Doesn't that say something about the rationality of a family towards one of their members who were convicted of such a crime as to receive the death penalty?
They can't ALL be innocent. But perhaps the families say "Not MY johnny boy ! He wouldn't hurt a fly! I know he is innocent!"
I would think they say something more like: "I'm so grateful I still get to see my father/husband/brother/son. I hope he never gets executed."
Having to go through something like this, to know someone close to you is going to be executed, and just count the days, the hours, the minutes, the seconds... that's what hell must really be like. Not to mention how it will be like to actually wait to be executed yourself; it would be easier to give them a gun, a few bullets and let them do it themselves when they're ready. But no, that way they're going to hell, right?
You know, not everyone who gets the death penalty is a monster in every way possible. People can still be attached to them and feel sorry for them, even if they are 100% guilty.
I don't think this barbaric act should go on anymore. If people want to die, they can get pretty creative, even in prison.
Nobody gives you an option whether you want to stay alive or not. Others decide for you, whether you're innocent or not.
Yes, I would not want to live to serve a life sentence either, but there are other things involved.
Though it seems there's an extensive discussion about capital punishment already elsewhere (haven't read it yet), I figure I may as well add here that I throw in my lot with those who say that capital punishment should be "banned" as you put it. I had to give a little persuasive speech about this last semester in fact, however everything I touched on was exclusively relevant to the United States.
I really think that the emotional conviction to hang on to the death penalty is flimsy and falls flat in light of the facts. To this day I haven't found one good reason for keeping capital punishment in the United States.
I am all for the death penalty, actually. I think they need to use it more and stop overcrowding our prisons. There are a whole slew of people I would use it on, and these include child rapists and others who commit crimes against children. Repeat sex offenders? Gone. Murderers? Gone.
Of course, this would be based on conclusive evidence. I would give them 1 appeal. No reason to keep them hanging out.
Consider the fact that the justice system is flawed; many cases are decided by arbitrary factors such as race or economic status of the defendant. Innocent people have been put on death row and later had to be exonerated because the system by which the death penalty is issued is not altogether impartial.
Note that even an "efficient" system of issuing the death penalty, that is to say, a system in which most or all of those who are issued the death penalty actually receive it (see Texas), does not prove by executing all of those who are accused that every defendant was necessarily guilty. Texas especially is a hotbed of injustice. 1 in 4 people on death row in Texas were represented by state provided attorneys (almost no defendants in capital cases can afford their own attorneys) who were later reprimanded, suspended, or even banned from practicing law by the State Bar due to malpractice. What does that tell you?
I think it's a common misconception that prison is awesome. To be fair, I've never been to one. So it might be :P
I don't know that its AWESOME, but you cannot deny the fact that prisoners are afforded more rights/privileges than a good portion of our law abiding citizens.
I have never been in either, but know plenty of people who have and most come out like it was no big deal. Prison SHOULD be a big deal.
Much of our prison overcrowding comes from potheads and other drug offenses.
I'm in favor of the death penalty in matters where the continued existence of someone would pose a likely danger to the rest of society. Murderers, for example, pose a continued risk to society and, imo, have no redeeming factor that can outweigh their danger to others. When you have cancer cells, you don't "rehabilitate" them, you destroy them.
Though, to be fair, I concede the point that innocent people would be at risk in the current system where arbitrary things such as economic class can swing a trial against someone. While I do think the death penalty should be used, I think it should perhaps be used less than it is and that imposing such a penalty should require a higher standard than even the usual "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Of course, I would not at all be opposed to abolishing the death penalty IF we actually HAD a successful means of rehabilitating criminals. Currently, we do not.