How do you feel about the death penalty?

here my position, death penalty you should be used in three cases all you have to prove without a shadow of a doubt the person commit the crime
1st degree murder. we have DNA evidence phone record storm record we can find out motive, where the body was buried, the time day to the exact measure, most of the time we catch the guilty they should be executed

2nd rape, rapist are evil people they need to die, its definitely uncomfortable form women, but once your raped you need to get sperm samples out of you vagina so they have DNA evidence so we can fry the guy. i not saying that shit is easy, but the pussy is a self cleaning organism we need DNA samples to get the person that raped you.

3rd child molest station (and were not talking about a 20 year old guy sleeping with a 17 year old) Child molesters to be fried I don't know how you prove any of that stuff but I say we kill all child molesters
0 2

Superb Opinion

  • The purpose of the law in general and the penal system in particular is first and foremost, to protect society, second to punish the guilty and third and least, to reform the criminal if possible. In that order.

    Capital punishment, generally speaking, does not seem to afford those benefits. First, it is the surety of punishment, not its severity, that is a deterrent to crime. If an individual is sure that they will be punished, they will likely not act. If that individual believes that they might get away with it, they will likely run the risk.

    So in that sense, capital punishment fails its first and most important test. It does not deter and therefore it does not protect the society. Throw in that it applies only in cases of premeditation - crimes of passion are not premeditated - and the range of those whom capital punishment applies becomes proportionately smaller.

    Secondly, it is axiomatic that we shape our laws and then our laws shape us. In that context, capital punishment reflects - and is a result of - the society's treatment of life as a means rather than an end. In this it is the parallel of the abortion argument. The planted axiom of liberal abortion laws is that life has no value save that which each individual attributes to it, therefore the law has no proper standing to afford it protection.

    Capital punishment is a case of the society deciding that the value of life is contingent rather than absolute. That action decides life's value rather than life's inherent worth. When the society places vengeance over any inherent value to life, it will apt in its larger context to see more of the former and value the latter less and less.

    To be sure, in the matter of capital punishment that is at the margins and dealing with decidedly unsympathetic individuals. Arguably the case can be made that "killing the killer" suggests that society places a much higher value on life. However, on balance, the inspiration of capital punishment is vengeance and not justice and thus both the value of life and the value of justice is undermined.

    Beyond that, humans are imperfect and there are issues related to failings of the legal system. In the question of justice, the accidental execution of the innocent is not an injustice that can be undone. Indeed, it is what suggests that vengeance - and not justice - is what inspires laws that condone capital punishment.

    In short, capital punishment harms society with too few countervailing benefits.

    • Except it’s not parallel to the abortion argument and unborn child has not committed a crime the baby hasn’t murders anyone the murder by taking a life they got caught for there crimes, Also how does it benefit society to have our taxpayers pay for these guys to eat when a bullet cost 50 cents and it’s quick an painless. Killing the killer is justice in most society and eyes for and eyes a tooth for a tooth, If one purposefully take someone’s life in cold blood that person has lost the right to live. As yes humans are imperfect but again tell me how it benefit anyone but the killer to have them stay alive? There was a guy who was recently executed and the liberals Moran is death, this asshole raped and murdered his 2 year old daughter her mother came out and witnessed him doing his. 1 how do you reform someone like that. 2 if you can’t reform someone like that which I believe you can’t what benefits is it to society to pay for him to continue to live. (We pay taxes we pay for him to live)

    • So if it is "eye for an eye," what is the difference between vengeance and justice? Make the distinction? My point is that if the purpose of capital punishment is to deter, then it fails. If it is justice, then what justice is it that relativizes the value of human life. After all, if an action can forfeit the definition of humanity, than it does not take much to define the mere act of conception as an aggression and thus expendable. A society that make an arbitrary distinction as to when life should be protected is not apt to draw the line at capital punishment. Indeed, it will take unto itself the definition of life's value - and thus you will get abortion and capital punishment. Both of which, you will note, command popular support at the moment. The parallel is not exact, but society is not apt to draw such fine line distinctions. Indeed, once the value of life becomes contingent, it will in due course become relative. Thus you will get capital punishment and abortion - or about what we now have.

    • Yes and eyes for an eyes is justice in case of murder, you plan to commit a murders of a innocent person you deserve to die, The act of conception is not an act of aggression by the logic voluntarily having sex is a an act of aggression because you can cause that conception. Which is on its face ridiculous. Also it’s not an arbitrary standard, The standard is you don’t get to kill someone who has not commit a horrible crime and unborn child has not taken anyone’s life, the abortion doctor has taken the babies life so logically execute abortion doctors

    • Show All

Most Helpful Guy

  • I don’t really know how I feel about the death penalty. Here’s why:


    The kind of people that it should be used on generally, have no remorse or empathy, which generally means they are sociopathic, psychopathic or narcissistic. Now, in the first two cases, a lot of the time they won’t fear death, therefore is kind of a useless deterrent, in the last case they do fear death. But lack the emotional range to be able to consider the death penalty as a deterrent prior to committing their crime.


    Secondly, unless a person was caught in the act, by more than one person. “A shadow of a doubt” will always exist, the issue with the death penalty is that people are judgmental, people make conclusions based on information given to them, which is either doctored or presented in a manner to which helps which ever side is providing the case. This has happened thousands of times in history and still happens to this day.


    Putting someone in an electric chair, for a crime they were “guilty” for but didn’t commit, is a very different kind of screw up. Especially if he’s proven innocent after the fact.


    The death penalty may have been an effective deterrent in the past, but killing people for the sake of killing them, when you’re going to lock them up for the rest of their lives anyway, doesn’t make any sense.


    Apologise for any spelling mistakes it’s 6am and I’m just awake.

    • All good it was 1 am when I wrote this. I mostly agree with you, There was a case where a a guy raped his 2 year old daughter and killed her by smashing her head agains a pick up truck. His wife was the only witness to the crime. Of course DNA evidence was found and the guy was executed at the end of last year. There was also a case I think about 9 years ago Anders Behring Breivik lit fire to a building and went over to a children’s birthday party on an island when the police was distracted he killed 69 people. The guy should be executed, Norway doesn’t have the death penalty, He did get the maximum sentence of 25 years the man was 33 at the time he meaning he’s going to get out at 58 when in reality he should have gotten the death penalty, So I will say there definitely cases where the murders should be executed swift bullet to the back of the head I say.

Most Helpful Girl

  • I’m not sure how I feel about the death penalty... I don’t like killing people no matter how awful they are and I know a lot of people will hate that I feel that way. I personally like the idea of locking them up in prison without the luxury of a tv or anything like that and instead they should be getting help, like therapy because I believe people need that but then being a victim, not of rape but of molestation when I was only a toddler and then in my early teens, for long I hated them and wanted them dead. As I’ve grow up I don’t wish death or anything on them, just that they get the help they need for whatever mental issues they have because clearly there’s something wrong there.


    I by all means don’t think a person should get away with the awful things they do but I don’t think death is it. Let them suffer in prison where they can hopefully also get help. They’ll live with the fact that they’ve harmed someone, for the rest of their life and hopefully after getting help they they realise what they did was awful.


    It is life and you’re going to get shit people who do these awful things, you can’t kill them all.
    I don’t promote murder...

    • i think most of that os fair, i don't condone torture but i think a lot or criminal who commit this types of crimes can be reformed also i don't see why people (you and me buy tax dollars should be keeping these jerks alive a quick bullet to the baxk of the head does the trick, hell put them to death by quick fast acting poison and allow then to die with a movie they enjoy, but i think they should die not matter what, they have lost the right to live by there actions

    • Why get help for someone if they should never be let out? Then again, people with life sentences still get out on parole. The ACLU has made is to prisoners get some luxuries. My question has always been, if we take guns away from criminals who use them, how come we let rapists keep their weapon?

    • @Dragonpurple exactly might as well get rid of them especially if they have a 300 year sentence

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!

What Girls & Guys Said

2 12
  • Death penalty would be fine if our justice system was flawless. But it's not. If even one innocent person is killed by the state, then everyone who voted for it is a murderer and qualifies for getting shot in the face, as well. Or, put another way, if you advocate for killing the innocent, even by accident, you are no longer innocent and everyone is operating within the confines of reason to force you to be consistent by advocating for your death as well.

    • No system is ever going to be flawless, as long as humans are running it, Most of the times the police get the right guy. I don't know about you but I don’t want my tax dollars going to feed people who draw up a plan to kill someone and carried it out, There was a case recently where a guy was executed for crimes of raping his two-year-old daughter and that smashing her head against a pick up truck, His wife caught him in the act, I don't know about you but I’d rather not pay for this guy to have a moldy hunk of bread with a glass of water that guy doesn’t deserve it in my opinion. I get what your saying about not wanting to mess up and kill innocent people hence why I think we should only use the death penalty for beyond a shadow of a doubt as the standard for execution even if there is a 1% chance the person is innocent then you don’t execute. I don't know if you remember that guy in Norway who decided to light a building on fire to distract the police so that he could go over at shoot up an birthday party’s what was happening on a small island park he killed about 30-40 kids that guy because a max sentence in Norway is 25 years will get out people like that should have a quick bullet to the back of the head. Not 25 year of living off the tax payers dime and then getting back out again. So I’d like to see it use in cases where there is no doubt the person is guilty

    • But you're drawing up a plan to kill people right now. "Most of the time" sounds acceptable to idealists until it's them who is falsely accused.

    • Of course 1 innocent man dying is a tragedy letting 100 murderers eat from my tax dollar it is also a bigger tragedy. Tell me we know who the Parkland shooter is don’t you think he deserves the death penalty he went in and he murdered 17 students, why should my tax dollars go to feeding a guy who has killed 17 people in a mass school shootings why should any of our tax dollars go to pay for this guy to eat or even have water to drink the best solution put a bullet in the back of his skull, but no I gotta pay for him to continue to live a life he doesn’t deserve, where is the justice in that?

    • Show All
  • They should give every single fucker that raided the capital the death penalty and it should happen immediately upon conviction.

  • All for it

  • In the developed world it costs more to actually push a death sentence case through then to just keep them in jail for life because of all the extra appeals etc.

    it's a waste of money and effort and legal hand wringing. I'm not strongly opposed to it but the required mechanisms are just this huge complication that isn't needed.

    • How is that even a case it’s a bullet to the head. (Least that’s the way I would do it). Also I don’t want to be paying for murders to eat, Just get rid of them.

    • Because what actually happens is you move them to death row in a max security prison where they have higher numbers of guards, more control, and then a bunch of government lawyers fight each other for years and years. It's primarily the legal costs that add up, but while all that's happening, they're paying way more for death row prison costs as well.

      Check www.thebalance.com/comparing-the-costs-of-death-penalty-vs-life-in-prison-4689874 as a starting point, but the 'article sources' at the bottom are the more direct info if you're skeptical. In any case, in state after state, pushing for the death penalty ends up costing millions more than life in prison would.

      You can say 'just get rid of them' but people also want to be really really sure before they do it, and it's just a lot cheaper to say 'we're sure beyond a normal reasonable doubt, you're in jail, if some new evidence shows up in 15 years we'll deal with it!'

    • The innocent man argument again and this is why we have an appeal, however after that appeal we should just take them in a steel room and shoot them in the back of the head. Think of guys like then parkland shooter, We know he shot up the school, why should he have the right to get tax payer funded food, I’m sure People would rather see him dead then knowing there tax dollars are going to feed the bastard

    • Show All
  • I've often thought the death penalty should be quicker, I get having many appeals and going through the system, but it really should not be taking 10+ years.

    If you think about it, upon conviction if someone has their first appeal a year later. That is still 2040 (assuming 40 hour work week) lawyer hours a attorney could be working on the case for... a single attorney.

    How many hours between each trial does someone really need?

    I support auto appeals on death sentences with a limited amount of time to get all the appeals done.

    Rapists are the tricky ones though, some women ruin it by calling rape when it wasn't rape. A lady here a few years back, had reported she had been raped twice and then got caught on tape stating if this guy didn't do exactly what she said she would report him for rape. She reported him for rape, then he turned the recording over... and now people were wondering if the two other guys had truly raped her.

    I get it, if she is super beat up, and its obvious she didn't consent but how does one determine rough sex from actual rape, when its just he said, she said? should we be killing people if they themselves may be the victim of the so called victim?

    I'd say a serial rapist without a doubt should get capital punishment, but not necessarily the one time offenders, who may have thought it was consensual only later to find out its not. I see a time when in society we have to have printed written contracts, stating it was consensual but then someone could she say was forced to sign it.

  • Interesting. 🤔

  • I'd vote for this.
    Why is this in sexuality and not politics?

  • Molestation*
    Not molest station.

    • Yea that’s what I get for speaking into into my iPad.

  • I agree with you

  • I 100% support it especially in premeditated murders. Some people are just extremely vile and not worthy to live.

    • Agreed

  • should be abolished everywhere

  • I mostly agree with you.

    1st degree murder: execute

    Rapist: castrate them and surgically give them a micro penis. Let the live with that for the rest of their life.

    Child molesters: public execution in a painful way such as crucifixion. People can throw things at them as they die.

    If the punishment is severe enough then it would be a deterrent and if not society would be rid of them.

  • I support the death penalty. people have no idea the type of monster out here killing and raping the innocent. Where I live a young lady was recently killed ( possible raped too ) on her way home for work. The two main suspect were " accidently" killed by the cops and it was welcoming. I know that sounds harsh , but I live in a high crime place and see the negitave effects of murders on people lives.

  • We should kill many more democrats than we do. The who process has become gummed up by endless appeals by liberal bitches and cunts