Asklemmy

The death penalty should ALMOST never be used. The only use for the death penalty is for world leaders that direct their subordinates to commit atrocious acts.

Normal civilians, no matter how dangerous, should only ever be treated with dignity. There is no place for state sanctioned murder.

A) It is immoral.

B) The justice system isn't perfect, and death is final.

C) The actual cost of going through all the trials and effort to put someone to death is typically higher than just keeping them locked up.

D) There is no humane way to put someone to death.

E) It is not effective at preventing crime. It only makes it so people have nothing to lose by being caught.

I think some crimes deserve death, but I just don't trust the government –any government!– to make that decision.

If killing people is wrong, its wrong.

Yes, I believe it's nearly always immoral, and the exception is public figures directly involved in crimes against humanity.

If you have to have a trial to figure out if you got the right person, that's too much doubt. It's just Nuremberg, Saddam, the radio guy from Rwanda, and folks like them. Everything else regardless of how monstrous the state should only kill if they are absolutely incapable of keeping that person from taking more lives.

Also governments should be held accountable when one prisoner kills another in a situation that could have been predicted. And yes this includes pedos being stabbed in prison.

the state should never enforce the death penalty. remove any hierarchical structures keeping together the justice system and bring in a community council operating under direct democracy and subject to regulation and recall. make sure the people ultimately have the power if corruption is suspected.

the death penalty should be a true rarity for extreme cases. i am currently unsure what i would consider for my own beliefs but i do know rehabilitation should be prioritized regardless.

The death penalty is incredibly stupid for more than one reason.

1. If someone committed a crime that egregious, they should be punished every day, and you should help them live as long as possible.
2. So many innocent people are put to death because our system for determining guilt is far from righteous, or right.
3. You don't talk about Fight Club.

I oppose it simply because it doesn't work. It is not a deterrent, and it does not serve justice to put people to death, and it costs far more to execute someone than it does to rehabilitate them (the most expensive alternative - I'm not suggesting rehabilitation is an option for everyone).

And sometimes we execute innocent people. Like, how many of your family members would you be willing to put to death to keep the death penalty? Every innocent victim of the death penalty had a family, and that family never imagined it could happen to them.

I'd be against it even if we could magically know without a doubt the person's guilty. Even if it had a negative cost. Even for raping a child.
Life is sacred, whatever "sacred" means for an atheist like me.
(And I was raped as a child, fwiw.)

The death penalty is wrong because life is precious and even the worst people can change if given enough time and help.

However, if it is strictly necessary to kill someone currently engaging in murder to stop them (i.e. the capitalist class), i.e. the situation is so time-sensitive that innocent people are going to die if the murderer isn't stopped, then I'm 1000% cool with killing the murderers until they stop murdering or are dead, whichever happens first.

I do not trust the justice system what so ever. Nor the nation state that gave birth to this abomination.

No to the death sentence.

I think the death penalty could be just, but, unfortunately our justice system is too capricious and dysfunctional to be worthy of administering it.

It's fine for other people, but I wouldn't want it for myself.

Strongly against the state having the option.

I'm against it. It does nothing to protect people that a life sentence doesn't do. It's permanent, there's no correcting for mistakes. It's about punishment, not deterrent.

Killing even a killer when there's an option to lock them up instead is unnecessary. It smacks of religious/moral judgement that is beyond what a justice system should be focused on. If an afterlife exists and is run by some supernatural deity(ies), they will take care of punishment.

Against, regardless of crime. Regardless of the system used to kill. Regardless of the system used to convict or identify the criminal. Even if they are unrepentant and said they'd do it again. Even under a perfect justice system.

Now life in prison, sure.

In a just society it will always cost more to execute a person than it would cost to imprison them for life. If that's always going to be the case in a just society you may as well imprison them for life. The outcome is the same.

The reason execution should always cost more is because you have to be absolutely sure to the best of our abilities that the person is guilty. Until we come up with a fool proof way to determine guilt we will always run the risk of executing the wrong person for a crime.

I'm opposed to the bourgeois state using the death penalty against proles.

You cannot be punished if you are dead. The death penalty is just convenient catharsis and a release of burden for the living.

Not the death penalty, but the lost prophets guy who got stabbed to death recently got off easy. Death was too good for him.

I'm strongly against death penalty when it comes to crimes of individual against individual.

I am for death penalty when it comes to crimes of influential individual against masses though.

A murderer or rapist who ruined one life doesn't deserve death penalty. A corrupt politician who ruined countless lives cooperating with the billionaires does.

I think even one innocent person being executed makes it all not worth it. Though that may be clouded by the facts, it doesn't deter crime and it costs more than life imprisonment.

In a perfect world, I think the death penalty could have a deterrence effect for white collar crime. I'd support the death penalty in that case. The line I draw where the death penalty is deserved is when someone systematically makes the world a worse place. Even serial killers don't reach that threshold for me.

There's no world where we can do that without ever executing an innocent person though. So I am firmly against the death penalty.

Yes. No one knows what happens when you die, no one truly knows if someone is guilty, no judicial system is perfect etc etc. Too much risk for the reward of killing someone (with a 10 ish percent of being innocent)

I'm all against death penalty in any form, except perhaps for some fascist leaderships. There are those who deserve to dance the Spandau ballet.

If we had some omniscient and perfectly fair justice system that could confirm there is no other option, sure. But jeesh, how much further could we be from that yk? The US justice system is becoming increasingly blatantly political.

Also, as someone who thinks punishment is vindictive and unnecessary compared to rehabilitation, the ultimate punishment does not appeal to me.

I am all for it. I can think of dozens of reasons that people should be put down.

Does the method of execution matter to me? Yes.

Does the crime matter? Absolutely

Does the cost matter? No.

the only people who should get the death penalty, are people who support it