Question:
Why are liberals against the death penalty?
anonymous
2009-04-30 00:49:14 UTC
Look, as a libertarian this is one issue where I don't agree with my party. I sort of take the Bill Maher stance in that I'm "pro death". Which basically means I support abortions, suicides, the death penalty, and pretty much anything that will get the freeway moving faster.

But in all seriousness, why should people like charles manson or any of the other terrible people who committed unspeakable crimes get to live. In my opinion, when you take someones life who didn't deserve it, you lost the rights to your own.
21 answers:
El Guapo
2009-04-30 08:02:40 UTC
I live in Texas, and I supported capital punishment for a long time, but the more I learned about it, the more I came to oppose it. In the end, several factors changed my mind:



1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. In the last 35 years in the U.S., 130 people have been released from death row because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. These are ALL people who were found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. So, as long as the death penalty is in place, you are pretty much GUARANTEED to occasionally execute an innocent person.



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



2. Cost: Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting & defending 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. This disparity becomes even greater when you consider the time value of money – most of the costs of capital punishment are up-front, occurring before and during the trial itself, whereas most of the costs of life imprisonment are spread over the term of incarceration (usually 30-40 years).



3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. 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). It is probably due, at least in part, to the high cost (see #2) - every extra dollar spent on capital punishment is one that's NOT going to police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. Personally, I think it also has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government fosters a culture of violence by saying, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’



4. It is inconsistently and arbitrarily applied. Factors that should be irrelevant (geography, race of the victim, poor representation, etc.) are all too often the determining factors in whether someone gets death versus life in prison.



5. There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst 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.” Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the architect of the 9/11 attacks) would love nothing better than to be put to death. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time."



6. 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. The New Testament (starring Jesus) is primarily ANTI-death penalty. For example, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus praises mercy (Matthew 5:7) and rejects “an eye for an eye” (Matthew 5:38-39). James 4:12 says that GOD is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
anonymous
2009-04-30 01:03:50 UTC
Well for starters, the main argument for the death penalty is that it is a deterrent against committing crimes.



California had a legalized death penalty at the time Charles Manson and his followers were committing murder. So why didn't it deter them?



I'm not anti-death penalty, but lets not deceive ourselves on what it is and how it's used.



1) It's good old fashioned Eye-for-an-Eye justice. And I'm down with that. Someone murders a loved one of mine for no good reason? I'll flip that damn switch myself.



2) It's a great tool for prosecutors to "encourage" those charged with murder into pleading guilty to charges. In other words, plead guilty and we'll send you to prison for life. Go to trial, and we'll ask for the death penalty if you are found guilty.



BTW : I'm a fairly liberal person.
anonymous
2009-04-30 01:08:35 UTC
There are countless examples of people wrongfully convicted. In Canada, for example, Guy Morin was convicted three times of the rape and murder of a nine years old neighbour, and was finally cleared after nine years in prison when the DNA established he was not guilty.



Canada does not have the death penalty, so they were able to release him, apologise and pay him compensation. In Texas he would have been dead. What kind of justice would that be?



We should not execute because there may be later evidence that a mistake was made. Our system, being designed by mortal men, is capable of error. We should try to avoid making them permanent.



Manson is in jail, and will spend the rest of his life there. He and all the other convicted killers are alive because we are aware that some of them are not truly guilty, and we are prepared to pay the price of lifetime incarceration for the guilty so the innocent can be spared.



My brother commanded a major crimes squad, and I frankly learned this opinion from him. He is aware that he can make mistakes.



This is not about liberalism. I am a fiscal conservative, myself, with libertarian leanings. It is about how best to serve justice, and I submit that justice is served best by keeping the convicted alive so we can correct the errors we discover.
Ben H
2009-04-30 01:00:39 UTC
I am far from liberal, I don't like people like Charles Manson, and I don't agree with the death penalty. I think that it costs too much money, and I also think that prisons are far too comfortable. 150 years ago, U.S. prisons were brutal, and they also were an effective deterrent. We would not need a death penalty if we returned to this type of policy.
Sageandscholar
2009-04-30 01:08:31 UTC
I am opposed to the death penalty for numerous reasons.

1. I do not agree with the life for a life argument. Nowhere else does our law support such as well (what next - rapists will be raped, public beatings for assault). If we hold life to be sacred then we cannot arbitrarily snuff it out.

2. the arbitrary and inconsistent way in which it is applied.

3. It has never been proven to act as a deterrent (seriously this is the most moronic of all arguments - it pre-supposes that a murderer stops before committing the crime and makes a conscious decision that life in prison is worth it and then goes ahead)

4. It leaves no margin for error.
Kasumi A
2009-04-30 00:54:53 UTC
I think you and I are in the same boat, I am a liberal myself, and consider myself a full supporter of the death penalty, pro-choice and what have you. I don't necessarily agree that one 'loses their rights to life', but when you take into consideration what that person has taken away from a family, what other punishment seems more befitting? Certainly not the tax-free getaways that our prisons have become.
anonymous
2009-04-30 23:02:47 UTC
Simple. It doesn't work. The threat of the death penalty has made not an iota of difference to US crime rates, so apart from making certain inadequate people feel better, it isn't much of a deterrent.
soltltym
2014-05-02 05:27:02 UTC
I just hope those people who are opposed to capital punishment become victims, or have loved ones that become victims of rape or murder, or even worse, and then tell me you want the murderer to enjoy life in prison, with all the comforts. Bring back hangings in the public square and on the 6:00 news.

Criminals today love you bleeding heart liberals, they know they will never pay for any crimes they commit, and there is nothing to deter them from doing that.
anonymous
2009-04-30 01:01:13 UTC
Because state sanctioned murder is still murder, the fact that after all appeals are exhausted it ends up costing more than life in prison, the fact that its a barbaric practice evident from the fact its only carried out by 2 western nations, you cant bring an innocent person back from death either
teeewalk
2009-04-30 00:56:03 UTC
I'm liberal and I support the death penalty.



We do not have the know-how to truly rehabilitate people that have become serial killers or the like....



Sorry - the appeals process should be aboilished for people that have been convicted of heinous crimes with genetic evidence.
mrjonessr41
2009-04-30 01:02:25 UTC
If 1 person who is in fact innocent is murdered, then this system of justice is broken and cannot be trusted to choose life and death.

Can you honestly say that you believe every person that has been put to death in this country was guilty. Can you imagine being that innocent person being walked down that corridor to be murdered by the very system you depend on to protect you.

No judge should control Life and Death.



The only way to Kill a person, without it being cruel and unusual punishment is to tell them you forgive them and then come behind them and shoot them in the head. Telling someone you are going to kill them and then make them wait for the end is in itself cruel and unusual punishment.
Feenixy
2009-04-30 00:57:17 UTC
Agreed, It's also funny you bring up something. I consider myself more liberal but still middle of the road. Liberals are for killing innocent fetuses, for the sake of choice. Yet they are also against killing murderers that "chose" to take a life. So killing someone who's totally innocent is ok, while killing someone who's not innocent is wrong? This is why I will never be a true liberal. And for all those that try and argue I'm a conservative republican or something, I did vote for Obama and for the most part believe in him.
dsan
2009-04-30 01:00:30 UTC
it is applied disproportionately by race. it actually costs more money to kill them than it does to imprison them for life.



though personally im liberal and don't really care that much. i think there's way more important issues with our legal and prison system than the death penalty
Spock
2009-04-30 01:00:04 UTC
I am in agreement with your position on this one. I think we should expand it to people that attack children as well though. If you kidnap and rape a child, you should be eligible for the death penalty.
racism is unbecoming
2009-04-30 00:59:19 UTC
I'm a liberal and feel that execution has its place in some instances. That sociopath Timothy McVeigh readily comes to mind. Manson is mentally ill.
Icecream
2009-04-30 01:29:23 UTC
Because they always support the position that costs more tax dollars, such as imprisoning an inmate for 50 years instead of putting them to death.
anonymous
2009-04-30 00:58:35 UTC
I agree.

But so many of the liberal supporters on this website seem quite happy with killing people they deem "evil" like Bush.
RU486
2009-04-30 01:05:18 UTC
I'm not.
spike missing debra m
2009-04-30 00:53:12 UTC
they're NOT against the death penalty; they just reserve it for the crime of inconveniencing a lifestyle by a fetus
anonymous
2009-04-30 00:52:28 UTC
EXACTLY! i think this law should also apply to child rapists...
Case
2009-04-30 00:53:02 UTC
you're pro-death? seriously? PRO DEATH? omg who is pro death except you?



what if they were innocent and then executed? but you're pro-DEATH so you wouldn't care



hey why dont we just kill people for the sake of it? afterall you're pro-DEATH



and what do you mean "someones life who didnt deserve it"? you're pro-DEATH so why do you care?


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...