Show of HandsShow of Hands

Comments: Add Comment

mfjd1948 rural johnson co iowa
11/14/17 9:56 am

No. Life without parole is cheaper and harder on the prisoner.

Advil sc
11/13/17 4:36 pm

Only if the person is absolutely guilty of a heinous crime. Such as the one who shot up the church in Texas. If not death, complete isolation with minimum contact with other people.

Reply
TheSirKestrel New Hampshire
11/13/17 3:25 pm

Absolutely not. In many cases, it is economically ineffective. It is also immoral in my opinion and degrades our nation. Finally, there have been several mistakes in our justice system and until it is reformed, the death penalty can not safely be sentenced.

Robert97206 Portland Oregon
11/13/17 1:56 pm

Against the death penalty.

We should never have given the government right to slaughter its slaves.

mark4
11/13/17 1:39 pm

Government should not take what it cannot restore.

Reply
Allegory United States
11/13/17 1:31 pm

No, I don't. To me, life imprisonment makes more sense when you consider wrongful convictions and the cost of appeals.

SauceBoss nj
11/13/17 1:08 pm

Yes, but only for very specific circumstances. Multiple heinous murders and there is undeniable evidence. If there is any doubt whatsoever then it should be avoided.

Reply
SHIPPY1944 Tn.
11/13/17 12:55 pm

Yes, thin the herd of predators, if it’s acceptable, for those of other species, then should be the same for Homo Sapiens❗️

Reply
Domino3 Abolish the ATF
11/13/17 12:51 pm

Yes, but I’m also skeptical of the idea that the state has the right to sentence someone to death. That’s a pretty big power, and has had unfortunate side effects for many.

Reply
mudkip17 United States of Texas
11/13/17 12:50 pm

I think our justice system is far too flawed to hand out death sentences. since the death penalty was reinstated 1 in every 10 that have been sentenced to death have proven their innocence due to new evidence being introduced.

gluxford1 Arizona
11/13/17 12:44 pm

I'm a very strong supporter of the death penalty. Some people have committed crimes so heinous, evil, & depraved that death becomes the only just punishment. Many of those people cannot be rehabilitated either. The appeals process needs to be shortened though and the method of execution needs to change as well.

Reply
susanr Colorado
11/13/17 12:24 pm

No, not for any crime, no matter how heinous, as a matter of principle. I don't think it's something a civilized society should be engaged in doing. If I didn't hold that opinion, I'd still be opposed based on the number of times a person has been sentenced to death (and sometimes executed) and later found not to have been guilty of the crime at all.

.

Reply
STONEYTJONES Indiana
11/13/17 3:35 pm

What should they do with them?

susanr Colorado
11/14/17 7:17 pm

Good question. I'd like to believe in the possibility of redeeming one's self, somehow; that somehow we could figure out how to help a person do something positive or useful with their life, even assuming the nature of their crimes meant they should be incarcerated for the rest of that life. Maybe even if we learn enough, eventually be able to help people fundamentally change... but at that point we might be able to *prevent* heinous crimes anyway.

That's pie-in-the-sky thinking, though, at least the last bit, and unlikely to happen in our lifetimes. (I just don't want to discount it entirely.) Meanwhile... keep them incarcerated, and *try* to help them do that something positive. (There have been efforts in that direction, some of them successful.) I'd rather not see total isolation or severe punishments; it just makes for totally crazy people, difficult to handle, and probably makes staff having to deal with them become rather horrible, crazy people as well.

.

STONEYTJONES Indiana
11/14/17 8:21 pm

Why should someone that rapes, mutilates, and murders a toddler get to live a long live with the tax payers paying for everything for them?

Fuck that.

susanr Colorado
11/14/17 9:04 pm

Because turning something awful into something better is better than doing something else awful.

Because it increases the goodness in the world instead of increasing the horribleness.

Harry3603 Tampa Bay Florida.
11/13/17 12:17 pm

No. It takes too long to actually put someone to death and the mandatory Appeals Processes only serve to make lawyers rich. Since innocents have been executed in the past, a life sentence allows justice to eventually prevail. Besides, vigilante justice is faster, more certain and has been known to happen in prison.

Reply
Yessy French Texan
11/13/17 11:49 am

No too easy for them to die . Torture would be better but we live in an age of "Human rights"

Reply
jfish82285 Tennessean in Colorado
11/13/17 11:42 am

Not at all. I believe that it should be abolished.

Reply