in very ectreme cases, where evidence is beyond overwhelming, I wouldn't argue against it

Vs them - racial bias has executed many innocent people and destroyed their lives.

I only favor it in extreme cases and when there is no possibility for doubt when it comes to the guilt of the suspect....In cases such as the church shooting in SC and the movie theatre in Colorado..Hell instances like that i'd be ok with an on the spot execution.

I think the death penalty is immoral.

State-sanctioned murder, which inordinately penalizes the poor and minorities.
It has all too often been used to kill innocent people. Prosecutors have used it to benefit
their careers. There is entirely too much corruption within the legal system to render it anything but a failure.
It deters nothing.

Canada does not have a death penalty. The US has a significant issue with false positives based on “eye witness “ testimony

Against them as the chance of an innocent person being wrongfully executed is just too great.

Even in the case of obvious murders (Gacy, Dahmer mentioned below), I believe it is better to keep the criminal alive to better understand why the crimes were committed.

Theoretically I'm fine with it, but in actuality there are too many problems and potential problems in the operation of a criminal justice system for me to be comfortable with such an irreversible action.

In my opinion there is no rational argument that supports the death sentence.

There's more than enough State endorsed murder. By enough I mean any of course.

My biggest objection is that the government isn't very good at doing anything, too many innocent people have been on death row because of incompetent government or people in government lying about what they know. They often get false confessions to serious crimes by browbeating innocent people.

It's far too costly in it's current state. It's not a deterant since most murders occur between known parties. I would reserve it only for the most extreme cases. I believe most of the time "Life in Prison without the Possibility of Parole" would suffice.

I believe that the death penalty swhould be reserved for those cases involving deliberate and vicious killing, probven by physcial evidence such as DNA and videotape. We have no obligation to keep such people alive at public expense. All cases without such irrevocanle evidence should be given a life term, as there is always a chance of overturning the original verdict.

I don't believe there are any benefits to the death penalty.

I always mess with conservatives on this issue. I tell them they trust the government too much.

I think it’s inhumane.
If it’s not on the footage- you can’t really prove that someone is 100% guilty of the crime. So imagine, how many innocent people your death penalty laws killed...
and on the other hand, who are we to decide who dies? I think it just makes you, just as bad human being and also it doesn’t serve no justice on any level. You can’t bring the victim back to life and you aren’t really punishing anyone by killing them because they will be already dead and won’t serve the punishment

An abosolute punishment that needs a perfect system of jurisprudence to use it. Since no perfect system is forthcoming, leave it out. Please.

I'm generally against it because our legal system screws up too often, but I have what I call the Gacy/Dahmer exception. If you have over a dozen people who were buried under your house while you lived there or if you have human body parts in your fridge and/or freezer you should be executed.

Strongly opposed. There have been too many mistakes and innocent people have been executed. Also, I believe in depriving violent people of their liberty, and shutting them away, but I don't believe in putting non-violent people in prison. It is a waste of resources. Get them doing community service instead. And people in prison should be given the chance to be educated and change and contribute something to society later. There will be some who can never be let out, but they should be treated decently, as they do in most of Europe, not punished for revenge.

As a non religious person I find it hard to think of death as a penalty. We will all die at some point. Death by lethal injection or even hanging would be better than suffering from some age related illness. By killing some murderer we are simply shortening the length of time he has to contemplate his incarcerated state.

As long as the death penalty exists, it can and will be misapplied or applied mistakenly. I believe some acts justify it, but I can't condone the state killing in my name, even if someone richly and truly deserves it.

I am pro death penalty. But under very specific circumstances and when the burden of proof is very clear. I also do not think the mentally ill who commit crimes eligible for the death penalty should be exempt.

Capital punishment serves no purpose but to sate the public's hunger for blood. No different than throwing people to the lions in Rome, or meeting on the green to watch the beheading. No resolution for the victim, no rehabilitation for the actor. If our society was honest about it they'd put executions on PPV and solve the debt crisis, but we have to maintain the illusion that we're not savages.

The last time the death penalty was exercised here in Australia it was done for political purpose. There was such public out cry that capital punishment was repealed. But perhaps auto da fe should be introduced for corrupt politicians.

It’s outdated and barbaric, it’s not practised in a majority of the world

I believe there are acts for which people deserve death. I do not believe we can properly and fairly administer that kind of justice without error. I also believe life in prison is worse than death. So I’m against the death penalty.