Murderers actually have one of the lowest recidivism rates. Not to say they shouldn’t be punished or that some of them don’t continue to present a threat, but it’s not accurate to suggest that it’s essentially preemptitive self-defense.
Not only that, but your plan (in your first post) would just make juries hesitant to convict in many cases, knowing what was at stake and that there were few safeguards or allowances for mitigating factors. Or maybe they’d just convict on manslaughter even though it was really murder…stuff like that.
Well, I don’t think anyone is going to say they’re for the death penalty when guilt has NOT been established. That’s the same standard as for any conviction…and yet, innocent people are still convicted of crimes.
The case that always swings it for me is this one.
The guy confessed and there was “clear” evidence linking him to the crime, so there was no reasonable doubt at the time that he was guilty. So he met all three of your citeria - hideous child murder, clear evidence and a confession. Except it was later proved he couldn’t have been guilty and was mentally impaired and only confessed under intense police pressure.
He’d have been a clear candidate for the noose, but his later exoneration would not have helped him once the trapdoor had opened.
So that’s why I’m against the death penalty in practice, even though sometimes you feel it’s deserved in individual cases.
Like others, I’m against it on practical terms. Our justice system is run by humans, and humans make mistakes. When we impose a penalty that can never be revoked, we are claiming a degree of perfection to which we are not entitled.
I support it for the entertainment value alone. If it makes people feel better, especially the family members of the victim(s), then that is the best we can hope for. I don’t place humans on a pedestal either. If we put down aggressive dogs, I don’t see why we shouldn’t do the same to our fellow primates.
One of my best childhood friends was up for the death penalty for executing a perfectly innocent man while he was on his knees begging for mercy. I was disappointed when my former friend didn’t get the DP. He got life in Angola instead which I think was an injustice. It doesn’t get a lot more personal than that on this issue.
Yes, for anyone who kills an innocent person for no reason. Double for serial killers, mass murderers and spree killers.
I’ve yet to meet a police officer who wasn’t for the death penalty. Some people just like killing, with continue to kill if released. and don’t deserve to live.
Ann Rule Ted Bundy and tried to have his life spared twice. The last time she visited him in prison she realized he was guilty and he did deserve to die.
There are new advances in forensics coming all the time wheich make positive proof more available than previously [and yes I will also agree that DNA has been exhonerating people currently named as guilty because the DNA procedures did NOT exist when they went to trial that would not have been found guilty if that tech had existed at that time]
There are some people who are so damaged they are not human, and instead of warehousing them, they should be put down with as much passion as a rabid dog. Many career gang members are rabid dogs, and should be put down. When someone commits enough violent crimes that they have spent most of their lives in jail there is something wrong with them that we obviously can not repair. it may have started with society failing them, but that time passed long ago and they are irreparable at this time, we should stop warehousing them.
Against. I don’t think it’s right to willfully and deliberately take another’s life, be it a fetus or a criminal or a mentally ill or physically handicapped person. I am for true life imprisonment with forced labor for convicted murders and rapists, however.
I’m in favor of it, but I’d like to see some changes.
Let’s have a Constitutional Amendment adding 3 more Justices to the SCOTUS. Each judicial term, they draw lots and three of them are selected as a Death Penalty Tribunal, with the proviso that a justice cannot serve two consecutive terms. The other nine do business as usual.
Now, a capital conviction in the state court is appealed to the state appellate court. If it is upheld, it is appealed into the Federal system and it goes directly to the tribunal. If they uphold it, that’s it and sentence is carried out with 72 hours.
It is absolutely ridiculous for a capital conviction to take twenty years to be carried out. That twenty years is paid for by the taxpayers. This way, the sentence is carried out within five years and a bucket of money is saved.