Death Penalty Question - let me set the scenario....?
540900
No because I couldn't kill anyone let alone family. However, imagining I was in that job then yes i would. He is obviously guilty and if i was pro death penalty then yes as i would be killing people all time. Also, if a member of my family had done that well they wouldn't be a member of my family anymore because that is disgusting. People who say betraying family is the worst crime. Well i disagree. I would stick by my family through most things. But rape and murder, they must be so cruel to do that to people how can you stick by that? so yes I would pull the switch...
834398
I would for me.... but that's not the point of Capital punishment.... Retribution and justice  are the point. Any determent is just a plus. And one thing is absolutely sure.... the person upon which Capital Punishment is carried out *never* commits a crime again. It is the only punishment with a zero recidivism
788159
Capital punishment is premeditated killing.\nAs a Christian I am morally opposed to killing regardless of the situation.\nI also believe it is morally wrong to force me to pay for the state to kill people.\nOK, it's only 3 sentences.....so kill me.
421249
I'm not totally opposed to the idea, but you gotta remember that in the old days, these punishments were meted out on site and without the benefit of "interference" from an impartial judicial system.  While "eye for an eye" would certainly cause some criminals to take a closer look at their actions, it would still have to be administered carefully and minimally, much in the way the death penalty is handled today.
646985
No death sentence.\n\nLife in prison or not, the sentence should make him repent what he/she did and his/her painful life (not physical) should be an example to people not to commit crimes against humanity.
800060
I am so torn on the death penalty issue... I don't have a stance yet.\n\nFrom a strictly economical side, I'm against the death penalty, because I've heard in multiple places that it costs 2-3 times more than life in prison w/o parole.\n\nFrom a moral standpoint, it's hard to say.  Killing someone removes them once and for all as a threat.  Granted, while in jail they are only a threat to other inmates and the prison guards, but still, you cannot make a blanket judgment on whether those people (in the case of the other prisoners) deserve the threat, or (in the case of the guards) willingly accept the threat by being in that job.  Also, there's always the chance of escape.  You don't have that chance with death.\n\nIn addition, there's the obvious fact that if you accept the death penalty, almost regardless of standards for conviction, you're going to eventually get an innocent person in there.  Making the standards for conviction extremely high just leads to multiple expensive appeals, which brings us back to the economic reason to be against it.  It also makes the death penalty so rare that any appeal to it being a deterrent is just silly at that point, because even if you are convicted you'd have to be one of the unlucky ones to get the chair.\n\nIn fact, I have not seen any evidence that it actually serves as a deterrent, regardless of the extensiveness of its use.\n\nI do believe that the highest value must be placed on human life, but when you have one human life that continues to threaten others, isn't it respecting that value to end their life?\n\nI don't know.  I'm an atheist struggling to have a position on this.
540999
Uh... how do you suggest we enforce the punishment?
620757
The tug and pull can be summed up as the theoretical and the reality.  For the first, I would want us to rehabilitate people, make them into productive members of society - that maximizes social good.  Reality is, that aint gonna happen for some people, and many come out worse than they went in.  Theoretically, putting someone in prison for life is more expensive.  Reality, a death row appeal ends up costing more dollars b/c of the expense to the taxpayer on the legal system.  Theoretically, we should tell people that killing is wrong, and teaching that lesson by doing the same.  Reality is, people commit crimes not with fear of the level of punishment, but by balancing the likelihood of getting caught.\nReality - society doesn't care, and most people dont care what ridiculously high percentage of people get railroaded by the justice system.\nBut I will say this from my personal opinion, I am tired of caring for people that want to whine about how their punishment isnt fair.  People make choices, and if you step outside the bounds society lays out, they shouldn't be surprrised that they don't like how society reacts.
549946
I would mention how permanent a penalty it is.  When a mistake is made, there's no way to correct it.  With DNA evidence now freeing falsely convicted people almost weekly, it's clear that the system is flawed.  Even DNA evidence that clears an executed person can't bring him back from the dead.  Research the "Innocence Project," and you should get some powerful arguments for abolishing (or at least modifying) the death penalty.
1089367
I don't believe in the death penalty. They are just commiting murder, and two worngs never make a right. God decides who should die at what time, so I think you are right, they should put him in jail for life and make him suffer for the pain he has caused people.
972552
Multiple counts of a crime....say for example....if a person is convited of 3 counts of murder...they would get life for each count....Personally I think that if a person gets life then they should be givin the dealth penalty....why pay all that money to keep a person alive who does not deserve to be and that will never contribute to it again.
97120
I think it's a guillotine... quick and all there is, is that split second of "oh s**t, here it comes"!  and btw... murder is murder, but execution is PUNISHMENT (a difference)
970770
Can you say "Death Penalty, then deportation" in a pine box
1016259
death or jail, whichever comes first
234331
I agree with having a death penalty, if we could ensure guilt. until then, the only justification is to "save money" that would be spent imprisoning someone for life. I think that argument is a little too NAZI. killing people because they cost society money just isn't a healthy road to travel.
143430
Having served on a murder jury already, I would choose to be on a case where there's a parking dispute or someone didn't pay their rent. Murder is hard. If you have the power to send someone to death, it is not as fun as it might seem.
690323
Interesting. Ok... I looked it up a bit. In the Jewish religion a person must be convicted first. The Talmud has strict laws about the convicting of people on death penalty laws. First it must be premeditated which means the person told someone exactly what he is about to do. If the person leaves the plan he told that person he cannot be convicted. Secondly, there must be three witnesses of the act. Finnaly the line on insanity is very clear and even small things could conclude insanity. Even hinting you may want the death penalty may mean insanity. This must be in a court and must strictly follow the Talmudic law. Please note that in Isreal in the last 300 years only one person has been executed. This was for the murder of many jews in the holocaust.