Question:
Death penalty cruel and unusual punished for those who were cruel themselves?
?
2014-05-16 15:18:56 UTC
Okay, how can someone who tortured, raped, murdered another person or multiple people stand up and say that being sentenced to death is cruel and unusual punishment for them? Do they not consider what they did to someone else and the fear they caused to be far worse than what they themselves will be getting?
Five answers:
?
2014-05-16 15:28:37 UTC
The George Bushes never get punished.
?
2014-05-16 21:29:34 UTC
Depends mental state, number of victims, etc
Susan S
2014-05-17 11:44:19 UTC
For the worst crimes, life without parole is better, for many reasons. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals, but because it doesn’t reduce crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and, worst of all, risks executions of innocent people.



The worst thing about it. Errors:

The system can make tragic mistakes. As of now, 144 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. We’ll never know for sure how many people have been executed for crimes they didn’t commit. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.



Keeping killers off the streets for good:

Life without parole, on the books in most states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages:

-an innocent person serving life can be released from prison

-life without parole costs less than the death penalty



Costs, a big surprise to many people:

It is well known that the death penalty costs far more than life sentences. Not many people know why this is so. The upfront part of the legal process, as well as appeals, are much more complex in death penalty cases, because the punishment sought is irreversible. We know that innocent people were executed in the past (in the US and elsewhere.) The largest costs come at the pre-trial and trial stages and they apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death.



Crime reduction (deterrence):

Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people without a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent. The death penalty is no more effective in deterring others than life sentences.



Who gets it:

The death penalty magnifies social and economic inequalities. It isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender.



Victims:

Like no other punishment, it subjects families of murder victims to a process which makes healing even harder. Even families who have supported it in principle have testified to the protracted and unavoidable damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.



The death penalty comes down to retribution or revenge—the only plausible reasons to support it.
?
2014-05-16 15:36:38 UTC
All conservatives/fascists should be put in concentration camps and tortured to death for their extreme racism.
2014-05-16 15:21:27 UTC
Because they're really just big old pus*sies.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...