• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Death Penalty

Should there be a death penalty?

  • Yes

    Votes: 55 47.0%
  • No

    Votes: 45 38.5%
  • Under certain circumstances, please explain

    Votes: 17 14.5%

  • Total voters
    117
Keeping it short....YES...theres a small % of humans that are unsalvageable.
 
in my opinion , the rejection of death penalty seems that some people tend to care about the rights of criminals rather than innocent victims.
 
in my opinion , the rejection of death penalty seems that some people tend to care about the rights of criminals rather than innocent victims.

I respect others that find the death penalty unacceptable, I understand their thoughts and beliefs that its wrong to kill another human even if its sanctioned by govt....they are also correct that there have been individuals that have been executed wrongly.

I am for the death penalty with a narrow definition of unsalvageable...meaning its believed and demonstrated they will kill again...
Heres a list for you...with pictures....can anyone tell me why we have the privledge of paying to feed and house and give medical care to charles manson for 30 yrs...or MORE.....heres a list with pictures....research what some of them have done to OTHER HUMANS..and you may decide the death penalty can be an appropriate tool

worst serial killers - Google Search
 
Should there be a death penalty?
yes.
there are consequences for every action.
and i think the consequence for murdering someone should be death.
 
Yes. For murder, child abuse and rape.
 
in my opinion , the rejection of death penalty seems that some people tend to care about the rights of criminals rather than innocent victims.

In what freaky mirror universe does the victim of a crime obtain the right to the life of another? What possible right of a victim is infringed by not killing another human being? Turning around and demanding the death of another person doesn't make a victim whole. All it does is destroy more life. It takes away someone's father, mother, sister, brother, daughter, or son. Destruction only begets more destruction.

And, of course, what pro death penalty people always forget is that it is important to protect the rights of accused criminals, because no conviction is 100% sure.
 
I think that the Death Penalty is an appropriate consequence to murder, rape, molestation or kidnapping.
 
I think that the Death Penalty is an appropriate consequence to murder, rape, molestation or kidnapping.

OR kidnapping?

So, a loving father who, in the midst of a brutal custody battle, takes his child with him and is arrested for kidnapping should be sentenced to death?
 
OR kidnapping?

So, a loving father who, in the midst of a brutal custody battle, takes his child with him and is arrested for kidnapping should be sentenced to death?

No. Of course not. Just as an 18 year-old she not be charged with a sex crime when shagging his 17 year-old girlfriend. There should, if there aren't already, be levels of kidnapping and the worst ones like for ransom should qualify.

I have to say though that I am a loving single father in the middle of a brutal custody battle and I haven't once thought of taking them...
 
No. Of course not. Just as an 18 year-old she not be charged with a sex crime when shagging his 17 year-old girlfriend. There should, if there aren't already, be levels of kidnapping and the worst ones like for ransom should qualify.

I have to say though that I am a loving single father in the middle of a brutal custody battle and I haven't once thought of taking them...

I partly agree with you on the sex crime issue, but I don't agree that the state has jurisdiction or a moral obligation to take the life of its citizenry.

As for you personally, I don't know your circumstances. But I do know there have been cases where the courts prematurely give primary (or sole) custody to the mother (or even father) when that person is dangerous and irresponsible. By the time the responsible parent convinces the court otherwise, the children may be teenagers who hate their father (or mother). On top of that, they may have acquired some of the bad habits of the bad parent.

In those cases, I would almost be glad if the responsible parent took the children and left. It wouldn't be legal, but in an ironic set of circumstances, you sometimes have to be willing to break the law in order to do what is right.
 
Last edited:
I say No to the death penalty simply because of a lot of cases that involve convicting innocent people. We need to fix our way of incarceration anyway...there is absolutely no reason to have millions of people in prison. The reason being because most of those in prison are non-violent offenders. People who use drugs are put in overcrowded prisons with rapists, and murderers.

For murder...Life in Prison (I mean natural life, not 25 to life)

For rape...Castration whether it be chemical or physical.

At least if you sentence a person to life in prison, and later down the road it is proven that the man/woman was innocent then they could be released. However, if they were executed then it was found out that they were innocent...now who is the murderer? That would be the government.

So, I would say we would need to rethink our entire prison system and who we incarcerate.
 
In what freaky mirror universe does the victim of a crime obtain the right to the life of another? What possible right of a victim is infringed by not killing another human being? Turning around and demanding the death of another person doesn't make a victim whole. All it does is destroy more life. It takes away someone's father, mother, sister, brother, daughter, or son. Destruction only begets more destruction.

And, of course, what pro death penalty people always forget is that it is important to protect the rights of accused criminals, because no conviction is 100% sure.

some convictions are 100% sure and death penalty is a deterrent punishment to murder,yes some people dont believe in this but it is a fact . the type of justice you want to be practised just serves for the criminals and their relatives.but what about teh relatives of victims?
 
I partly agree with you on the sex crime issue, but I don't agree that the state has jurisdiction or a moral obligation to take the life of its citizenry.

As for you personally, I don't know your circumstances. But I do know there have been cases where the courts prematurely give primary (or sole) custody to the mother (or even father) when that person is dangerous and irresponsible. By the time the responsible parent convinces the court otherwise, the children may be teenagers who hate their father (or mother). On top of that, they may have acquired some of the bad habits of the bad parent.

In those cases, I would almost be glad if the responsible parent took the children and left. It wouldn't be legal, but in an ironic set of circumstances, you sometimes have to be willing to break the law in order to do what is right.

I hear you. My case is that I have an ex with BPD. She has threatened suicide, to leave us, to drive us into oncoming traffic and all the other fun stuff. She is a pretty good mom though even though she teaches them bad habits. I still would only think to take them if she was to harm them. I have evidence of other stuff but not enough crap to take them illegally when they are in her care. I have them most of the time which is a good thing.
 
There are crimes that do deserve the death sentence.
 
Back
Top Bottom