Should the death penalty be banned?

So this is a topic that I haven't really seen brought up in quite some time, but a lot of people still seem to be against it. What do you think of the death penalty?

Personally I don't think it should be banned. While it certainly shouldn't be used for all crimes, I do think for committing higher felonies it makes sense. If you're a mass murderer I don't really think simply having jail time with no other real punishments is quite suitable. That's not to say every time someone commits murder they should instantly be given the death penalty, but a lot of cases where that happens I feel it may be necessary.

In the end I just feel that although it shouldn't be used often there are some cases where I feel it's a necessary action to take.

I don't think it should be banned. It's suitable for the most heinous crimes like mass murders. It shouldn't be used all the time of course but it's a fine punishment for the most awful things imaginable. Life imprisonment is a fine punishment too. They have to be a true menace to society for such a punishment.

I don't have any moral objections against its use for, say, mass murderers. The problem I have is with the risk involved in executing someone innocent (which is even worse for the death penalty due to its irreversible nature; at least if someone is imprisoned and later found to be innocent they can be released and compensated). 

Of course, it would be possible to go to great trouble not to execute innocent people, but this is a long, drawn-out and expensive process (those lawyers aren't cheap, and of course the prisoner needs to be housed and fed the whole time). I'm not sure it's worth the cost, TBH.

KyngzIndeyen wrote:I don't have any moral objections against its use for, say, mass murderers. The problem I have is with the risk involved in executing someone innocent (which is even worse for the death penalty due to its irreversible nature; at least if someone is imprisoned and later found to be innocent they can be released and compensated). 

Of course, it would be possible to go to great trouble not to execute innocent people, but this is a long, drawn-out and expensive process (those lawyers aren't cheap, and of course the prisoner needs to be housed and fed the whole time). I'm not sure it's worth the cost, TBH.

That's true. It is possible that someone innocent could be executed, which is very unfortunate. They should have to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of something horrible like mass murder to warrant the death penalty. It's very unfortunate if someone is executed but then was proven innocent later on.

I agree with Kyngz here. It might be a waste of money because some people end up not having been guilty at all and that actually happens a lot more than a lot of people think just with any crime. Someone having to be killed for something they didn't actually do is not something I wanna think about.

Nope. I'd say keep it as it is for people who do bad things that tragically affect dozens of people, like the Boston Marathon. and I was around 100 miles from the actual place where it occured