Do you believe in it?
Are you against it?
Let us know what you think.

As for me, when a serial killer confesses to raping and killing 20 women, children or men, it's hard to argue that his life should be spared. In Malaysia, they hang people who carry drugs(mules) and anyone who has a firearm without a permit,( which is very hard to get). Naturally in both cases I don't agree with the punishment. Someone could plant a gun (or drugs) on me and it's the death penalty unless I have a competent lawyer. A lot of people have gotten off because of police incompetence but that's another story.
America is now grouped with China and a few other countries that still practices Capital Punishment--I mean among developed and developing countries. The Vatican is against it as are most European Countries. Texas alone puts to death more convicts than the whole of Western Europe I would think. I just want to know what you think, and is the system still viable in your eyes.

Against it. Too expensive, too much risk to kill people who didnt do anything wrong.

My issue isn't about killing an innocent person, although that is a good reason too. Let's suppose this innocent person was you. How would you feel then? Me, I say I would rather have a 1000 guilty men go free than to kill an innocent man. Keep them in jail for life.

what about the argument that it is more expensive to take a prisoner to their death than to just house them for their natural life? I don't know the answers to this as I have not done any research but I do remember there were arguments made to this effect.

Yes, I've heard that argument: that it supposedly costs the govt. more to go through the appeals process for capital punishment, than to keep him in prison for life. I find that argument hard to believe, and even if it's so, maybe the process could be done more cheaply. Yet, how much is it worth it to save YOUR life, if you're innocent?

This is a moral issue first, and a political issue second. As a pacifist Christian, I can't participate in capital punishment, but I understand that the government (Nazi, Communist, capitalist, whatever) has the right to wield the sword and execute a prisoner. Some criminals, such as convicted serial killers, appear to be so damaged that they should never be released to the free world. It does not follow, though, that they must be killed by the government. But Jesus was killed by the government on false charges, so what's new?

Any human that willfully takes the life of another human in a non self defence situation is a human no more. (Read that sentence carefully before you try to take me to task)

These animals should be executed in the same fashion that they killed their victims. And done so within 30 days of their conviction. There are many cases that those convicted of murder can not be disputed. Charles Manson. Richard Ramirez come to mind. There is no doubt as to their guilt yet these savage pigs are still alive. The argument that an innocent person may be executed is spurious at best. How many law abiding citizen find themselves accused of murder? Those accused of murder are most often the career criminals that violate the law as a way of life. For every crime they are caught at there are ten other crimes they got away with. Just ask any seasoned police detective. This is the scum of society. They deserve no special consideration.

Execution vs. life incarceration costs. A .357 slug to the back of the head costs about .87 cents ( last time I bought a box).

I'm pretty sure there have been studies that have demonstrated that the death penalty is not a murder deterrent.

The reason I oppose the death penalty is that I believe that taking the life of a defenseless person is an absolute wrong.

I've read your first sentence time and time again and still have a question- are you saying that executioners are subhuman?

Capital punishment or life imprisonment...essentially the deviant human is removed from society. It is fitting and necessary that those people who commit capital crimes must be stopped from continuing their aberrant behavior.

Personally, the thought of being locked up for life is worse than a death sentence. I can't imagine anything more inhumane than being confined to a small area, living among the scum of the earth. Warehousing humans until they finally die of "natural causes" holds no higher ethical or moral standing than a mercy killing.

From what I have read and know, the cost of both forms of punishment is extremely high...both in money and time. I guess in the final analysis, I would give the convicted prisoner the choice..."Do you want to meet your maker now, or be kept in a prison for life?" That would certainly put an end to this moralistic debate that seems to endlessly plague our society.

Won't be any surprise to most that I think the death penalty is appropriate for some crimes. The procedure required to carry out the punishment needs reform, should require less time, less money and should be applied only when appropriate. I do not care whether it costs more to apply the appropriate justice than to mock it; I care that it takes almost the same amount of time. The unsubstantiated allegations of killing innocent convicts willy nilly have been cast for decades, and convicts reprieve from capital punishment go on for decades in the form of lawyers collecting government reimbursements.


Really, do you take your own argument seriously? The whole of Western Europe outlawed capital punishment, yet you find it unusual that Texas, where capital punishment is the law of the land, kills more convicts than countries that banned capital punishment???!!!

Why did you pick Texas, it's not the only state that 'practices' capital punishment?

By your comparison ALL of the states where capital punishment is legal kill more convicts than the "whole of western europe". The US federal government 'practices' capital punishment, they too kill more convicts than the "whole of western europe".

I'll answer my own question, you're a tool. You picked Texas because that's where the evil Mao-Tse-Hitler-Hussein-Stalin-Beelzebub Bush was governor, and he's soooooo bad that the whole damned state must go through some humanistic cleansing (political exorcism if you will) as birth place of YOUR CONCEPTION of evil in our time.

Fortunately we're not all tools.

I think the economic aspect of your argument is compelling, Nomad.

Outside of that, I have no definitive answer to this question...

I am just very uneasy about supporting a philosophy in which humans may kill humans as if a man has the right to kill another, regardless of the context.

I say these people need to be worked to the brink of death, and very little spent on them... I think we need to look at what is actually driving the cost of incarceration up. Is it the facilities and the staff overseeing prisoners? Or is it "room and board"? I'm not sure - so I'm asking.

As a solution - if there is a way to work the funds out of criminals, I'm all for it.

I'm fuzzzy on this, but remember figures having been put out about the daily cost of living in these modern-day prisons (where the prisoners have better living conditions than homeless have access to in programs to benefit them. Usually, they are only given a maximum of 3-days' lodging and have to be out by 8a, stay out the whole day regardless of the weather, and have a curfew if they miss, they are out.---my own note) is what is driving up the cost of prisons.

Read it unil you get it.....................


This is not a riddle LC. C'mon you can figure it out???

Yes Solo. Our prisoners have it much better than the homeless. Makes you wonder how many are there voluntarily because of that very fact. Regardless of that point it is the Liberals that have made incarceration a vacation and not the nightmare it should be. The more you mitigate a punishment for criminal activity the more criminal activity you will have.

Though I feel like I am swimming through slime to defend a statement by Nomad.... it could be argued that it is self defense to execute a murderer. It depends on your semantics.

Jump in MR the slime is fine.
Actually, for LC's benifit, once someone willfully takes another humans' life they are human no more. The executioner is just eradicating an insect.

I heard this in a comedy routine... I liked it

Texas has the death penalty. If you go to Texas and kill somebody, they will kill you back. The Texas Legislature is debating a bill that would eliminate the appeals process of a convicted murderer if there were three credible witnesses. In other words if you kill somebody and three reputable people see you do it, there is no 15 years of expensive appeals. You go straight to the front of the line. While other States are debating whether to abolish the death penalty, Texas is putting in an express lane.

Oh Well

Boh Bpen Yang

Let's hope it works.

No way. Have you read the Houston Chronicle? It's a tad bit \\ reverse italics \\ if you know what I mean.

And who gets to define what "reputable people" are and who they are?

Maybe credible is the word. I didn't memorize the bit completely.

If you and two of your family members saw someone kill the most important person in your life,??????? Ah what the hey? Let's give the guy a break. He problably had mother issues.