Topic: Opinions on death penalty? (Read 733 times)

I am against it but to those who commit heinous crime, I think its reasonable enough to impose it on them.They are threat to society, those who have criminal minds,habitual ,serious offender of heinous crimes etc. We may pity on them, but we should be pity more on their victims and their surviving family.

the death penalty is very good for heavy criminals, like murderers and corruptors. many countries have developed because they impose death penalties on corruptors like China.

I am very positive about the death penalty. Since the reign of Xi Jinping, China has developed rapidly due to Xin Jinping's policy of punishing criminals such as corruption.

Life is life you can still give them second chance and there is jail where they can change and if they don't that is the time death penalty can be used against them and death penalty still depends on what type of crime did she/he commit if she/he does really deserve to face death then so be it.

there are horrendous crimes (genocide, rape, child abuse) that deserve severe penalties such as life imprisonment, but in my opinion nobody can dispose of the life of another person (except maybe god), if someone kill a person even with the death penalty becomes a murderer...

Prisoner are having the life of a boss behind the bars, they all got their basic needs served to them, are they really punished inside or just chilling , i rather suggest poor people to make some bad things and live a life in prison, they are served with what they need, is there any punitive challenges with prisoners? or we just serving them :>

They are jailed, they cant commit crime, but why do we keep them where is the purpose of storing them if we just let them have a life of boss.

Death penalty should happen for people do crime and not desire in life

We are not slave, we need to educate them, show them how they can live a life inside the prison not just letting them spend time in bars, work for their own food, train them as independent.
People will change and death penalty will be left behind. for now it was the best thing to lessen over population and abusive life in prison.

Its unfair for us where we faces life system, we work so we will not die, but them complete sleep and everything.

I not see death penalty will run for long if we will implement a thing that will outrank it, like simple of introducing a life for a prison, Jail should be the school, a factory of worker, and with a peace.
after all death penalty will be a fear for everybody.

In Texas USA you can get, for example, 300 years of prison. What's funny that even if you die in prison, your body will have to be kept in prison graveyard till that time you are "free".
There're a system that pluses years behind bars. If you cheated on taxes in EU country, you will get some fixed sentence, 10 years for example, in Texas you get +10 years for every 100k etc. (this is a harsh example, I don't know specifics). So if you stole some 30 million you will get 300 years. Sounds logical. One thing I don't understand when criminals get 2-3-4 times life imprisonment... 

I am for death penalty not because it is an easy way, but because tax payers shouldn't pay for supporting that criminal his whole life.

I am against it!
Because the system is not perfect and there are plenty of cases where people have been justified after they have been convicted this is why death penalty is not reasonable.

We all seem to get the death penalty sooner or later.

If they harmed anyone, let them work at hard labor to pay off the debt they owe. If they pay it off before their normal lifespan is done, guillotine. Besides, that will give their family members time to find out if the witnesses and prosecutor were lying at their trial.

Maliciously lying witnesses and prosecutors deserve the death penalty.

death penalty is carried out by all countries but there are some countries that do not apply for humanitarian reasons,
capital punishment is the latest punishment for which the crime rate has exceeded the limits of human norms and criminal acts that are so sadistic that the incident must be eliminated, including evil actors in it must be eliminated to avoid a bad perception among the publicso for me if the death penalty must be carried out against a high crime, and get a strict selection for that sentence.

It all depends on what did the criminal did to get the death penalty.
I would only approve on rape and murder but other than that I think it shouldn't really be on death penalty.
But I think the best penalty for them is to be sent in jail for a life time and to be thrown in the worst jail so they wouldn't get a special treatment or anything.

it's always sad when it was because of framing, and when the guy is innocent... however they are always clear case, like when the body trace of the refugee immigrants from muslims countries are left on the 12 year old swedish girls they raped to death...

you see in the case, I am for death penalty for the perpetrators, and if their families don't agree, next batch.

the enemies must die, foreign and domestic.

For some point i was thinking that death penalty must be implement so that people will afraid to do Sin like rape,corrupt,Murder and so many more.if death penalty was implemented maybe less crime will happened.because they gonna be afraid to die.
but on the other hand i was thinking that much better if prison for  lifetime plus having hitting or punching your back like in saudi.so that you will feel the pain when you doing such a bad thing.mostly murder and rape must be punishment like you are in hell.so that this will gonna be learned for them and people will afraid to commit sin.

Just kill them if they did anything harm to many people's life.They don't deserve any second chances if they do then you may need to give third and fourth and so on...

Is killing a killer really the real answer? If that's the case then those who prosecuted the killer is also a murderer for the good of others? sounds  funny tho.



Have you heard somebody getting killed by this law because of stealing something? Nothing right?

Who are we to say who should and shouldn't be killed? That's not to say we should allow murders to run rampant either.

In my opinion death penalty should be impose by the law only for those who have serious crime commited by a person, if we have not impose this kind of law most of the criminal is easily doing a crime without afraid because they can easily get out from jail and then they commited the crime again.

But I just said im in favor of the death penalty, you are not making much sense lately. As a christian you shouldnt want to kill anyone. As far as I know god said everyone can repent, no? You in fact said it too that if a killer truly repents he would go to heaven.

To make a murderer suffer for the rest of his life is much better than just simply killing him

It's not surprising that someone who loves criminality wants to go easy on criminals so they are encouraged to continue to be criminals.

What? You want to stick them in a room underground and set off a baby nuke down there? It would be a little faster than the guillotine.

It's not surprising that someone who wants other people to be tortured forever (hell) is in favor of the death penalty. Obviously we wont do it with a Guillotine, badecker. There are better ways.

If you're gonna execute them, get it over with. Or is there some kind of retribution that is gained from prolonging it?

Make sure they are guilty... really deserving of the death penalty. Then get it over with. Guillotine is the fastest, sure way.

Yep I dont know the exact logistics behind it but yes making them work would be useful too. Really anything but letting them just live there for 30 years. Some prisons are tough but others arent and the comfort sometimes is higher than outside.

I guess you would get more than 20 years for that crime. Anyway, I partly agree with your point about the cost of living for one prisoner which certainly adds up to a big amount in 20 years. But I have a solution for this. The cost of security, food etc. should be deducted from prisoner's life savings, his property should be sold. If/when this would not be enough, the prisoner should work at the prison. This is already functioning in many prisons - prisoners work in factories or as farmers. But they get very small salary, more like pocket money. Instead, they should work to pay for their costs and if they earned more, this would be their money. If they refused to work, they would get significantly lower comfort level (very small room, no outdoor time...) and cheaper food.

Why waste time with someone who murdered 10 people just because maybe after 20 years he might become "better"? We dont need that, use the money to educate children not to waste it on a dude who murders people.

No death penalty.

Some prisons maybe hell and some maybe better, by giving a chance to get an education, develop a skill, and even explore the arts.

And, yes! What what about innocent people that were convicted?

There is always a chance for a human being to grow and get better as long as they are alive.

It does not really reduce crime but it does save people money, if we have to keep someone in jail for 50 years, we have to pay for everything, food, clothes, etc. If we just execute him, all that money is saved.

It’s not about the death penalty it’s about the penalty which is required to maintain peaceful environment and one who is commuting sin or violating basic human rights must get severe punishment and it’s justified. Do I do support death penalty and for all not for only poor criminals.

I strongly oppose prevention. In most countries there's so much focus on it that it's becoming hard to live by the rules. Also, prevention only takes power from the people and gives it to the police. I'll give you an example. In some countries you can be armed at all times and can shoot intruders. In other, even knives are banned. Literally, in the UK you can't carry a small knife in your pocket because to the police you are armed. So, the police can carry firearms, but you  can't even have a pocket knife. There are even dumber laws in some countries that don't even allow you to fight an armed burglar to your own home. If you do it and he gets injured or killed you could go to jail.
I don't need the police to tell me where I can or can't walk, drink, smoke, who I can meet up with or at what hours because their statistics say that if I'm out at night I'm in danger of being mugged.


No. There's no collective responsibility here! Would you say the same if somebody came into your house and rapoed your sister? That it was the fault of the society and the police? No, it was his fault and your own because you didn't have an alarm system and guns in the house.


Sure, it wouldn't be a bad idea to take organs from people instead of killing them, but what about basic human rights? Wouldn't that be like torture for them? Maybe give them a choice?

I too agree that death should not be the first choice when handing out a sentence, and as much as I hate to say it death penalty laws are required to instil fear in the mind of criminals. While your thoughts are noble about keeping them alive by taking their organs for donation, I strongly feel this will be misused by criminals as they’ll commit gruesome crimes and escape the punishment. One more important thing what happens when these criminals escape the custody when they’re being taken to the hospital, and once again commit a heinous crime will you yet say they should not be executed?.

I kinda agree on many points.

However, criminal or not, we should consider everyone human being. And as a human being, one is a human resource. To kill a human is to end the human resource.

I think as a society, we should focus more on how to prevent crimes in the first place rather than thinking how to punish after the crime is commited.

If there has been a mass murder, it's not just the fault of the murderer, but of society as a whole who couldn't prevent it from happening despite having strong police and army forces and intelligence agencies!

I have some different solutions, instead of giving death penalty , take one of its kidneys and donate to someone who needs thus saving the other person's life. Now have a strict super vision on the criminal for rest of his life, but let him live it without the borders of four walls. I'm pretty sure, with a weak body and only one kidney and strict supervision, he won't be able to commit any crime either. Instead of just killing him off, this solution is better what do you think?

only the rappers with lil in there name tho

Lil Wayne.
Lil Pump.
Lil Ronny
Lil Boosie.
Lil Baby.
Lil Xan.
Lil Yachty.
Lil Flip.
Lil Dex

I mean there is some good rappers out there like this guy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kppx4bzfAaE
Do you think a priest rapper should have the death penalty?

There are two important points for each side of this debate and all 4 are valid, thus we can't really say death penalty is right or wrong.
Points against:
People make mistakes and there were many people imprisoned by mistake. What if these people were executed by mistake? The Green Mile comes to mind.
By allowing death penalty we are also opening ourselves to being abused and oppressed. What if somebody decides that the scope of crimes punishable by death should be broadened? One day we may find ourselves sentenced to death for defending our property, or not paying our taxes.

Points for:
What about the most dangerous mass murderers. People who raped and murdered children. People who are diagnosed psychopaths who have to be kept in isolation for the next 50 years? Should the taxes be spent on feeding and guarding them when there are other, more pressing needs?
Poor people are dying from cold and starvation every day. If we keep treating prisoners well, giving them free healthcare, warm cells, 3 meals a day, what does that say about the justice system? Kill and we shall take care of you for the rest of your life? If your life is hard, you can always murder someone and if you get away with it you'll profit and if not you will still profit in another way.

It is all about second chances. I highly believed that there are really people who deserves to be forgiven because of their crimes for such reasons.

I agree with techshare, if someone get death sentence without due process is purely unfair and can be one of the biggest loop hole of this ideology. Just read to what is currently happening in Hongkong. I was not so sure of what the law was but it is all about punishing a certain person who is just still suspected of a crime.

humans are natural enemies, an absolutely just society will never exist and capital punishment of some will result into negative effects, over time the society will look like tyranny, and others will form enemies against it.

Death penalty is not going to be given to any good persons so why we need to be agasint it.

More strict punishment will make more afraid to the people who want to do crimes so it may actually restrict the crimes rates but for the system works perfect we need to have corruption free nation.

Depending on the situation of a certain country, if the crime rate is so high, then brutal punishment like this is necessary to minimize the crime rate.
This punishment would certainly make criminal minds to possibly change, in our country there was a death penalty before but was removed after a new president was elected and it seems like our new president now is not against this so I guess it will be back soon.

Death penalty are for rapists, this is the most common offenders that get sentence in the past, I hope they'll also ad drug lords or drug traffickers as that's the root cause of a big crimes.

Exactly. That is why government power should be strictly limited.

there is never a perfectly working government, never something without corruption

If we can establish a perfect government, death penalty will work well. But our governments are easily influenced and manipulated since it is managed by human. It will become dangerous for innocent people framed. They can get penalized for a crime they didn't commit. This is not a rare case and happened repeatedly in different parts of the world. Even you say to have a strict government. Humans are humans, they can get biased no matter what. And that's a very sensitive thing about this.

I believe it might be acceptable for certain crimes but with the possibility of a wrong conviction it should only be allowed when the accused has been proven "guilty beyond reasonable doubt" and that ample time has been allowed for appeals. There have been cases of people being in jail for 30 years or more only to be acquitted later.


Exactly. Much as I like to see certain kinds of criminals dead, there's no denying that investigators can be quite stupid at times. And not to mention malicious lying bitches and jerks seem to get more and more brazen these days. Take this guy for example... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP2syWS-2M0  Dude stayed in prison for 5 years over a rape allegation. The woman later admitted she lied and got a slap on the wrist.


Might not work everywhere but don't Greenlanders let out their inmates during certain times of the year and they even go hunting?

Unfortunately supervision can only go so far. I live in a low-income neighborhood where it's common knowledge who's who is a drug dealer. These people have been in and out of jail several times already but never change. An "industry" has even developed around them where equally corrupt cops and local politicians had them arrested, fined, released and then arrested again.

some ppl deserve to die for the things they've done, but giving to the goverment opportunity to kill is fatal

Some surely deserve a death penalty. Not a usual murderers, but rappers and others

The cost to keep a prisoner in prison for life is far less than to execute him because of so many appeals and other proesses

However, I feel that it's better to give death than to life in prison for the fact that life in prison is very harsh!


This is the most important reason why I have always been (and still part of me) opposes death penalty because Innocents get convicted. But, I would love to see a innocent wrongly executed than an innocent young guy spending rest of his life in prison and getting out in old age 

But since there will be appeals and chances of the innocent to get released if he stays alive, I'm in a dilemma to make any choice.

Concludingly, I am both against death penalty and life in prison as both are unnecessary harsh punishments. Supervision after serving a long prison time is better

I agree.
In general I am against this way of punishment. It would be better if prisoners would work for the state without being paid and offer their services to the public.
But for certain crimes such as pedophilia etc. I think that the criminals who do that deserve the strictest punishment.

When government want to keep a criminal in a jail for 20 years it will be cost a lot so better take them into hell will be a good solution.

When someone already did crimes then chances of being into a good soul is less but atleast their death will be a good lesson for the people who thinking about making crimes.

We only feel pains when we are alive. The deaths did not know no pain and that means deaths penalties served no purpose than separation from the body which is better. Putting criminal behind bar is far better and that is a good punishment well deserved for criminals and criminality. Capital punishment serves no purpose than creating enemies and regret.

In my country there is no such penalties for crimes so crime rate is huge when in the day time people doing it but look at the arab countries people think about the scary punishment and most of them will be scared to do any crimes.

Not really, it has been proven that brutal punishments do not reduce crime rates. You used to get your arm cut if you were caught stealing and people were still stealing.

Death penalty saves us money since we dont have to pay for the prisoner. In cases where its confirmed beyond any doubt, death penalty should be applied.

I used to be against death penalty but after looking at the picture of reality, my sentiment goes to the victims now.

I agree, for heinous crimes it should be applied.

It's also a way to scare people who are thinking to commit such crimes.

Brutal punishment will actually reduce the crime rates so I always agree with the penalty even if its is death.

I am not ideologically opposed to the death penalty for certain crimes, however due to incompetence and corruption of government, I have to oppose it on the principal that it too often makes mistakes. Prisoners can be freed, dead men stay dead.

I always used to be against death penalty.

My political leanings are mostly towards left (except for abortion where I belong to extreme right and a extreme pro-life).

But quite recently, I have started to agree on death penalty.

Why?
Not because I believe that death penalty is good punishment to stop criminals.

Because, life in prison is a much much much harsher than the death penalty.

Spending whole life behind bars like a caged animal is so so worse.

Many of my peers are against death penalty because they find death penalty harsh. (Which I still do). But they completely ignore how life in prison is much harsher.

Hence, if I be given the choice between death penalty or life behind bars, I'll choose death penalty.

But, will I choose death penalty if there's other alternative? No.

I think even the most extreme crimes deserves no more than 20 years in prison.

If the person is socio/psychopath and has no remorse, then, keep him under supervision after a long sentence.

But it's inhuman to lock away people for eternity (till they die).

Opinions ?