There has been much controversy as of late in Texas. Do a search and you can find all sorts of information about it. Being from Texas I'm not immune to the reputation it has of being the leader in the country of executions. Over the last couple of years, DNA evidence has exonerated several death row inmates and now the state is paying restitution to them. This is costing the state ridiculous amounts of money on top of the money spent to try them and fight the numerous appeals they went through.
Here's what I think. I am not opposed to the death penalty, however it should only be eligible for criminals that are found guilty with DNA and/or conclusive video or witnessed evidence. If someone is found guilty without such evidence, then the death penalty should NOT be on the table for their sentence. If they do have such evidence that no appeals would result in overturning that conviction and they have been sentenced to death, then the sentence should be carried out swiftly.
What are your thoughts? Are you Anti-Death Penalty in all circumstances? Pro-Death Penalty? If so under what circumstances are you pro? Would you vote for or against a politician solely for his or her stance on the death penalty?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
I've never thought it was a good idea to give the state the power to kill it's citizens. Rather than a death penalty, I would like to see a life penalty where the guilty is pretty much stripped of everything that makes a life....no human contact, no visitors, no books, no music, no color, just a windowless cubicle with one meal every day of exactly the same food.
I am a person that supports the death penalty. I think that if a person is convicted of murder beyond reasonable doubt, he should be hung to save the taxpayers money.
In this case however, this guy was screwed over by his lawyer. I have never met a lawyer that go around claiming that his client was guilty and defending a judgement in the case that he has lost.
I believe if you kill outside of self defense, you should be given the death penalty. However, I don't agree on the costly methods of allowing one to sit on Death Row for years and then lethally inject them. I think if they are found guilty, they should be taken behind the courthouse and given a bullet from a firing squad. I would not change my vote for a politician based on their stance on the death penalty. Protecting my freedom is more of an issue for me.
As stated I tend to agree with all of the points. If someone is in for life for taking life, and a few other offenses I can think of, then everything that makes prison comfortable now should be stripped away.
I agree I'm looking for a politician to protect our freedom and would not vote for or against based on death penalty stance or pledges to fight for or against.
All good points...Thanks for caring enough to comment...
Post a Comment