What is your opinion on the death penalty?

Okay so my speech class is holding debates. Tomorrow, we are discussing the Death Penalty…what I would like to know…is what the awesome people on this site think…about the Death Penalty…are you for or against? Why or Why Not? (I need some ideas for tomorrow…please and thank you!)

Answer #2


pokes head out of her tent…

Ha must have been sleeping…ahaha joke. No. I finally decided to check back and see if any more people have come to my little bonfire. And yep. A great turn out. Well, I see there are many intelligent people here. Whether they are for or against the Death Penalty. I myself…was caught off gurard many times. Theres many times I was thinking…hmm am I really Against it? But…I dont think I can change that now. I still am against it. But being for…has a lot of reason as well…as being against.

The debate yesterday in my class was interesting. Of course…theres times I wanted to shout things from the audience…but you couldnt really say anything if you werent on the panel. Which is really gay. But…uhm, yeah. I’ve learned more then ever…and I want to thank everyone for sharing their opinions with me…

packs up tent and leaves happily

Answer #3

I’m against the death penalty. To me the only justification for killing or violence is self-defence and I don’t make exceptions for governments.

Most sociologists agree that the death penalty isn’t a deterent.

Since death pentalty convicts get automatic appeals (they try to make sure everyone they execute is actually guilty of their crime) it is more expensive to kill someone than to lock them up for life.

Killing assumes that the convict because of their crime is no value to society what so ever. Look at the Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. Few people shed a tear when he was executed but consider this, McVeigh knew things about the bombing that have historical significance. Were there other accomplices than Terry Nichols? Were any groups helping him with the planning or execution of his crime? Killing McVeigh makes it that much less likely that we will ever learn these facts bout the crime.

I hear so many people talking about getting justice for a heinous crime by executing the perpetrator. They aren’t after justice; what they are after is revenge. Revenge is one of our darkest emotions and criminal justice is not there for revenge but for rehabilitation when possible and to protect society when it isn’t.

Answer #4

I am against it completely. Usually, we only sentence people to death if they have done a terrible crime such as killing another (or a few other) people. In my opinion, it is not for us to choose if they live or die. The only way we can really punish them is if they are still alive. We don’t know what happens after death, and maybe they will go to a better place for them. After all of the crimes they have done, why give them this freedom? One of the cruelist punishments is being forced to live with yourself after all you have done and be constantly reminded of the pain you caused others. How can this be possible if someone was dead? Also, by killing someone who killed or did bad things to others, we are stooping to their level all the while punishing them for their actions. In a way its even worse as we make a public affair out of it. We are carrying on our notorious legacy of being hypocritical.

Answer #5


Not because I don’t think some people deserve to die, but because I think the government should not be in the business of doing it.

There have been too many cases now of people on death row being proven innocent. Just imagine how much more there are!

Again, many people on death row are guilty, dont get me wrong. The point is that its easier and cheaper to keep someone in prison for life without the possibility of parole.

An addendum to this argument, is that many conservatives (christian conservatives) are for the death penalty, but at the same time are against abortion. Both acts take a human life. Isn’t this a double standard?

Finally, as a society, we are getting more and more advanced, and the death penalty has been outlawed in many parts of the world. The act of a government taking the life of a citizen is rightly seen as fairly barbaric. Thus it should be discontinued.

Answer #6

I’ve hopped the fence on this subject, many times in my life. When I was young, I felt that it wasn’t “mans” place to take a life…that killing in the name of justice wasn’t up to human beings. Later…and hundreds of truly henious crimes later… I changed my mind…SOME crimes DO deserve the death penalty. I even wondered why we keep them on death row for so long, dieing of old age waiting to die at the hands of their peers, seems a little cruel to me…

With the advent of DNA, and the phenominal improvement of forensic science…it would seem to me that the death penalty laws could stand a “clean-up”…Such as…the death penalty could not be applied in any case that is totally circumstancial…ie: if there is NO physical evidence to back up the finding of guilt. IF there is physical evidence proving that the accused is the guilty party, and the crime is henious (serial killers, especially serial child killers…terrorists/mass killers (Oklahoma City, 911)…)…the repeal process, the 20+ years sitting on death row, could also be shortened, since the only people on death row would either have pleaded guilty, or proven by physical evidence that they WERE guilty.


Answer #7

I used to think that if someone murders someone, the murderer should die, but that just makes us murderers too. Also, in some places like Indonesia, drug trafficing is a crime punishable by firing squad, and I don’t think that’s fair. I mean, what’s a few illeagal drugs compared to someones life?

Answer #8

boo yah!! I love your answer phrannie, and I am in total agreement. the death penalty shouldn’t be construed as a deterent, it should be implimented solely as a punishment to the crime of murder. the people committing these crimes have very little remorse for their actions, and would not be deterred by the threat of death. they prove through their actions that they have very little respect for life. most( or it could be proven-All) have some kind of psycotic issues behind why they commit crimes, their mental instability is not going to magically dissappear while they are sitting on death row finishing out their life term. it is true that oftentimes it is better to allow a NORMAL person to live with what they have done. but most murderers, rapists , etc. oftentimes lack the capacity to feel guilt or remorse over what they have done. so a gentle society should drain financial resources on some degenerate criminals who should be treated as human beings. I don’t buy it, I am not a christian- but some of their teachings strike a logical chord. anyone remember the - do unto others as you would have them do unto you, or An eye for an eye? these philosophies have been around for centuries and still do not lose their meaning even in the modern era. as soon as someone crosses that line society should respond emphatically, that that persons life is now forfeit. the world is imperfect, murder has been around from the dawn of civilization, in a perfect world there would be no murders, no rapes, no incestuous assaults, and no need for the judicial system or capital punishment. BUT the world is not perfect, will never be perfect, regardless of the good wishes of humanity. as soon as the criminals mind makes the conscious decision to cross the line, no amount of well wishing is going to stop what they are going to do. the sooner society accepts that these people should be euthanized humanely, the sooner we can turn our attention to matters that we should truly be focusing on, and then and only then can we as a society even consider aspiring to be a kinder gentler community.

Answer #9

If it is a repeaeted crime yes . I mean rapisim rapists deserve to die murders deserve to die but robbers , probably not. if they robbed several times mabe. but still no one deserves to die we need fair justice.

Answer #10

jail and capital punishment is not about punishing the person its about making sure it never happens again so if someone kills they are not making society any better so they have to be removed from it by the easiest way possible and that is death.. but it really depends on what they did and the government needs to be as sure as possible before they kill someone

Answer #11

My junior year of high school I did my debate on the death penalty. At first I was against it because to me it seems like it would be more of a punishment for someone to be in prison for the rest of their life than die. I saw dying as the easy way out. AfterI did my reseach (and I did a lot of research),I changed my opinion entirely. There have been so many cases where murderers and rapists have been sentenced to life in prison without parole and either escaped of got out on parole anyway. Many of these people have killed again. I realized that it is not just about what is the best punishment but how can we best prevent this from happening again. I would advise you to research some of the cases where criminals escaped and killed again, I think that is what won my audience over because I won my dabate. Hope this helps…

Answer #12

against… though death penalty means the end of such an existance, it doesn’t mean that the person has got what he deserved… instead ‘bear the burden’ type of punishments must be put to fame… a death penalty may also affect a person who happens to know about it…

Answer #13

Wow…same here…I am Definatley Against…

it bugs the hell out of me…

what is this world coming to…


guess ill just set up camp…I know more people will come to this little bonfire…

sets up tent and waits

Answer #14

I think its wrong couse some some people have probly died who were fraimed and I just think people should AWAYS get a chance to straighton up I mean a lot of years in jail is ok but we shouldnt kill people couse I personaly think it makes then killers to

Answer #15

im against it I dont see the logic in trying to teach the world that killing is wrong by killing someone but there does need to be a severe punishment for the criminals I think that they should be locked in solitary confidement with pictures of the victim and his/her family covering all four walls so hell never forget what he did and he can see for his/her self the seriousness of what he has done. I hope this helps you in your debate

best of luck- kevin

Answer #16

“It is never ok to kill someone”…

Hmmm…makes me wonder how long you might ponder killing a man like James Duncan III, the gent who killed the family (step-dad, mom, and 13 year old son) in Coeur d’Alene, Id. a couple years back…kidnapped the two youngest children, raped and killed the young son, and raped, but had not killed the 8 year old girl, when he was apprehended…how long would you ponder killing him, if he came knocking at YOUR door?

One rule in life I’ve learned…NEVER say NEVER…


Answer #17

me again, if society allowed us to protect and defend ourselves , and take a more proactive stance against those who would try to harm us, there would be no need for the death penalty anymore, things would get taken care of right on the spot. ask yourself this, If you were being brutally attacked, and had the means to defend your life at the cost of the attackers life, would you choose to kill to live? a quote from the tv show ‘ firefly’ “ if someone is trying to kill you, well, you need to kill them right back.”

an armed society based on the common sense principal of self preservation is possibly the best deterent to violent crime.

Answer #18

I am extremely FOR the death penalty, it is my strict belief that as soon as a person violates anothers civil rights or takes their life, their rights and life should be forfeit. it is a rather utopian thought that no one should kill or be killed, nature and reality dictate that every living thing kills- people oftentimes kill for rather stupid reasons. so YES if it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you killed a person, your life should be taken- because you have shown that you are defective in thoughts and actions- and should not be able to live in a state of limbo ( on death row) draining government and tax resources that could be going to other more fruitfull causes such as homelessness, and feeding those people in our country that need it.

Answer #19

well the death penalty isn’t really a good punishment but it really dose depend on what the person did wrong like somdom lasan I don’t really know how to spell it but I think you desire the death penalty because on september,11,2001 he killed over 2,000 inocent people that didn’t do a thing to him but thats what I think everyont have a different opion

Answer #20

death penalty only for pediphiles until we can find a medication for that mental disease

Answer #21

I don’t think we have the right to kill.

The other arguments, for and against, both have some good points (against: you might kill an innocent person, for: a guilty person might get out of jail and kill again) so it’s hard to judge according to those arguments.

The only one that works for me is that we should not kill at all.

The two Bible verses I would use to justify this are the 10 Commandments: ‘Thou shalt not kill’ (Exodis 20:13) and: “Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Romans 12:19).

Answer #22

hmmm…interesting… thanks…

I shall wait–even longer…er well just a little bit longer…

peeks out of tent

Answer #23

this society condonnes murder by murdering the murderer (sp I know)

Answer #24

I stand by what I said. It is never ok to kill someone.

Answer #25

It is never ok to kill someone.

More Like This
Ask an advisor one-on-one!

Andrew Flusche Law Firm

Legal Services, Traffic Law, Criminal Law