Poll: The death penalty, are you for or against?

[Kosmiche]

For, bring it into action for tax evasion, Jimmy Carr to die first.

 

[RomanNose]

Against it. There are reasons why only the most backwards states in the US still practice it.




Video evidence clearly showing the person in the act?

Is possible to have two people who look similar, iirc it has happened before but I can't remember when

 

[panyan]

For it, if the crime merits it and its 100% clear cut. Mass murderers, serial rapists etc don’t deserve to live especially when the tax payers are footing the bill.

+1

 

[Twentyone]

Against it. Most reasons have been said already.

I also think that death is an easy way out of paying for whatever crime has been committed.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

Too many mistakes. Against.

 

[pingwing]

The bible says something about an eye for an eye, it wasn't meant literally and is not a good system to just kill those who kill.

So yeah, worst thing a state can do.

 

[panyan]

I also think that death is an easy way out of paying for whatever crime has been committed.

so there should be even more torturous sanctions beyond the death penalty?

 

[RomanNose]

Against . It doesn't do any good.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

23 posts and no one has used the 'eye for an eye' argument? GD, I am disappoint.

I'm against the death penalty.

e : ah, posted whilst I was typing.

 

[Scotty123]

For.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

Various public speakers and influential men throughout history have said the same thing (in various different words): An eye for and eye leaves everyone blind.

 

[Daze]

If the person is doing a life sentence and they aren't going to get out then I'd rather them be put to death than spend 10s of years in prison costing tax payers money to keep them.

 

[Ahleckz]

Against it. There are reasons why only the most backwards states in the US still practice it.




Video evidence clearly showing the person in the act?

Dcotored video? Or a simple case of mistaken identity?

For it, if the crime merits it and its 100% clear cut. Mass murderers, serial rapists etc don’t deserve to live especially when the tax payers are footing the bill.

Do you reckon you can ever have 100% proof though? There are plenty of reports of DNA being wrong, plenty of cases of witnesses lying, confessions can easily be coerced.

 

[^TANK^]

I'm against it on the basis that they get the quick way out, as opposed to being confined to a small space for the rest of their life.

 

[olivier renault]

Slaphead has good points.

 

[The Halk]

For in theory - but against in practice.

Until we can near guarantee guilt, and we have a rehabilitation based justice system then the death penalty is inexcusable. Once we have the two pre-requisites it's unnecessary.

 

[yoyo50]

 

[Twentyone]

so there should be even more torturous sanctions beyond the death penalty?

What I meant was that we as a society have decided that as a punishment, you go to prison.

If you are killed then you won't get to serve that punishment. I don't mean that they should be tortured.

 

[Moothead2]

For in theory - but against in practice.

Until we can near guarantee guilt, and we have a rehabilitation based justice system then the death penalty is inexcusable. Once we have the two pre-requisites it's unnecessary.

Then there will still be room for error. I don't think we'll ever be able to guarentee guilt in 100% of cases and therefore the dealth penalty is still too risky in my opinion.

 

[Craterloads]

Do you reckon you can ever have 100% proof though? There are plenty of reports of DNA being wrong, plenty of cases of witnesses lying, confessions can easily be coerced.

Andreas Breivik is 100% guilty