The emotional impulse for revenge is not a sufficient justification for the use of capital punishment, with all of the problems and risks involved. ... Wrongful executions are a preventable risk. ... By substituting the death penalty with a sentence of life without parole, we meet society's needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irrevocable punishment. ...
The reasons I chose this side is because capital punishment contradicts itself, it is cruel, and has a question of innocence involved in the final decision of punishment. ... There are to many mistakes that can be made during a trial, and risking even just one persons life is cruel. ... Another person involved in the death of this murder would be the jury that found him guilty. The jury just committed a crime of being involved in the murder of a person, because they made the decision to find him guilty. ... They should be the way that law states it, because they were involved in this murd...
This must be changed, and these states need to abolish it on the ground that it carries a dangerous risk of punishing the innocent. ... In the case of the death penalty, however, error becomes a risk to innocent people. ... It is wrong for everyone involved: the innocent that is being prosecuted, criminals, the family of the victim, and our nation as a whole. ...
These states need to abolish it on the grounds that it carries a dangerous risk of punishing the innocent, is unethical and barbaric, and is an ineffective deterrent of crime versus the alternative of life in prison without parole. ... However, in the case of the death penalty, error becomes too dangerous a risk. ... It is wrong for everyone involved: the prosecuted innocent, criminals, victims' families, and our nation. ...
I would much rather risk the former. ... When a convicted killer is given life without parole, the appeals made by attorneys on both sides, as well as appeals by the court and the judges involved, add up to millions of dollars our government wastes every year, not to mention money for the convicted murderer's food and clothing, etc....
These states need to abolish it due to the fact it has risk of punishing the innocent, is unethical and brutal, and is an ineffective deterrent of crime because of the alternative life in prison. ... It does hurt everyone involved: criminals, victims' families, prosecuted innocent and hurts society as a whole. ...
Having been involved with justice agencies around the world, it's been somewhat embarrassing, quite frankly, that notions just as so-called civilized as ours think we're barbaric because we still have capital punishment"- Reginald Wilkinson, was a prison director in Ohio. ... The facts show that death penalty cases take several years after someone's convicted of a crime which leads to it, it reduces the risk of convicting innocent people even the mistake is possible. ...
