What are problems with capital punishment besides the speed of the appeals system??

Question

This is for a pro capital punishment speech

Answer 1

The idea that the method needs to be perceived as humane as possible. I do not believe it should be torturous or anything like that, simply quick.



The electric chair, hanging, & firing squad are rarely used any more, as they have been deemed inhumane & gruesome. I have always considered the gas chamber cruel and inhumane, but the other three "traditional" methods are usually very quick and acceptable to me.



Botched executions can be a problem. Finding a vein for lethal injection has been a repeating problem, especially with IV drug users. Fire from electrocutions happens from time to time as improper sponges have been used, corrosion on the skull cap, etc can cause electrical resistance which ignites flames. If the drop from a hanging is too far, the head has popped off. If the drop from a hanging is not far enough, the neck fails to snap and the condemned slowly strangles to death.

Answer 2

I was pro-death penalty for a long time, but I have changed my stance over the years, for several reasons - here are the problems with capital punishment as I see them:



1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the U.S., over 100 death row inmates have been exonerated by DNA evidence in the last 30 years. Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. No matter how rare it is, the government should not risk executing one single innocent person.



Really, that should be reason enough for most people. If you need more, read on:



2. Because of the extra expense of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.



3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty states. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government becomes the bad parent who says, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’



4. There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst of our criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.”



5. Most governments are supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."



As Voltaire said, "I disagree what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Good luck on your speech.

Answer 3

There are cases of people being wrongly convicted and once killed they cannot come back. It is far more expensive to execute someone than to put them in jail for life (this shocks most people, but it is true). However, the most commonly cited reason capital punishment is bad is that it punishes those who have taken life by taking their life, essentially being hypocritical.

Answer 4

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. Here are some answers, with sources below:



129 people on death rows have been released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA, available in less than 10% of all homicides, can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.



The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reliable study shows the death penalty deters others. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don’t.



Life without parole, on the books in 48 states, also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending 23 of 24 hours a day locked in a tiny cell is not a picnic. Life without parole costs less than the death penalty.



The death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison, mostly because of the upfront costs of legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people. (upfront=before and during the initial trial)



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.





Sources:



Death Penalty Information Center, www.deathpenaltyinfo.org, for stats on executions, reports on costs, deterrence studies, links to FBI crime stats and links to testimony (at state legislatures) of victims' family members.



FBI http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_04.html



The Innocence Project, www.innocenceproject.org



http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/COcosttestimony.pdf page 3 and 4 on why the death penalty is so expensive



http://www.njadp.org/forms/signon-survivor.html for statements of victims’ families

Answer 5

It is quite... you wake up and hear a blurb on the news after the fact.



If it is really to be a deterrent then make them public and bring back the Electric Chair and show people how horrible it is to die that way... then it will really be a deterrent.



Good Luck

Answer 6

I am for it but just against the unjust courts.

we don't to speed up the appeals system

we need to make sure that the courts is of justice

Answer 7

It's wrong and tortuous.