanging - 3 executions.\nFiring Squad - 2 executions. \n\nLethal injection is considered to be more humane than others. \n\nActually, lethal injection is just humane for the ‘witnesses’ not ‘the person being executed’.No matter how you dress it up, you are still killing a human being.\n\nIt is known that in about 40 % of the cases where lethal injection has been used, there have been misuses and it has taken as long as 45 minutes for the condemned to die. \n\nIf the main consideration is truly to be ‘humane’ to ‘the person being executed’, why not the ‘firing squad’ ? Such a death is said to be faster and less painful than lethal injection.
138703
I agree with you that there should be more creative forms of punishment.  We mix non-violent and violent prisoners together and we have horrible overcrowding of prisons. However, I was once on a jury during the trial of a man who defrauded dozens of elderly people out of their life savings.  Many lost their homes.  While he didn't physically assault them, his crime against them was extremely harmful and cruel, and we need to protect society against such people.
1109568
Yes, and modern societies have taken revenge out of the hands of the person affected and placed the responsibility in the hands of the courts, so that when someone is robbed, the person wants revenge, and gets it when the robber is sentenced to prison. Prison is the "revenge"--it is a more civilized system than letting the two fight it out.
784615
Valid point, but look at it this way. The government is already spending way over budget on its prison facilities. And who has to pay for these facilities? You and I and everyone else reading this. It costs a lot of money to shelter and feed someone for 60+ years. \n\nNot that I completely agree with the death penalty, it has its faults. But where do you expect all of that money to come from?
36791
Because most people in the USA believe in punishment, and many believe in the notion of "an eye for an eye" for murder. \n\nEven in the face of some high visibility questioning of the fairness or accuracy of the death penalty, it is still very difficult politically to gain the momentum to end the death penalty.
43087
According to the figures on the source site, death penalty states have higher murder rates. So it doesn't seem to be much of a deterrent.
1065211
This is a doozy hard question.\n\nDeath penalty is not an answer because we are the killers also, if we condoned the killing of killers. In a way it makes sense for many in our society to live by the rule "an eye for an eye" but in another sense we will turn into the killers, and that's supposedly what we're trying to get rid of?\n\nIt is cheaper for the prisoners to stay in prison for the rest of their life, rather than executing them. If a prisoner has a better life among society then prison will seem harsh, death will only make it easier as then they won't be living with the guilt. But if they have a shitty life in the society, then prison doesn't seem so bad because everything is paid for in there and they live as if they never lived before. On the other hand if we kill them, we rid them of guilt and any responsibilities so it seems better to let them “rot” in prison. But yet it goes back to my point about them living an easier life in prison.\n\nSo to me, it is a catch 22 for the people involve excluding the prisoner as they are the winners in the outcome of any jurisdiction. Life in prison, or death. This probably doesn't answer the question but actually stir up more issues but I wanted to put in my few cents. =)
9586
You paint your question with too broad a stroke.\n\nWe kill some inmates because society has determined that certain criminals deserve death.  They deserve the greatest punishment that society can give when they commit certain capital crimes, like mass murder and rape.  To compare the justification behind the death penalty (a retributive form of punishing the guilty) with the justification behind refusing assisted suicide (a social policy norm) is improper.\n\nSociety (except at present Oregon) has placed a strict line between aiding death and allowing death.  In all states, an individual who is terminally ill may refuse medical treatment.  Refusal of medical treatment may result in death, and often does.  For some, it is more painful to continue to live, and they'd prefer to hasten death.\n\nSociety has made a judgment that the doctor's role should be to heal, not to kill.  Assisting death is just too horrible for society to handle at this stage, and in my opinion, rightly.  However, the justifications for capital punishment and assisted suicide are very different and should not be so easily conflated.
1079662
' condemned to dead ' ?! I thought the whole planet was. Capital punishment statistics. Look under that on the net.
849298
No.\n\nAs a matter of PUBLIC POLICY, I would cite the following reasons:\n\n(1) Death is an irreversible punishment, and overzealous juries/prosecutors get it wrong WAY too often.  (RECENT EXAMPLE:  Read "The Innocent Man", a nonfiction book by John Grisham.)\n\n(2) Taxpayer dollars spent on criminal sanctions should be designed to protect society, not dish out retribution. Yet, statistical data is clear that the death penalty and tougher criminal sentences does not deter murder or violent crime.  Why?  Most violent criminals are sociopathic/psychopathic and simply do not rationally weigh the consequences of their actions before committing violent crimes.\n\n(3) The numbers indicate that the death penalty is not imposed upon the worst of the murderers (i.e., the person who actually pulled the trigger and killed).  Why?  Truly disturbed seriel killers more often than not have mitigating circumstances that get them out of the death penalty (e.g., severe abuse as children).  Second, the death penalty is most often sought where the prosecution can get an easy sentence (i.e., the person who drove the person who pulled the trigger, because the person who actually pulled the trigger ran to the police and got a plea deal for life without parole).\n\n(4) Prosecuting the death penalty costs taxpayers more than simply giving them a sentence of life without parole.  Why?  Courts want to do everything they can to ensure that an innocent person is not put to death.  Unfortunately, innocent people are being released from death row routinely, despite the fact that they had numerous appeals.\n\n(5) The death penalty is not fairly applied.  For example, Harris County, Texas prosecutes more death penalty cases than the rest of the State of Texas combined.  Is that fair?  Is it fair that a black defendant who kills a white victim is 8 times more likely to get the death penalty than a white defendant who kills a black victim?  Is it fair that over 90% of the defendants on death row in states like Texas, which have no public defenders, had no money to hire an attorney and had to receive court-appointed counsel, most of which have no criminal law experience?\n\n(6) Once again, criminal sanctions should be designed to protect society, not dish out retribution.  Although victim's families will say, on the eve of execution, that the death penalty gives them closure; pyschologists who actually follow up with victim's families will tell you that is a fallacy.  (Read up on it for yourself.)  If the government wants to be in the business of making victim's families feel better (as opposed to making society safer, which is the primary purpose of criminal law), then it would better devote the financial resources to providing psychological services than seeking death penalty prosecutions.\n\n(7) The assertion that a person who commits murder poses a risk that he/she will murder again is ridiculous if the alternative sentence is life in prison without possibility of parole (as it is in most states for murder).  A rapist or other violent criminal is just as likely to murder or commit violent crimes on other inmates than murderers are.  We are not making other inmates (all of whom commited violent crimes if they are in high security prisons) statistically safer by killing murderers.\n\nNow, my Christian view:\n\n(1) One of the Ten Commandments given to Moses says "Thou shalt not kill."  That's a period at the end of that sentence.  It does not say, "Thou shalt not kill unless the person you are killing killed someone else."  There is no "unless", no "if", no qualifiers whatsoever.\n\n(2) In response to all of those "good Christians" who are often so quick to cite the Old Testament (Exodus 21:23-25) as grounds for supporting the death penalty, I would direct you to two passages from the NEW TESTAMENT:\n(i) "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a too
24795
No.  However it can seem harsh for certain types of crime such as drug smuggling, and therfore its application is a little extreme. Unfortunatley the pendulum has swung a little to far with respect to the application of the death penalty in Singapore. Other countries, such as Canada, that do not have the death penalty should consider it for murder and attempted murder. Here the pendulum has swung to far in the other direction. There has to be a balance so that a justice system, in any given country, is just. Meaning that the appropriate punishment is given for the crime.  Unfortunately, opponents of the death penalty fail to understand this simple principle.
679248
Capital punishment\nFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia\nJump to: navigation, search\n"Execution" redirects here. For other uses, see Execution (disambiguation). \nIt has been suggested that Death penalty paradox be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)Contents [hide]\n1 The death penalty worldwide \n1.1 Global distribution of death penalty \n1.2 Public opinion \n1.3 International organizations \n1.4 Juvenile capital punishment \n1.5 The death penalty in specific countries \n2 History \n2.1 Movements towards "humane" execution \n2.2 Abolitionism in different countries \n3 Debate: Retentionism versus Abolitionism \n3.1 Abolitionist movement \n3.1.1 Reasons to oppose to death penalty \n3.1.2 List of famous abolitionists \n3.2 Retentionist movement \n3.2.1 Reasons to support the death penalty \n3.2.2 List of famous retentionists \n4 Religious views \n5 Abolitionist themes in arts and media \n6 Methods of execution \n7 Notes \n8 External links \n8.1 Resources opposing capital punishment \n8.2 Resources favoring capital punishment \n8.3 Religious views on the death penalty \n \n \nCapital Punishment, or the death penalty, is the most severe punishment that can be imposed by the State for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offenses. When a person is sentenced to die, their life will be terminated in a lawful place (in nearly all cases, a prison) in a process known as an execution. In "capital punishment", "capital" comes from the latin noun "caput", which means head; therefore, to be subjected to capital punishment means to figuratively lose your head. Historically, the execution of criminals and political opponents was used by nearly all societies both to punish crime and to suppress political dissent. Among democratic countries around the world, most European and Latin American states have abolished capital punishment (except the United States, Guatemala and most of the Caribbean), while democracies in Asia and Africa retain it. Among nondemocratic countries the use of the death penalty is common.\n\nIn most places that practice capital punishment today, the death penalty is reserved as a punishment for premeditated murder, espionage, or treason or part of military justice. In some majority-Muslim countries, sexual crimes including adultery and sodomy, carry the death penalty as does religious crimes such as apostasy. In many retentionist countries, drug trafficking is also a capital offense. In China, human trafficking and serious cases of corruption are also punished by the death penalty. In militaries around the world, courts-martial have imposed death sentences for offenses such as cowardice, desertion, insubordination, and mutiny.\n\nCapital punishment is a contentious issue. Supporters of capital punishment argue that it deters crime, prevents recidivism, and is an appropriate retribution for the crime of murder. Opponents of capital punishment argue that it does not deter crime more than life imprisonment, violates human rights, leads to wrongful executions, and discriminates against minorities and the poor.\n\n[edit]\nThe death penalty worldwide\n[edit]\nGlobal distribution of death penalty\n \nUse of the death penalty around the world (as of 2005/06).\n\n██ Abolished for all offences (86)\n\n██ Abolished for all offences except under special circumstances (11)\n\n██ Retains, though not used for at least 10 years (25)\n\n██ Retains death penalty (74)\nReports from NGOs opposed to the death penalty tend to publicise the view that abolition is a global trend. In 1977, 16 countries were abolitionist, while the figure was 122 for the end of 2005. In more detail, 86 countries have abolished capital punishment for all offences, 11 for all offences except under special circumstances, and 25 others have not used it for at least 10 years. However, Sri Lanka recently declared an end to its moratorium on the death penalty. A total of 74 countries reta
1181605
Actually if you do some research you'll find that an average more money is spent on a prisoner on death row.  Appeals, lengthy stay on death row, etc adds up also.  The death penalty is not only wrong its wasting taxpayers money!  But what is the Gov. doing thats right these days anyways?