Should the U.S. Abolish the Death Penalty?

Should the U.S. Abolish the Death Penalty?

The death penalty has provoked heated discussion since biblical times, and today the debate remains as controversial as ever. Is such a sentence ever justified? Capital punishment is an intensely emotional topic for everyone involved because it sits at the intersection of life, death and the very definition of the word 'justice.'

Next question in Crime

This content is inappropriate
Loading

Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content, so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.

Explanation:


You are seeing 7 Comments on this Argument. See all 135 Comments on this Question.
Regarding Argument
An Enforced Death Penalty Saves Lives Through Deterrence
- From Criminal Justice Legal Foundation
No Side
By Criminal Justice Legal Foundation - Kent Scheidegger

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • polobo
    Loophole Defense

    Your last sentence requires that the system change since what you propose restricts (generally) due process and thus is unconstitutional. This may be a desired change but it is one that actually weakens your death penalty argument since these restrictions make it more likely that the guilty are proven as such and the innocent are not. If you concede that death is irreversible then any change that increases likelihood of "false proof" is incompatible as an argument supporting the death penalty.

    Assuming that using an imperfect system for deterrence at the risk of harm to innocent persons is unacceptable; regardless of its deterrence effects the system must stand on its own first. Given the maximum harm possible by the system (death) what is the maximum level of risk/accuracy we are willing to accept (false positive percentage). If our courts can be shown to meet that level of accuracy then the system should be deemed acceptable otherwise it should be canned. What level of accuracy would you impose on a system for which an inaccurate result ends in death? How accurate is our current system? What is the cost associated with this and other levels of accuracy?

    - poloboUS August 30, 2008 8:17PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • ukmarcus
    Call that logic? Go to the bottom of the logic class.

    I don't suppose it cuts any ice with you that the rest of the world sees this as pre-historic? I also don't suppose it matters that those countries that don't have the death penalty don't have as many murders as the USA? Your logic is flawed and outdated. The death penalty is a sign of a society that is backward. You're in bed with China and all the other backward countries in the world. Shame. Why don't we start burning witches again too?

    - ukmarcusUS September 3, 2008 5:23PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • Dank
    Death Penalty is NOT a Deterrent

    The mind of a person who commits a murder can only be in a limited number of states at the time of the crime . 1. They do not believe they will be caught. 2. They are in such a rage that they don't care if they are caught. 3. They are unaware of the seriousness of the crime or they don't believe what they are doing is wrong. (Usually insanity or mental retardation is a factor) 4.In rare cases, they want to be caught.
    In any of those cases the death penalty has no detterent effect, whatsoever.

    - DankUS March 25, 2009 11:29AM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

    • oneoldman
      From experience

      I have had reason to go to prisons in connection with my former work. I can tell you that the death penalty is more welcome for a perpetrator than life without parole. Life places him in the population where his life is worth nothing. The death penalty is not and has never been a deterrent for the criminal. If he thinks about it at all he does not feel he will be caught.

      - oneoldmanUS July 30, 2009 12:39PM

      Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

      Thank You for your Comment

      We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • weedonald
    No proof of deterence only proof of revenge and retribution

    Among the innumerable,screwed up, neo-con principles that seperates Americans and divides this nation, the death penalty is a core tenet........an eye for an eye, assuage your grief (fear,loathing,anger, superiority, etc.) by punishing the offender and if a few mistakes are made, too bad.
    In most civilized societies, the idea of killing the killer is contradictory, ignorant and clearly ineffective. If the crime is pre-meditated, the last thing going through the criminals mind is being caught and facing a death penalty. If the crime is one of spontaneous rage, the fear of apprehension or subsequent death is totally absent, at least until the offender returns to a calmer state. If the crime is a toxic blend of addiction and insane pleasure(serial killers) getting caught and being executed are, more or less minor irritations, if not welcome relief. If the crime is a "professional hit" or something similar then there is little fear of the consequences and a surity of being able to evade them easily. If the crime is accidental, there is no death penalty, unless it occurs in the committing of another crime ( robbery , rape , etc.) and so on.
    Those who quote spurious and highly politically spun "statistics, research and proofs" that the death penalty is an effective deterrent are in the same class as those who claim their particular religious dogmas, books, beliefs, words of Divine guidance, ad nausea are deluded and morally simplistic.
    Every religious text has, among other Values, the basic tenet that the sanctity of life is unbreachable and that no one has God's authorization to take life, period. Despite this, the fanatical religious right, along with the fanatical terrorist minorities and the dissolute, corrupt dictators worldwide perversly adhere to their "right"to kill whomever they determine to be enemies of God, the State, criminals or even their personal adversaries.
    I am a proud citizen of a nation who has ended capital punishment decades past and it is one of the safest, least violent countries in the world. We also strictly control access to weapons by the general public AND employ an effective, carefully monitored supervision and training for those given the priviledge to own a weapon. Our violent crime rate has declined over the past 40 years by about .8% per year while about 5% of those imprisoned for a capital crime have subsequently been released as innocent of their original "crime". It is singularly hypocritical to maintain that the most just and rightful punishment for murder is to murder the offender, but the gut satisfying appeal of watching the person who murdered being subjected to the same treatment as their victim(s) is a particularly difficult addiction to break.

    - weedonaldDE November 11, 2009 12:39PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

Regarding Objection
More Money to Put Police on the Street is the Real Deterrent
- From Amnesty
Yes Side
By Amnesty International - Working to Protect Human Rights

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • atliberty
    I wish we could have the DP

    I used to be for the death penalty for the bundy, dahmer and other heinous serial killers but after experience in the legal system I am not even sure those guys were realy guilty. Also they have used it on people that were involved in individual crimes of passion and bar fights where there are elements of self defense and other mitigating factors. Then too Timothy McVey publicly asked for the death penalty and it took them a long time to give him a leathal injection. If I had life in prison or death I would chose death. So like, if they found GW guilty of starting the Iraq war so his military industrial complex buddies could make the outlandish profits they did, I would want him to live in prison a long long time.

    - atlibertyUS March 29, 2009 4:00PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • oneoldman
    well said atliberty

    Just waking up every day knowing that you would never again freedom would be worse the death penalty .

    - oneoldmanUS July 30, 2009 12:53PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag Side: Yes

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

Should We End Executions?

Loading
  • Yes
  • No
Vote
View Results

Ask Your Friends to Vote

Spotlight

Loading
  • Amnesty
    Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all.

    Our supporters are... More

Subscribe to Opposing News

Biweekly updates on new debates and experts

Loading
Thank you for signing up

Please check your email to confirm your subscription.