The Death Penalty is a hot topic these days. It's an emotional one to say the least?

According to the media here in California, there are over 700 inmates currently sitting on death row. The same media also states that most of them will be there for at least 20 years. Some may even die of old age. How is this a deterrent to the comission of a violent crime? Many of those on "the row" are sex offenders. I'm totally in favor of closing down death row & the execution chamber. Put these people in with the general prison population. Investigative Reporters have discovered thet there is acutally a "code of ethics" among prisoners. I wonder just how many of these death row inmates would have comitted those crimes if they knew that they would have to live among the general population? I can hear the ACLU crying that this in violation of their civil rights. What civil rights. What about the civil rights of the victims? In my opinion, the moment that you comitt a crime, you give up your civil rights. I'm quite sure that I will get some very emotiona responses. I can't wait

The notion that ANY punishment can be a deterrent is predicated on 3 things. First, the punishment must be certain. Second, the punishment must be close in proximity in time to the action it purports to punish. Finally, the punishment must be severe enough to outweigh any perceived benefit to be derived from the punishable act.

I think you can see where the death penalty falls short on at least the first two of these measures. As for the final one, imagine for a moment, the capacity of someone who is about to commit an act punishable by the death penalty. Now, imagine them giving the slightest ounce of contemplation to ANY of these considerations in the process. Get my point? Deterrence requires a mental state that is ABSENT in those about to commit the act that could result in the death penalty.

There, no emotion at all.

I higly disagree,why should we have to provide them with room and board along with the best medical and percription options in the world while the rest of us have to work and slave to support them.
I know thousands of honest hard woking people who cant even afford to go to a Doctor or get a percription filled.
Time to wake up

i support the death penalty and think that evey state in the Union should immediately start executing all the ones on death row, where does it say that someone should be a burden on the tax payer for his nature life and contribute to the overcrowding ect. A person that is convicted given an appeal and convicted again should then have the sentence carried out when it comes to murder or child molesting or rape there should be no punishment but death and then unlike the bleeding hearts that say a person can change there would be an actual deterrent to crime and you would see a drastic decrease in these crimes so yes bring back the death penalty and start the executions get them out of here society would be far better off

CRIMINALS SHOULD NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL!!!!!!! THEY SHOULD BE EXECUTED NO LONGER THEN 90 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING THEIR DEATH SENTENCE!!!!

This would save the taxpayers millions of dollars, and would make jail ten times more expensive.

Furthermore, look at all the practical reasons to be in favor of the death penalty:

-it serves due justice (the punishment fits the crime), and serving due justice is the NO.1 job of a court of law (preventing crime is NOT their job)
-it shows that we are tough on crime
-it gets bang for the taxpayers buck
-criminals given the DP have a 0% recidivism rate
-It holds people responcible for the horrible content of their character. This fulfills what MLKJ always wanted: judge not by the color of your skin, but by the content of your character. The characterof these criminals warrants death
-It holds the criminal responcible for his actions
-appeals and **** aside, it's cheaper then prison
-it decreases the prison population, which saves even more taxpayers money
-Because the death penalty is the punishment given by a neutrel judge, there is no vengance in it. Therefore, there is no moral objection to be had with the death penalty.
-The death penalty defends human rights by establishing a mentality that "we will not tolerate any violation of any innocent person's human right's

I oppose the death penalty with pragmatic reasons and facts. You don't have to sympathize with criminals or want them to avoid terrible punishments for terrible crimes to ask if the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime, to look at alternatives and to think about the risks of executing innocent people. Sources below.

127 people on death rows released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, can鈥檛 guarantee we won鈥檛 execute innocent people.

The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reliable study shows the death penalty deters others. To deter others a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don鈥檛.

We have a good alternative, life without parole, on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure, swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?

The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. Murder victim family members have testified that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. Speed up the process and we will execute innocent people.